Time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save ourselves

Society has known about global warming, the grave consequences that could result if we continue emitting a growing amount of harmful gases into the atmosphere for 50 years. Have measure been taken to curb the rate of depletion of the o-zone layer? Sure. Earth hour, increased awareness of recycling, things that were once packaged in plastic now being packaged in recyclable materials…

Has anyone started actually giving a fuck?

Time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save ourselves

Nope.

Rates are continuing to climb. Glaciers continue to melt, species continue going extinct (150-200 go extinct every 24 hours), average annual temperatures are still climbing.

Main pollutants:

-Methane (a gas that leaks from landfills and natural gas pipes)

-Black-carbon particles (the exhaust of diesel trucks and the smoke from wood- and coal-burning stoves)

- Hydrofluorocarbons (man-made gases used in refrigerators, air conditioners and spray cans)


These pollutants stay in the atmosphere only a short time, reducing them provides a noticeable payoff within a matter of months to a decade. If we fail to bother to cut our emissions of any and all of such of those types of things soon enough; sure, we might save the planet to a certain degree though we’ll be long gone by that point.

Perhaps it’s time for a change in the approach to raising awareness. That the earth itself, doesn’t need to be saved. Unless it’s hit by a meteor or something, it’ll continue doing it’s thing for another few billion years.

Us, not so much. Not at this rate, at least.

Not only would the realization of what is happening hit people and they'd actually make a greater effort to reduce emissions if rather than organizations throwing images of cute penguins and polar bears at us, they’d market it through a ‘Save Yourselves’ campaign.


0|0
2|10
kaylaS91 is a GirlsAskGuys Editor
Who are Editors?

Join the discussion

0/2500

Submit

What Guys Said 10

  • STANDING OVATION!
    Definitely support enhanced awareness about this obviously critical topic, that so many ignore unfortunately.
    Despite the overwhelming data and empirical research Republicans manage to make it a political issue unfortunately as well.

    0|1
    0|0
  • There are three concerns which cause problems with convincing people about this matter.

    1. The US government has a pattern of rushing to warn people about impending problems without having enough information and it later develops that the problem was a non-problem or, even worse, the government warnings told us to do things that were even worse for us. In the 1960's, we were told that eating butter is bad for us and we should all switch to margarine. Now we are told that margarine is even worse for us and, guess what. . . we should switch to butter. In the late 1970's, we were warned about an impending ice age to be caused by pollutants blocking out the sunlight. It was "scientifically accepted" to be true. . . but it didn't happen. One little side note: in the US, most funding for scientific research comes from the federal government. If you think that does not create any bias in research, you are simply naive.

    2. I share many of the concerns of environmentalists, but there are environmenazis who have a political agenda which is larger than purely environmental concerns. Particularly with the current administration, there is a natural suspicion and distrust that the government may be using environmental concerns to drive a larger agenda because they assume that we are all stupid sheep who will blindly follow whatever they say. . . and there are many who fit that mold.

    3. There are two separate questions with global warming: is the planet getting warmer and, if so, to what extent (if any) is that change caused my human activities? Virtually all the discussion I hear assumes that if the planet is getting warmer, it MUST be caused by man. This planet has experienced global warming and cooling long before man made activity was a factor and the extinction of species occurred when we still lived in caves.

    Finally, when someone expresses skepticism, the proponents of this alarm simply start calling the skeptic names instead of discussing the evidence. Why is that?

    1|1
    0|0
  • I blame @ihav2fart

    Major Methane gas contributor.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Too late now, Planets already fucked, May aswell just fucking burn everything and speed up the extinction process.

    To try and turn shit around now would be pretty freaking futile.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They changed the name to "climate change" when we had gone 15 years with no warming.
    We are probably entering a little ice age.
    Carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas. It is the staff of life for plants. The primary consequence of rising co2 levels is better crop yields and larger herds of large herbivores.
    Sunspot and other solar cycles are ignored so enviros can blame mankind or what God is doing.
    Pinatubo (1991) emitted more "polutants" than mankind has for a million years. The antarctic ice sheet is growing fast.
    The primary purpose of the global warming movement is more government control and wealth transfer to non producers.

    1|1
    0|0
    • nah, carbon is a greenhouse gas, its not a pollutant, meaning it doesn't haxe any toxicity, but it does absorb heat, nice trick on your mind, thanks republicans, also the earth had a way of putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, such as forest fires, which usually averaged around 200 acres, now with our past fire suppression, they go into the hundred of thousands because the forests are overgrown and weak, as more forest fires occur, the warmer it gets, the more forests get infected with bark beetles, the bigger the fires, its a circle

  • Cfcs depleting the ozone layer isn't the problem now. They banned things like freon in the early 90s. Its fossil fuels that are the problem. There's too much money involved in burning them. The bastards have known about it for decades. They don't give a fuck. They'd rather have us all drowned under rising oceans than lose a penny profit. It's too late now anyway. It's called a positive feedback loop. Water vapour is the biggest greenhouse gas and the more C02 in the atmosphere the more evaporates and the higher the gmst becomes. There's no stopping it now. Even if we stopped putting excess carbon into the atmosphere today it would continue rising for most of this century. Blame the pseudo science scum who put so much lies into peoples heads. They should be jailed. If you lie in court it's perjury coz it effects people's lives. Lie in public to millions and it's fair play though. We're going to lose most of the world's largest cities in the next hundred years. There's no avoiding it. Hundreds of millions will become refugees. All because of wanks in suits who favour a bank balance over humanity

    0|0
    0|0
  • The vast majority of Americans are tired of this fear mongering, doom saying rhetoric that has gone on for 30 years yet nothing has happened. The scientist who came up with the theory of global warming has said he was wrong. 31,000 climate scientists agree that AGW isn't real. I'm 17 years old. Can you explain to me why, if the Earth is getting hotter, global temperatures have dropped by 1.08 degrees Fahrenheit in my lifetime?

    2|0
    1|1
    • And a "vast majority" of rational thinking people are really really tired of having to argue with talking points provided by the oil and gas industry.
      I have been arguing against these points longer than you have been alive. So please go back to school and educate yourself before embarrassing yourself even further.

    • Show All
    • So you're saying a random heat wave caused by an Arctic cyclone proves "global warming". And again you cannot refute any of my points. Speaking of Arctic sea ice, in 2007 Al Gore predicted the ice caps would be gone in 7 years. In summer of 2014, they were not only still around, but 42%-62% bigger in the summertime. The Antarctic ice shelf has grown thicker and received more snow over the last 30 years. In addition to my points in my original post you still haven't refuted, please refute these, too, oh enlightened priest of global warming.

  • Well apparently Volkswagen for years has been manufacturing cars that goes over the international limit for carbon dioxide emissions so hopefully now that they'll be cracked down on that newer models will be significantly better. People driving Volkswagen should seriously get a different car. If it's a Volkswagen then they are driving a car that emits more than any Hummer or any other gas guzzler.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Do you seriously think that everyone who is driving a Volkswagen can simply park it and go buy a new car?

  • I applaud you for trying to raise awareness about the mess we're in. I think there needs to be a tax on carbon. That would put what economists call a "price signal" on fossil fuels that would provide incentives to move away from them. The carbon tax would start at one level, and over time gradually increase per unit of carbon. The plan would be revenue neutral, in that the taxes collected would be rebated to the people. (This would enable the people to afford the higher utility costs that will come from taxing carbon.) Obviously we can't force other countries to impose the same kind of carbon tax, so what do we do about them? For each country that we trade with that doesn't impose a similar tax we apply the tax to any product they want to export to us via foreign trade. The United States and other Western nations are huge consumer markets, so the non-carbon taxing countries will have a big incentive to impose the tax if they want access to our markets.

    0|0
    0|0
    • You couldn't use a carbon tax. The main reason is that too much of our livelihood depends on carbon emission based behavior so without major implementations by the government to provide some form of alternative you're basically taxing people for working in fields that require travel which makes those fields less attractive. Also, making trade less attractive is just not a good idea particularly because in Macroeconomics the one thing you really don't want to do is import to begin with, the ultimate goal is to attempt to not import while exporting for obvious basic profit maximization, so making it harder to take in imports with tariffs lowers the willingness of companies to buy imports which lowers your standing in the global market for exportation since you lower your competitive advantage.

  • My confusion comes from what the goal of this piece is supposed to be.

    There is no real data to work off of here, for instance you say the rates are going up, but are the rates of pollution going up or are just the rates of production going up, because they are different.

    A rate of pollution can actually drop (improving conditions) but the rate of production of said things can actually rise (from population and consumption) which creates a whole new array of problems.

    I mean I am not against ecological awareness but considering you mentioned CFCs, something that is often banned from refrigeration and aerosols ( http://www3.epa.gov/ozone/science/sc_fact.html ), and has been since the 70s majorly it's just not enough to really pull it's own weight.

    I think the greatest turn-off to giving a crap about the planet is people use fearmongering. You say CFCs (Hydrofluorocarbons) are increasing but I see no evidence and actually see evidence to the contrary in mass production ( www.esrl.noaa.gov/.../cfcs.html )!

    Basically, without being wordy, you're lying.

    1|0
    0|1
    • rates of greenhouse emissions and depletion of the ozone layer are going up.
      This is not a scientific piece. If you're looking for stats, hit the library. :)

    • Show All
    • @OP
      Actually he's right. I can tell you're one of those people who hate being wrong so let me make this brief and probably very painful.

      You have no data or references to back up your statements, so therefore you are wrong he is right.

    • @BaileyisDarcy 'This is not a scientific piece. If you're looking for stats, hit the library. '

What Girls Said 2

  • those diesel fumes *shudders*

    0|0
    0|0
  • When the people screaming the loudest about it actually take some action then I will to.

    It makes me sick people who use more fuel or carbon in month than I will in my life say I need to cut back.

    0|1
    0|0
Loading...