Photosynthetic algae produces 70-80% of the worlds oxygen from CO2+sunlight, likely making it the single greatest reducer of CO2 in our system. Our modern, clean coal plants and other industrial fossil fuel applications are able to filter out the majority of pollutants (mercury, sulfer, etc) except for CO2. We then implement CO2 emission restrictions that drive industry overseas to places that filter out less (or none) of the other pollutants, and still pump out CO2 as well. These other pollutants, which would be filtered from our emissions but are released in places like China eventually make their way into the oceans where the photosynthetic algae live. So not only are we not reducing CO2, we're in effect increasing the amount of other pollutants collecting in the environment *and* harming the algae, compounding the CO2 density (and endangering our O2 density). So, wth are we doing? How are CO2 restrictions implemented locally or 'peicemale' supposed to help anything at all? By implementing them now, prior to total global participation, we're actually making the problem *worse.*
For the first time in human history the entire planet agreed to cooperate and stop this runaway train. Thanks to Trump that is over.
load of bs. the paris treaty did nothing to stop 3rd world industrial pollution, or the dynamic of industry moving to the 3rd world as a result of increased restrictions elsewhere.
The rest of the world will keep doing what was agreed to, and even the U.S. pretty much ignores Trump and does it anyway because it makes economic sense.
Government should subsidize CO2 production to help feed the algae. Support the poor, CO2 starved algae. Breath deep and hard and often. More algae, more fish, help feed the world. Feel good about yourself and make more CO2
Sometimes. Mostly algae is just the bottom of the food chain. Mostly nutrient starved, nitrogen and iron work wonders mid ocean and even create a fishery in a very short time. Like months. But, if I can get CO2 subsidies to save the algae, I will. Shorelines have nutrients from upwelling and draining run off.
Actually that statistic is for all marine plants, not just algae. The solution is simple---dump more fertilizer into the oceans. Great for CO2 reduction and Oxygen levels for humans (for sea life, not so much)
You obviously have a very limited understanding of biology and world biota. Algae is several steps away from the bottom of the food chain and is not a big part of it regardless.
BSc Biological Science, Magna Cum Laude, Special Honors. University of California, Irvine. Went on to Medical School at the University of California Medical Center in San Francisco. Didn't have to take Biochemistry class because I passed the exam with no studying all summer. So did the other two there who were undergrads at UCI. Mostly wanted to share that my approach to general practice medicine has been very basic, biology. Like trying to get lungers to drink their water. That's water, not beverage. Enough to keep the urine clear. If the urine is dark, the body trying to conserve water makes thicker phlegm and steroids is not the answer. Well it turns out lungers hate water similar to diabetics loving carbs. Really. No wonder they're lungers and diabetics, to some degree. All things considered, I enjoyed your personal comment very much. Now it is my writing skills that suck major. My ability to express what I wish to say in writing. But, not my understanding of biology, biota, etc. per your personal. I also figured out the and preached a diet similar to Atkins, Hypoglycemia Diet, Diabetic Diet, Paleo Diet, etc. but I called it the 10,000 BC Diet. Whatever you could eat in 10,000 BC. No flour, no rice. Okay whole fruits and nuts, no prepared products, no juices. And of course the flesh of once living critters and eggs. Save the cheating for desert, not sustenance. Save the cheating for a cookie instead of pasta. And algae is pretty low on the food chain while we speak of photosynthetic sorts. Now zooplankton, they're a step or two above. Both yummy to the filter feeders.
That's kind of like saying brain cancer is worse than lung cancer. Either is probably going to kill me so would would to prefer to avoid both.
While your resume is indeed impressive it does not change the validity of my commentary. Dietary requirement vary within the human population dramatically, I as an example cannot be vegetarian and maintain my health. I tried to a couple times and became weak and immune compromised each time, after returning to my regular foods I swiftly regained my health.
There is truth in that. But the key is to not promote growth in areas with high fish populations. This means in the deep ocean and not along coastlines. Uncontrolled growth tends to occur along coastlines. Excess algae growth in the wrong places will only help to accelerate the death of the oceans. Nitrogen runoff from farms and industry is the biggest culprit. Companies are planning to create large blooms in the deep ocean in order to offset their industrial CO2 emissions.
We don't really know that much about deep oceans other than we are always finding weird things in them. There are lots of ways to sink carbon. The government(s) seem fixated on reducing output when reducing output wouldn't even come close to working even according to the models they are relying on. Seems to be a disconnect between policy and "data" among the AGW faithful as well.
What makes deep-ocean algae unique, as compared to other plants, is that when the algae dies, it sinks. In the low temperatures and high pressure of the deep ocean, the algae doesn't rot. So unlike most plants, the CO2 is trapped.
If you have no idea what I am talking about, then you are in no position to conclude they are wild or unsubstantiated. Don't impute your ignorance onto others.
The " I have no idea what you are talking about" is obviously meant as ridicule of your knowledge vs. a literal statement. If indeed you did not understand that the statement is clearly validated.
No it isn't. Even left-wing Vox acknowledges it. https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/18/16166014/negative-emissions
No they didn't. China is working on pollution but not enough and that was voluntary. Everyone needs to be on board with everything including plastics.
The entire world signed the agreement. It is true. For the first time in human history the entire planet agreed on something. And Trump sht on it. Oh wait, I believe Somalia did not sign. The US and Somalia stand together against the world.
That's just part of the story. Participating was voluntary and not everyone participated appropriately. I don't think China signed but I'll check. I live there part time and my family is PRC so i know what it's like there and what they are doing. Stop spinning your agenda and give the whole truth.
