Skip to main content

View Diary: Wherein I talk about solutions to the worst effects of climate change (116 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  EPA's inventory includes fertilizer production. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    See Table ES-2 here:

    •  your figures conveniently omit Black carbon one of (0+ / 0-)

      the most potent climate pollutants contributing to climate warming.  you don't seem to understand how to reduce warming you just cite figures.  it's understandable why your actions are suspect.  you try to steer the conversation to your screwed facts.   sad

      Macca's Meatless Monday

      by VL Baker on Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 10:17:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Black carbon emissions from United States (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        enemy of the people

        plant and animal agriculture is insignificant.   You have some rice field burning and not much else.

        U.S. agriculture does not have the problem of animal agriculture in South American with black carbon emissions from forest combustion.

        Since you are a denier when it comes to EPA's greenhouse gas emissions inventory, it is not likely that you'll ever understand any of this.

        •  we're talking about global warming not just US (0+ / 0-)

          atmosphere  Black carbon emitted from deforestation fires in the Amazon travel even to the Arctic and are a factor in melting glaciers and Black carbon emitted from cook stoves in Africa also travel around the earth.  you should know this..your feigned ignorance is very suspect.

          Macca's Meatless Monday

          by VL Baker on Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 12:41:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  and the epa #'s don't include deforestation (0+ / 0-)

            in Brazil rainforest etc. etc etc...that's why those #'s can't be used for global emissions...if you know this and omit you are deliberately trying to sow doubt...if you don't know it well you're in the wrong business.

            Macca's Meatless Monday

            by VL Baker on Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 12:51:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  United States animal agricultural operations (0+ / 0-)

              carried out with domestic feed sources are not responsible for Brazil rainforest destruction and pretending like they are either for political/communication purposes, or for purposes of emission inventory development and completeness, isn't sound or valid environmental analysis.

          •  Black carbon emissions from U.S. agriculture (0+ / 0-)

            operations isn't a significant problem so your intimation that U.S. agriculture should somehow be considered a major contributor to that portion of the global warming problem caused by black carbon and be held responsible for it.....does not make any sense.

            Your fundamental error is thinking that the 2006 UN long shadow report emission-unit-specific black carbon and methane emission factors from field and animal agricultural operations can be appropriately used to draw comprehensive  conclusions about the GHG emission consequences of patterns of U.S. agriculture industry practices.

            •  your problem is take you don't realize that (0+ / 0-)

              global warming is a GLOBAL issue...atmospheres don't just hover over countries without moving...astounding

              Macca's Meatless Monday

              by VL Baker on Mon Nov 11, 2013 at 02:39:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site