Safety glasses on.

[Subduction Zone]

Why is he further polluting the air?

To make a bigger point.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So this is intended for comedy but still has a valid point in my opinion:

Even if somebody is sceptical about climate change, it seems like a tremendous gamble. As ever though, while individuals can certainly contribute, a lot of the work on the environment needs to come from those at the top.

I could see where he was going long before he got there and I love it. What if we make a better world for the wrong reason?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you see carbon dioxide as a pollutant? Is it really wise to try to limit carbon dioxide in light of species extinction, especially in regards to plants? (If your patient is under stress, then the last thing you want to do is cut off the breathing supply. Just sayin') There are other pollutants we should be focusing on, imo.

Excessive CO2 is a pollutant. And yes, we can put a figure on that. Is clean drinking water a pollutant? No? Then you should not mind if we force pump ten gallons of water into your stomach. The point is that excessive amounts of even beneficial materials is not a good thing. Yes, plants need carbon dioxide, but even they suffer if amounts are too high, and they definitely suffer if the climate changes.

 

[David1967]

Any questions?

Love it! Bill Nye is great. This delivery is a ways from the old "Bill Nye the Science Guy".

 

[David1967]

Do you believe that the earth is over populated?

Way, overpopulated.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And someone already posted this from its original source (cough cough):

Carbon Taxes.

But it was the Bill Nye bits that made me post that episode here.

 

[Stanyon]

To make a bigger point.

He could have just as easily used facts and figures instead of releasing more toxic fumes into the air.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He could have just as easily used facts and figures instead of releasing more toxic fumes into the air.

A dramatic presentation can be much more effective. You would not be discussing this if he only presented facts and figures.

 

[shunyadragon]

Do you believe that the earth is over populated?

Yes, if not yes were on the way to overload on the carrying capacity of the earth.

 

[crossfire]

Simply yes, Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant. Yes, it is wise to reduce carbon dioxide.. Plants are definitely not under threat due to reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, though the increase levels of carbon dioxide do threaten many animal species due to global warming. You need to clarify your concern for plants.

Simply that plants are the main carbon dioxide reducer and that plants are the basis of habitats that support other species. I'm focusing on managing extinction cycles wherever possible.

Yes there are many pollutants we need to focus on, and some related to global warming, but that is a separate issue. Burning fuels that release carbon dioxide also release other dangerous pollutants, and over manufacture and use of plastics is probably second, and related to carbon dioxide emissions.

Is there any efforts being put forth in these other pollutants, or is carbon stealing the show?

From my perspective of human pollution and global warming I do not consider there to be any practical way to reverse the trend, but nonetheless our attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are beneficial to the human environment and our energy consumption. The world demand for energy and over population are reasons why we likely cannot resolve the emission problem enough to reverse the trend. We will have to deal with global warming for the long term.

If we cannot reverse the emission problem, then why not focus on the real pollutants and the habitat destruction that leads to extinction events?

 

[crossfire]

One of my concerns about the unhealthy obsession with carbon dioxide: I live in the pacific northwest, where hydroelectric power is the mainstay. Hydroelectric power has been targeted as causing more carbon emissions than power plants that burn fossil fuels! Really?

 

[shunyadragon]

Simply that plants are the main carbon dioxide reducer and that plants are the basis of habitats that support other species. I'm focusing on managing extinction cycles wherever possible.

The changes in CO2 will not effect plants in the range we are reasonably considering.

Is there any efforts being put forth in these other pollutants, or is carbon stealing the show?

Carbon is the biggy, but see below.

If we cannot reverse the emission problem, then why not focus on the real pollutants and the habitat destruction that leads to extinction events?

Reducing the emissions is the best we can do. The changes in the climate, and the related pollutants to the energy industry are things like metals in the waste products of burning coal.

From: Overview of Greenhouse Gases | US EPA

Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases. This section provides information on emissions and removals of the main greenhouse gases to and from the atmosphere. For more information on the other climate forcers, such as black carbon, please visit the Climate Change Indicators: Climate Forcing page.

• Carbon dioxide (CO2): Carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere through burning fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and oil), solid waste, trees and other biological materials, and also as a result of certain chemical reactions (e.g., manufacture of cement). Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere (or "sequestered") when it is absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle.
• Methane (CH4): Methane is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas, and oil. Methane emissions also result from livestock and other agricultural practices and by the decay of organic waste in municipal solid waste landfills.
• Nitrous oxide (N2O): Nitrous oxide is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste, as well as during treatment of wastewater.
• Fluorinated gases: Hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride are synthetic, powerful greenhouse gases that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are sometimes used as substitutes for stratospheric ozone-depleting substances (e.g., chlorofluorocarbons, hydrochlorofluorocarbons, and halons). These gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities, but because they are potent greenhouse gases, they are sometimes referred to as High Global Warming Potential gases ("High GWP gases").

 

[shunyadragon]

One of my concerns about the unhealthy obsession with carbon dioxide: I live in the pacific northwest, where hydroelectric power is the mainstay. Hydroelectric power has been targeted as causing more carbon emissions than power plants that burn fossil fuels! Really?

I am not aware of this please provide references.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

He's not a very qualified messenger. Hes a comedian with an engineering degree. I am more qualified than he is. At least I work with the EPA, so yeah I know a thing or two about it.

You have a degree and experience in science and engineering that ranks you above him? Tell us more.

You seem to be claiming he is a comedian by profession as well and that being one would eliminate the validity of his opinion. Can you substantiate either of those two implications?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes.
But I'll spare everyone my usual lecture about why.

I think we are seeing the results of overpopulation even now.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Do you see carbon dioxide as a pollutant? Is it really wise to try to limit carbon dioxide in light of species extinction, especially in regards to plants? (If your patient is under stress, then the last thing you want to do is cut off the breathing supply. Just sayin') There are other pollutants we should be focusing on, imo.

Anything could be a pollutant or toxin. It depends on the concentration and exposure. Too much oxygen can cause conditions similar to intoxication and even death.

There are a number of issues associated with the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that could substantially accelerate not only the extinction of species, but of existing biomes.

 

[crossfire]

I am not aware of this please provide references.

Here's a couple of sources
Hydroelectric power's dirty secret revealed
Hydro power can generate more carbon dioxide than it saves | Cosmos

 

[Revoltingest]

I think we are seeing the results of overpopulation even now.

Like the anthropocene extinction, eh?

 

[shunyadragon]

Here's a couple of sources
Hydroelectric power's dirty secret revealed
Hydro power can generate more carbon dioxide than it saves | Cosmos

This new to me since my primary expertise related to this is atmospheric issues related to powerplant, and industrial release of greenhouse gases.

I will review this, but disagree at present with the conclusions. Yes, there are CO2 and methane emissions related dammed watersheds related to lakes covering forests. First, in most dam construction most of the forests and vegetation is removed. Second, the emissions related to the vegetation in the lake is one time in the volume of vegetation covered, where power plants are continuous emissions over many years, and many many tons of coal, fuel or natural gas..

I will look into this more, but I do not believe the math is there.

 

[Enoch07]

You seem to be claiming he is a comedian by profession as well and that being one would eliminate the validity of his opinion.

I did already. But here ya go again, since you can't be bothered to put in any effort at all.

Bill Nye - Wikipedia

1986–1991: Comedy beginnings and Almost Live!
Nye quit his job at Boeing on October 3, 1986 to focus on his burgeoning comedy career.