Re: FW: - Climate Change Hearings and the roll(?) of nuclear power

["Franz Schoenhofer" <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>]

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: SAFarberMSPH@CS.COM <SAFarberMSPH@CS.COM>

An: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM <RuthWeiner@AOL.COM>; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Datum: Donnerstag, 01. August 2002 18:38

Betreff: Re: FW: - Climate Change Hearings and the roll(?) of nuclear power





>Radsafe:

>The long term observations of CO2 concentration in air in the Northern

>hemisphere [like Muana Loa ? sp?]



---------------------------------------------------

It is correctly spelled "Mauna Loa" - great place on the Big Island of

Hawaii - you should go there!



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------



in Hawaii show a steady increase in mean

>CO2 concentration over the last 40 or so years with slight dips and rises

of

>a periodic annual nature.





----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------



Stations for monitoring CO2 in the atmosphere are spread all over the world.

The monitoring goes back - as far as I know - to the beginning of the

industrial age about 200 years back. There is not the slightest doubt, that

the CO2 concentration has increased dramatically (sorry, I do not know the

numbers by heart). Furthermore there is not the slightest doubt, that this

increase has been caused by the human race: I hope everybody discussing CO2

issues knows about the Suess-effect. CO2 of natural origin has a certain

concentration of C-14, which is determined by the production rate of C-14 by

cosmic rays, depending on solar cycles etc. CO2 originating from the burning

of fossile fuels does not contain C-14, because the C-14 originally present

in coal and oil has decayed. Therefore the result of mixing these two types

of CO2 results in a depletion of C-14 in the mixture. This effect is of

course not very much pronounced, but with modern analytical equipment has

been confirmed since long - for instance in Silesia in Poland, where much

coal is burnt for electricity generation.



>

>Each year as terrestrial plants burst into bloom in the spring and

>photosynthesis increases there is a slight dip in CO2 concentration from

>which the total photosynthesis of CO2 to fixed carbon in biomass can be

>estimated.  As net photosynthesis drops with the coming of winter the

annual

>sine-like wave of CO2 concentration goes up. The long term CO2 average has

>been going up year by year with dramatic net increases in CO2 over the

period

>of all measurements.

>

----------------------------------------------------------



You forget, that while in the Northern Hemisphere spring approaches and

photosynthesis increases, in the Southern Hemisphere autumn comes and kills

the plants, makes them decay and emitting CO2 into the atmosphere. Well, the

exchange of air masses between the Southern and the Northern Hemisphere is

almost not existent. Contamination of the Southern Hemisphere by nuclear

fallout is much lower than for the Northern Hemisphere, because the

overwhelming number of atmospheric nuclear tests, especially with regard to

their yield, have been conducted in the Northern Hemisphere. But in the long

end the question or problem of CO2 can only be solved on a world wide basis.

Again I have to say, that it is a pity, that the Kyoto Protocol seems to

have failed.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------

>Photosynthesis is clearly not keeping up with the growing atmospheric

>releases of CO2 although it does slow down the increase by a slight amount.

>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----

To me it rather seems that photosynthesis would without human interference

maintain an equilibrium between CO2 generated and removed. Whatever was and

is manmade increased and will increase the CO2 concentration. Cutting down

forests like in South America and other areas of the world additionally

reduces the absorption of CO2 by photosynthesis. However I agree with Ruth,

that algae etc. may have a much higher importance in photosynthesis

CO2-fixation than all our forests on land.



Best regards,



Franz









************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/