Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
What is the formula used for this? Is it just strictly produced CO2? or do they take into account things like reduced ability to absorb CO2 due to deforestation?
|
Ummm... I don't know. I didn't build it.
However, source / reason for carbon increase, unless the data is wrong, shows a large, dramatic increase which should be cause for concern.
"Ya I'm super smart and question everything, but hey I ignored the point of the graph and made a super smart question about the oilsands and forests! Go Me!"
I kid
It's the oil thread, but unfortunately rational thinking doesn't get applied when the blame game comes out and the oil sands / pipelines / Canada Energy production seems to be an easy target. Look at the article just posted above about the Irving Refinery.
I don't think the average non-Canadian person (or even East Coast person evidently) concerned about climate change is going to care about the rational details presented by a Canadian (or Albertan) who believes the oilsands or Alberta oil should be extracted.
Which is obvious and doesn't need discussed really because it's not making a difference and has been rehashed over and over again to no avail.