On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 08:53:02 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
amogles wrote:
On Oct 9, 1:18=A0am, "Richard J." wrote:

How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? =A0The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways are
98% fully used. =A0Gatwick is already the world's busiest single-runway
airport. =A0So how is this capacity increase achieved?
--
Richard J.

I guess it would allow some of the duplication of flights between the
two airports to be reduced.

You have to wonder just how many more flights will satisfy the aircraft
lobby. The sky is already a contrail polluted mess on most days and thats
not even from the aircraft landing at london airports. Perhaps they won't
be happy until the sky looks like the M25 with wings?

B2003

Not a comment on the original post but just a little contribution to
the overall thread on global warming/pollution/whatever.
I don't think a word has been said about the contribution of volcanoes
to all the nasties in the atmosphere - as I understand it, man's
pollution is but a fraction of what the world's volcanoes spew out.
Or have I been misinformed?

Guy Gorton

On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:18:52 +0100, Guy Gorton wrote:

Not a comment on the original post but just a little contribution to the
overall thread on global warming/pollution/whatever. I don't think a
word has been said about the contribution of volcanoes to all the
nasties in the atmosphere - as I understand it, man's pollution is but a
fraction of what the world's volcanoes spew out. Or have I been
misinformed?

Pretty much, yes. You have been misinformed.

Individual large eruptions can spew out a lot of CO2, but they're
transient. They don't keep on pumping it out day after day, month after
month, year after year. Globally, it's a small (going on insigificant)
effect. This hasn't always been true in geological time, of course -
vulcanism may have played a critical role in driving climate change at
the end of the Permian, for example.

Sample reference at:

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon_dioxide

but the numbers look consistent with other refereed/reputable sources
I've seen.


--
Speaking for myself, and no-one but myself

On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:55:47 +0000 (UTC)
Andy Breen wrote:
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon_dioxide

but the numbers look consistent with other refereed/reputable sources
I've seen.

Another good link:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...2-emissions-ar
e-too-tiny-to-matter.html

B2003

In message , at 18:18:52 on
Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Guy Gorton remarked:
I don't think a word has been said about the contribution of volcanoes
to all the nasties in the atmosphere - as I understand it, man's
pollution is but a fraction of what the world's volcanoes spew out.
Or have I been misinformed?

If you have a scheme to stop the volcanoes, a fortune awaits you.

But that (plus other natural things) are the "background emissions", and
as Dickens wrote:

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six,
result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty
pounds ought and six, result misery."

The man-made carbon emissions might well be that pair of sixpences.

I suspect Tony Polson's point is that reducing it by 33% to fourpence
isn't going to solve it.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:15:58 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
I suspect Tony Polson's point is that reducing it by 33% to fourpence
isn't going to solve it.

Its not a question of solving it anymore, its a case of making it less
worse that it would otherwise be.

B2003

In message , at 08:52:15 on Thu, 13 Oct
2011, d remarked:
I suspect Tony Polson's point is that reducing it by 33% to fourpence
isn't going to solve it.

Its not a question of solving it anymore, its a case of making it less
worse that it would otherwise be.

If there's a tipping point (in or out of debtor's jail in Dickens's
tale) saving the fourpence won't help at all.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:24:54 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
If there's a tipping point (in or out of debtor's jail in Dickens's
tale) saving the fourpence won't help at all.

Maybe not. But better to try and fail than just give up and do an Eeyore.

B2003

d wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:24:54 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
If there's a tipping point (in or out of debtor's jail in Dickens's
tale) saving the fourpence won't help at all.

Maybe not. But better to try and fail than just give up and do an Eeyore.


If trying and failing means that you destroy our economy and way of
life, are you really sure that you want to try?

Perhaps the Eeyore approach is worth a look. ;-)

In message , at 09:37:03 on Thu, 13 Oct
2011, d remarked:
If there's a tipping point (in or out of debtor's jail in Dickens's
tale) saving the fourpence won't help at all.

Maybe not. But better to try and fail than just give up and do an Eeyore.

The cost vs benefit is unfavourable, compared to many more useful things
one could be doing.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:58:30 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:37:03 on Thu, 13 Oct
2011, d remarked:
If there's a tipping point (in or out of debtor's jail in Dickens's
tale) saving the fourpence won't help at all.

Maybe not. But better to try and fail than just give up and do an Eeyore.

The cost vs benefit is unfavourable, compared to many more useful things
one could be doing.

There's nothing like a good bit of short termist thinking. Let me guess,
education, hospitals, all the other standard issue emotive vote winners?
Fat lot of use any of them will be if the climate shifts drastically and
we're not ready for it.

B2003