text:
NOTICE (March 2018): This website provides access to the CDIAC archive data temporarily. It will be gradually transitioned into data packages in the new ESS-DIVE archive. This site will continue to operate in parallel during and after the transition, and will be retired at a future date. If you have any questions regarding the data or the transition, please contact ess-dive-support@lbl.gov.
Navigate CDIAC
About CDIAC
Information on CDIAC data, data policies, and more
Permission to Use Data
Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions
Trace Gas Emissions
Atmospheric Trace Gases & Aerosols
Oceanic Trace Gases
Terrestrial Carbon Management
Vegetation Response to CO2 & Climate
Land-Use & Ecosystems
Key resources related to carbon cycle and climate change research
Recent Greenhouse Gas Concentrations
Latest Global Carbon Budget Estimates
Illustration of the Global Carbon Cycle
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Reports
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
Frequently Asked Global Change Questions
This page lists global change questions that have been received at CDIAC and the answers that were provided to a diverse audience. If you have a question relating to carbon dioxide and global change and cannot find the answer you need here, you can "Ask Us a Question", and we will be glad to try to help you.
Should we grow trees to remove carbon in the atmosphere?
What are the present tropospheric concentrations, global warming potentials (100 year time horizon), and atmospheric lifetimes of CO2, CH4, N2O, CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CCl4, methyl chloroform, HCFC-22, sulphur hexafluoride, trifluoromethyl sulphur pentafluoride, perfluoroethane, and surface ozone?
Where can I find information on the naming of halocarbons?
Can you quantify the sources and sinks of the global carbon cycle?
How much carbon is stored in the different ecosystems?
In terms of mass, how much carbon does 1 part per million by volume of atmospheric CO2 represent?
What percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere has been produced by human beings through the burning of fossil fuels?
How much carbon dioxide is produced from the combustion of 1000 cubic feet of natural gas?
Why do some estimates of CO2 emissions seem to be about 3 1/2 times as large as others?
Why is the sum of all national and regional CO2 emission estimates less than the global totals?
Why do some smaller nations have larger per capita emission estimates than industrialized nations like the US?
What is the greenhouse effect? Is it the same as the ozone hole issue?
Should we be concerned with human breathing as a source of CO2?
How does the oxygen cycle relate to the greenhouse effect and global warming?
Is it possible to reduce CO2 emissions without cutting back on the burning of fossil fuels? In other words, can higher efficiency or better technology reduce the impact of the consumption of fossil fuels?
How long does it take for the oceans and terrestrial biosphere to take up carbon after it is burned?
How much CO2 is emitted as a result of my using specific electrical appliances?
What are the conditions happening in certain countries that could upset or disturb the oxygen cycle?
Why do certain compounds, such as carbon dioxide, absorb and emit infrared energy?
What kinds of radiation pass through the atmosphere, and what kinds are absorbed?
Why do clear winter nights tend to be colder than cloudy ones; and why is the daily temperature variation in the desert greater than that found in a moist environment?
Is it possible to separate the carbon and oxygen from CO2 as is possible with other molecules?
I am curious about the global warming potential of water vapor. Do you know if estimates are done of this in the same way as global warming potentials are calculated for other greenhouse gases? I am also interested in why no mention is ever made of the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by anthropogenic emissions of water vapor. Are the anthropogenic emissions not significant?
Is there environmental impact/concern (greenhouse emissions) associated with technologies using CO2 (e.g. dry ice blasting, supercritical cleaning, painting, etc.,). If so, are there current or impending regulation specific to their use?
Could you tell me, please, if I have 1 gallon of fuel in my car, how many (units?) of CO2 will be emitted? Is there any difference if the car 4 or 6 or 8 cylinders or in respect of horse power in percentage?
How much CO2 do you get from combustion of fossil fuels? How can the mass of the CO2 be greater than the mass of the fuel burned?
Is there any ONE person who discovered global warming? If not, what year was global warming discovered?
Where can I find information on the use of liquefied carbon dioxide in the extraction of alkaloids from plant materials?
Where can I obtain information on the properties of CO2?
I would like to know whether or not significant amounts of soil organic matter (SOM) and freshly fallen litter in a forest ecosystem can be degraded ABIOTICALLY (i.e., through chemical or physical processes) and consequently generate CO2. In other words, can I consider that entire CO2 emitted from soil is derived from biological processes?
I understand that atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are increasing, but when I look at a graph (for example, Keeling's Mauna Loa data), the curve is squiggly. For half of each year, the concentrations increases, and for the other half it decreases. What is the reason for this?
How can I perform CO2 calculations of the carbon dioxide system in seawater?
Are organizations elsewhere in the world studying technologies that could help us address the problem of global climate change?
I would like to use a diagram, image, graph, table, or other materials from the CDIAC website. How can I obtain permission? Are there copyright restrictions?
Can you suggest some education resources on global climate change?
It depends. View references of papers relating to forest management, biomass fuels, and CO2 emissions to the atmosphere.
See new document, Answers to ten frequently asked questions about bioenergy, carbon sinks and their role in global climate change, by Robert Matthews and Kimberly Robertson, prepared as part of IEA Bioenergy Task 38 (Greenhouse Gas Balances of Biomass and Bioenergy Systems).
Additional information on managing carbon through carbon sequestration is available on the DOE Office of Science Carbon Sequestration website.
View a table presenting data and source for current greenhouse gas concentrations.
Name that compound: The numbers game for CFCs, HFCs, HCFCs, and Halons
Read a discussion of the global carbon cycle.
Note: GtC = gigatons of carbon and giga = 109
Find the latest carbon budget estimates. Source: Global Carbon Project
And, click here to see figures summarizing the global cycles of biologically active elements. Source: William S. Reeburgh, Professor Marine and Terrestrial Biogeochemistry, University of California.
View an illustration of the major world ecosystem complexes ranked by carbon in live vegetation.
Using 5.137 x 1018 kg as the mass of the atmosphere (Trenberth, 1981 JGR 86:5238-46), 1 ppmv of CO2= 2.13 Gt of carbon.
Anthropogenic CO2 comes from fossil fuel combustion, changes in land use (e.g., forest clearing), and cement manufacture. Houghton and Hackler have estimated land-use changes from 1850-2000, so it is convenient to use 1850 as our starting point for the following discussion. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations had not changed appreciably over the preceding 850 years (IPCC; The Scientific Basis) so it may be safely assumed that they would not have changed appreciably in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000 in the absence of human intervention.
In the following calculations, we will express atmospheric concentrations of CO2 in units of parts per million by volume (ppmv). Each ppmv represents 2.13 X1015 grams, or 2.13 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in the atmosphere. According to Houghton and Hackler, land-use changes from 1850-2000 resulted in a net transfer of 154 PgC to the atmosphere. During that same period, 282 PgC were released by combustion of fossil fuels, and 5.5 additional PgC were released to the atmosphere from cement manufacture. This adds up to 154 + 282 + 5.5 = 441.5 PgC, of which 282/444.1 = 64% is due to fossil-fuel combustion.
Atmospheric CO2 concentrations rose from 288 ppmv in 1850 to 369.5 ppmv in 2000, for an increase of 81.5 ppmv, or 174 PgC. In other words, about 40% (174/441.5) of the additional carbon has remained in the atmosphere, while the remaining 60% has been transferred to the oceans and terrestrial biosphere.
The 369.5 ppmv of carbon in the atmosphere, in the form of CO2, translates into 787 PgC, of which 174 PgC has been added since 1850. From the second paragraph above, we see that 64% of that 174 PgC, or 111 PgC, can be attributed to fossil-fuel combustion. This represents about 14% (111/787) of the carbon in the atmosphere in the form of CO2.
If we start with 1000 cubic feet of natural gas (and assuming it is pure methane or CH4) at STP (standard temperature and pressure, i.e., temperature of 273°K = 0°C = 32°F and pressure of 1 atm = 14.7 psia = 760 torr), and burn it completely, here's what we come up with:
1 cubic foot (cf) = 0.0283165 cubic meters (m3)
and 1 m3 = 1000 liters (L)
so 1 cf = 28.31685 L
and 1000 cf = 28316.85 L
Since 1 mole of a gas occupies 22.4 L at STP, 28316.85 L of CH4 contains 28316.85/22.4 = 1264.145 moles of CH4 (each mole of CH4 = approx. 16 g)
If we burn CH4 completely, it follows this equation:
CH4 + 2O2 => CO2 + 2H20
That is, for each mole of methane we get one mole of carbon dioxide.
One mole of CO2 has a mass of approx. 44 g, so 1264.145 moles of CO2 has a mass of approx. 1264.145 x 44 or 55622.38 g
A pound is about equivalent to 454 g, so 55622.38 g is about equivalent to 55622.38/454 or 122 lb
That is, the complete combustion of 1000 cubic feet at STP of natural gas results in the production of about 122 lb of carbon dioxide.
Of course, the mass of the methane in 1000 cubic feet will vary if the temperature and pressure are NOT as assumed above, and this will affect the mass of CO2 produced. According to the Ideal Gas Law:
PV = nRT
where   P = pressure
V = volume
n = moles of gas
T = temperature
R = constant (0.08206 L atm/mole K or 62.36 L torr/mole K)
at STP, 1000 cf contains
n = PV/RT moles of methane
= (1 atm)(28316.85 L)/(0.08206 L atm/mole K)(273°K)
= 1264 moles CH4 (the value given in the example above)
In the energy industry, however, 1 standard cubic foot (scf) of natural gas is defined at 60°F (= 15.6°C = 288.6°K) and 14.7 psia, rather than at STP (Handbook of Formulae, Equations and Conversion Factors for the Energy Professional, JOB Publications, Tallahassee, FL;). Solving again at this higher (relative to STP) temperature, we get:
n = (1 atm)(28316.85 L)/(0.08206 L atm/mole K)(288.6°K)
= 1196 moles CH4
That is, at the higher temperature, a given volume of gas will contain fewer moles, and less mass. Going again through the calculation for CO2 emitted, but using the value of 1196 moles of CH4, results in an answer of approximately 115 lb of carbon dioxide.
When looking at CO2 emissions estimates, it is important to look at the units in which they are expressed. The numbers are sometimes expressed as mass of CO2 but are listed in all of our estimates only in terms of the mass of the C (carbon). Because C cycles through the atmosphere, oceans, plants, fuels, etc. and changes the ways in which it is combined with other elements, it is often easier to keep track only of the flows of carbon. Emissions expressed in units of C can be easily converted to emissions in CO2 units by adjusting for the mass of the attached oxygen atoms, that is by multiplying by the ratios of the molecular weights, 44/12, or 3.67.
The difference between the sum of the individual countries (or regions) and the global estimates is generally less than 5%. There are four primary reasons for this.
global totals include emissions from bunker fuels whereas these are not included in national (or regional) totals. Bunker fuels are fuels used by ships and aircraft in international transportation,
global totals include estimates for the oxidation of non-fuel hydrocarbon products (e.g., asphalt, lubricants, petroleum waxes, etc.) whereas national totals do not,
national totals include annual changes in fuel stocks whereas the global total does not, and
due to statistical differences in the international statistics, the sum of exports from all exporters is not identical to the sum of all imports by all importers.
Often it is difficult to attribute emissions to a source. Many small island nations have military bases that are used for re-fueling or have large tourist industries. Who do you assign the emissions to; the US whose military planes are re-fueling on the Wake Island with aviation and jet fuel or the Wake Island? The accounting practices used within the UN Energy Statistics Database assign this fuel consumption to the Wake Island thus elevating the Wake Island's per capita estimate. The same is true for tourist nations like Aruba who are assigned the fuels used in the commercial planes carrying tourists back to their native countries. Although this distorts the per capita emission estimates it makes it easier from an accounting standpoint than trying to trace each plane or ship to its final destination. One should be cautious in using only the per capita CO2 emission estimates.
No, they are two different (but related) issues.The greenhouse effect issue concerns the warming of the lower part of the atmosphere, the troposphere (the layer in which temperature drops with height; it is about 10-15 kilometers thick, varying with latitude and season), by increasing concentrations of the so-called greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and others) in the troposphere. This warming occurs because the greenhouse gases, while they are transparent to incoming solar radiation, absorb infrared (heat) radiation from the Earth that would otherwise escape from the atmosphere into space; the greenhouse gases then re-radiate some of this heat back towards the surface of the Earth.
The ozone hole issue concerns the loss of ozone in the upper part of the atmosphere, the stratosphere, resulting from increasing concentrations of certain halogenated hydrocarbons (such as chlorinated fluorocarbons, known as CFCs). Through a series of chemical reactions in the stratosphere, the halogenated hydrocarbons destroy ozone in the stratosphere. This is of concern because the ozone blocks incoming ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, and portions of the ultraviolet radiation spectrum have been found to have adverse biological effects.
The greenhouse effect and ozone hole issues are, however, related. For example, CFCs are involved in both issues: CFCs, in addition to destroying stratosphere ozone, are also greenhouse gases. It has traditionally been thought there is not much mixing of the troposphere and stratosphere. But there is recent evidence of transport of stratospheric ozone into the troposphere (see "Ozone-rich transients in the upper equatorial Atlantic troposphere," by Suhre et al., Nature , Vol. 388, 14 August 1997, pages 661-663, and the related discussion paper, "Ozone clouds over the Atlantic," by Crutzen and Lawrence, on pages 625-626 in the same issue of Nature ). So ozone depletion in the stratosphere could result in reduced concentrations of this greenhouse gas in the troposphere. Conversely, global climate change could also affect ozone depletion through changes in stratospheric temperature and water vapor (see "The effect of climate change on ozone depletion through changes in stratospheric water vapour," by Kirk-Davidoff et al., Nature, Vol. 402, 25 November 1999, pages 399-401).
No. While people do exhale carbon dioxide (the rate is approximately 1 kg per day, and it depends strongly on the person's activity level), this carbon dioxide includes carbon that was originally taken out of the carbon dioxide in the air by plants through photosynthesis - whether you eat the plants directly or animals that eat the plants. Thus, there is a closed loop, with no net addition to the atmosphere. Of course, the agriculture, food processing, and marketing industries use energy (in many cases based on the combustion of fossil fuels), but their emissions of carbon dioxide are captured in our estimates as emissions from solid, liquid, or gaseous fuels.
With recent developments it is now feasible to measure variations in the oxygen content of the atmosphere at the parts per million (ppm) level. Regular measurements of changes in atmospheric oxygen (O2) are currently being made at a number of locations around the world using two independent techniques, one based on interferometry and one based on stable isotope mass spectroscopy. Oxygen measurements can inform us about fundamental aspects of the global carbon cycle. Oxygen is generated by green plants in photosynthesis and converted to carbon dioxide (CO2) in animal and human respiration. Carbon dioxide is the greenhouse gas of most concern due to its abundance in the atmosphere (~ 360 ppm) and anthropogenic sources. Variations in atmospheric O2 are controlled largely by fluxes of carbon (e.g., photosynthesis and respiration CO2 + H2O <=> CH2O + O2).
For further reading, we suggest:
Keeling, R.F., D.A. Najjar, M.L. Bender, P.P. Tans. 1993. What Atmospheric Oxygen Measurements Can Tell Us About The Global Carbon Cycle. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 7:37-67.
Moore, B. III, and B.H. Braswell. 1994. The lifetime of excess atmospheric carbon dioxide. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 8:23-38.
Keeling, R.F. and S.R. Shertz. 1992. Seasonal and interannual variations in atmospheric oxygen and implications for the global carbon cycle. Nature 358:723-727.
Broecker, W. and J.P.Severinghaus. 1992. Diminishing Oxygen. Nature 358:710-711.
Fossil fuels are basically carbon and hydrogen. When fossil fuels are burned the carbon is oxidized to produce carbon dioxide and the hydrogen is oxidized to water. During these reactions heat is released, which is why we burn the fossil fuels in the first place. There are all kinds of issues involved in the efficiency with which the heat is used to provide services for mankind, but basically, if you burn fossil fuels - you get carbon dioxide (and water, but we don't care about the water). People have debated ways to collect the carbon dioxide, and what you would do with it if you did collect it, but to collect it requires a significant portion of the energy (heat) that you got by burning the fossil fuel in the first place. That is, it is very expensive to collect the carbon dioxide and it is still not very clear what you would do with it - lots of it. I think that many people envision that carbon dioxide is like sulfur dioxide in that it is a pollutant the comes along with burning coal and that if we had better technology or more care, we could eliminate it. This is simply not true, if you burn coal, you get carbon dioxide as a necessary and unavoidable product. Like I say, there is a fair amount of literature now on ways to collect and dispose of carbon dioxide, but you really can't burn fossil fuels without getting it.
With over 800 billion metric tons of carbon in the atmosphere and an annual exchange with the biosphere and oceans equal to around 200 billion metric tons, an average atom of carbon spends only about 4 years in the atmosphere before it goes into the oceans or the terrestrial biosphere. We can think of this as the average residence time for a carbon atom in the atmosphere. However, the oceans and terrestrial biosphere not only take up carbon from the atmosphere (e.g., absorption by the oceans and photosynthesis by plants) but they also give it back (e.g., emission from oceans and respiration by animals). That is, most of these carbon atoms are "recycled" so the atmosphere is not entirely rid of them. The time it takes for a carbon atom to make it out of this recycling system and to get into the deep ocean is about 100 years.
The figure below, provided by Ken Caldiera of the Carnegie Institution for Science, shows how an instantaneous doubling of pre-industrial carbon dioxide (from 280 parts per million to 560 parts per million) would be removed from the atmosphere-biosphere system. About 50% of the added CO2 would be removed after about 200 years and about 80% of it would be removed after about 1000 years, but complete removal of the remaining 20% to the deep ocean and carbonate rocks would have to rely on geological processes operating over much longer time periods.
In general, as of 2010, an average of about 1.4 lb (0.63 kg) of carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted to the atmosphere per kilowatt-hour (kW-h) of electricity delivered to a customer in the United States. This includes electricity consumed to run the generating plant, and electricity lost in lines and transformers on the way from the generating plant to your toaster. Actual emissions per kW-h generated can vary, from virtually zero* (e.g., for hydropower) to around 2.4 lb per kW-h for a coal-fired power plant. Within that range, the value will depend on the mix of energy sources providing the electricity.
A good source of information for particular regions within the United States is given by EPA at http://cfpub.epa.gov/egridweb/ghg.cfm. These numbers are in units of lbs. per megawatt hour so you would divide by 1000 to get lbs/kilowatt-hour. Those figures apply to electricity leaving a generating plant, but do not count electricity losses in lines and transformers on the way to your house (transmission and delivery losses). To roughly account for these losses, multiply the numbers given by 1.07, as per Annual Energy Review.
The energy (kW-h) and dollar costs for many specific types of appliances are given at http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/appliances/index.cfm/mytopic=10040
*Carbon emitted as a result of constructing a generating facility, from vehicles needed to maintain the facility, etc. are sometimes included in the accounting, so that carbon emitted from a hydropower facility, for example, would be very small but not exactly zero.
The first person to quantitatively investigate variations in atmospheric oxygen, and their relation to the global oxygen cycle is Dr. Ralph Keeling of Scripps Institution of Oceanography. The Web link (http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu) provides information on his work. Given that oxygen is produced by vegetation, it might be argued that humankind has the greatest influence on the oxygen cycle by means of alterations in the world's vegetation (e.g., deforestation, effects of increasing atmospheric CO2 on photosynthesis).
Certain wavelengths of infrared radiation moving upward from the earth are absorbed by molecules consisting of 3 or more atoms, such as carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere. The absorbed energy causes these molecules to go into excited modes of vibration until they get rid of the absorbed energy. One way to get rid of the energy is to emit infrared radiation, some of which will be radiated back down towards the earth.
For an animation of the vibrational modes of the CO2 molecule, see
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/physical_science/chemistry/molecules_vibrate.html
http://science.widener.edu/svb/ftir/ir_co2.html
Molecules can become excited in other ways than vibration; some excited modes of molecules involve rotation, but the wavelengths that affect molecules that way are usually in the far infrared, beyond those wavelengths in which most of the earth's energy is radiated. Shorter wavelengths can also excite electrons within molecules, or even strip electrons away. These wavelengths are typically in ultraviolet parts of the spectrum.
Radiatively active gases absorb specific wavelengths of radiation. Very little radiation is absorbed in the visible wavelengths, between about 0.4 and 0.75 micrometers. Therefore, we can see the visible reflection of sunlight from the moon, and astronauts can see physical features of the earth, through the entire atmosphere. However, an infrared camera sensing radiation between 5 and 8 micrometers would not detect physical features even a few kilometers away, even on a day that would be considered clear in the visible wavelengths. This is because water vapor is "opaque" in many infrared wavelengths, including 5 to 8 micrometers, and there is water vapor in the atmosphere even when there are no clouds.
Solar radiation includes ultraviolet, visible, and infrared wavelengths. Fortunately for us and other living things, most of the ultraviolet radiation (wavelengths shorter than visible) from the sun is picked off in the high atmosphere. This highly energetic radiation can strip electrons from atoms, causing the ionosphere and its associated phenomena such as aurora and the variations in your radio's ability to pick up distant broadcasting stations. Chemical reactions involving ozone formation and depletion in the middle and high stratosphere also pick off a lot of ultraviolet radiation, thereby preventing it from reaching the surface and causing skin cancers. Some of the infrared radiation in the solar spectrum is absorbed by atmospheric gases, mostly water vapor. The differentiation between solar radiation and visible light is not always made in meteorology textbooks, so students sometimes come away thinking that the "solar radiation" absorbed by the atmosphere is in visible spectrum; instead, it is mostly in the ultraviolet and infrared.
The earth emits radiation in the infrared, mostly between about 5 and 50 micrometers. Water vapor absorbs strongly between 5 and 8 micrometers, and above 20 micrometers. Water vapor and carbon dioxide absorb radiation between about 13 and 20 micrometers. Most wavelengths between about 8 and 13 micrometers can pass through the atmosphere. The main effect of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide would be to increase absorption of wavelengths near 13 micrometers.
Clouds absorb a lot of outgoing (infrared) radiation, and re-radiate it back down to earth. On nights when clouds are sparse or nonexistent, much less radiation comes back to us and more goes through the atmosphere out to space. This partly explains the large amount of radiative cooling at night in deserts, where clouds are sparse or nonexistent.
A related factor of frequently underrated importance is condensation of water vapor as mist, dew, or even frost. As vapor molecules lose energy and condense to the liquid or solid state, that energy is added to the surrounding air, a process which retards any temperature decrease by radiation. Formation of dew or frost will thus retard nighttime cooling, and this is more likely to happen in climates where the relative humidity is generally high.
Finally, in many deserts, the thermal conductivity of the (dry) soil is really small, especially in a sandy desert where the soil particles are relatively large and there is a lot of space for air in between. In addition, with little or no water to evaporate, evaporative cooling is minimal. There is also little vegetation to provide shading. This all leads to a hot surface, but not much transport of heat into the subsurface. When the sun goes down, that hot surface radiates a lot of energy away very quickly and relatively little heat is conducted upward to keep the surface warm. The result is low surface temperatures in the early morning hours. This reduced "thermal inertia" of a desert surface partly explains the wider day-night variations in temperature of a desert as compared to an agricultural area, for example.
The problem in separating the carbon and oxygen from CO2 is that CO2 is a VERY stable molecule, because of the bonds that hold the carbon and oxygen together, and it takes a lot of energy to separate them. Most schemes being considered now involve conversion to liquid or solids. One present concept for capturing CO2, such as from flue gases of boilers, involves chemical reaction with MEA (monoethanol amine). Other techniques include physical absorption; chemical reaction to methanol, polymers and copolymers, aromatic carboxylic acid, or urea; and reaction in plant photosynthetic systems (or synthetic versions thereof). Overcoming energetic hurdles is a major challenge; if the energy needed to drive these reactions comes from burning of fossil fuels, there may not be an overall gain. One aspect of the current research is the use of catalysts to promote the reactions. (In green plants, of course, chlorophyll is such a catalyst!) One area of current research is looking at using cellular components to imitate photosynthesis on an industrial scale. For example, see http://www.ornl.gov/ornl94/looking.html which describes research of the Chemical Technology Division at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
The International Energy Agency's Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme has many activities in the area of separation and sequestration of CO2 - see their website (http://www.ieagreen.org.uk/).
Published reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) discuss atmospheric water vapor in great detail. For example, the first report in 1997 states:
Water vapour is the most abundant and important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. However, human activities have only a small direct influence on the amount of atmospheric water vapour. Indirectly, humans have the potential to affect water vapour substantially by changing climate. For example, a warmer atmosphere contains more water vapour.
In addtion, the answer to an FAQ about the greenhouse effect from the 2007 IPCC Report. contains the following:
Adding more of a greenhouse gas, such as CO2, to the atmosphere intensifies the greenhouse effect, thus warming Earth's climate. The amount of warming depends on various feedback mechanisms. For example, as the atmosphere warms due to rising levels of greenhouse gases, its concentration of water vapour increases, further intensifying the greenhouse effect. This in turn causes more warming, which causes an additional increase in water vapour, in a self-reinforcing cycle. This water vapour feedback may be strong enough to approximately double the increase in the greenhouse effect due to the added CO2 alone.
"Most of the CO2 used in these kinds of applications is recovered from processes like fermentation and it is either CO2 that it is being extracted from the atmosphere by plants or CO2 that would have been released from fossil fuel burning anyhow. In essence it passes through this kind of use rather than being emitted immediately and there is no extra CO2 produced".
A good estimate is that you will discharge 19.6 pounds of CO2 from burning 1 gallon of gasoline. This does not depend on the power or configuration of the engine but depends only on the chemistry of the fuel. Of course if the car gets more miles per gallon of gasoline, you will get less CO2 per unit of service rendered (that is, less CO2 per mile traveled).
The U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently launched a new Fuel Economy Web Site designed to help the public factor energy efficiency into their car buying decisions. This site offers information on the connection between fuel economy, advanced technology, and the environment.
Let us illustrate with the combustion of natural gas (methane).
C = carbon, atomic weight approximately 12
H = hydrogen, atomic weight approximately 1
O = oxygen, atomic weight approximately 16
CH4 = methane, molecular weight approximately 16
O2 = molecular oxygen, molecular weight approximately 32
CO2 = carbon dioxide, molecular weight approximately 44
H2O = water, molecular weight approximately 18
For combustion of methane
CH4 + 2O2 = CO2 + 2H2O
So, combustion of 16 mass units (grams, pounds, whatever) of methane produces 44 mass units of carbon dioxide and 36 mass units of water while consuming 64 mass units of oxygen.
Is there any ONE person who discovered global warming? If not, what year was global warming discovered?.
The first person to have quantitatively predicted a change in surface temperature resulting from increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide is generally acknowledged as Svante Arrhenius, in 1896.
As far back as the 1930's Guy Callendar investigated carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere and indicated that increases were indeed occurring. Proof came in the 1960s when precise measurements began by Charles David Keeling in 1957 showed a steady increase at remote stations, indicating the global nature of the increases. By the 1990s, it was widely accepted that the Earth's surface air temperature had warmed over the past century, and that increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were an important contributor to this warming.
Climate changes, warming and cooling, have been occurring throughout geologic history. In general, climatologists accept 30-year trends as indicative that something has changed in the mechanisms that influence climate. There have been two such warming periods in the last 100 years, one from 1910 to 1940 and one from 1970 through 2000, separated by a period of cooling. Most climatologists now believe that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere have become a strong enough influence to have been primarily responsible for the most recent warming.
Arrhenius, Svante. 1896. On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. Series V, Volume 41, no. 251 (April), pages 237-276.
Fleming, James Rodger. 2007. The Callendar Effect. Published by the American Meteorological Society.
Kaiser, J. 1996. Supercritical Solvent Comes Into Its Own. Science. Vol. 274. p. 2013.
National Institute of Standards and Technology's website
Earliest quantitative measurements indicate that decomposition can be entirely attributed to biological processes.
SHANKS, R. E., and J. S. OLSON. 1961. First-year breakdown of leaf litter in southern Appalachian forests. Science 134(3473):194-195.
OLSON, J. S. 1963. Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology 44(2):322-331.
There may be some photo-oxidation but it is likely to be minor. For a more modern treatment (but largely based on the model develobet over 30 years ago by Olson) see:
Bosatta, E. and Agren, G.I. 1985. Theoretical analysis of decomposition of heterogeneous substrates. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 17:601-610.
Bosatta, E. and Agren, G.I. 1995. The power and reactive continuum models as particular cases of the q-theory of organic matter dynamics. Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta 59:3833-3835.
Agren, G.I. and Bosatta, E. 1996. Theoretical Ecosystem Ecology. Cambridge University Press.
I understand that atmospheric concentration of CO2 is increasing, but when I look at a graph (for example, Keeling's Mauna Loa data), the curve is squiggly. For half of each year, the concentration increases, and for the other half it decreases. What is the reason for this?
The variations within each year are the result of the annual cycles of photosynthesis and respiration. Photosynthesis, in which plants take up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen, dominates during the warmer part of the year. Respiration, by which plants and animals take up oxygen and release carbon dioxide, occurs all the time but dominates during the colder part of the year. Overall, then, atmospheric carbon dioxide decreases during the growing season and increases during the rest of the year. Because the seasons in the northern and southern hemispheres are opposite, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is decreasing in the northern hemisphere summer while increasing at the same time in the southern hemisphere winter, and vice versa. The magnitude of this cycle is strongest nearer the poles and approaches zero towards the Equator, where it reverses sign. The cycle is more pronounced in the northern hemisphere (which has relatively more land mass and terrestrial vegetation) than in the southern hemisphere (which is more dominated by oceans).
The Program Developed for CO2 System Calculations (ORNL/CDIAC-105), recently released by Ernie Lewis, Department of Applied Science, Brookhaven National Laboratory, and Doug Wallace, Abteilung Meereschemie, Institut fuer Meereskunde, was developed to help calculate inorganic carbon speciation in seawater.
This program, CO2SYS, performs calculations relating parameters of the carbon dioxide system in seawater and freshwater by using two of the four measurable parameters of the CO2 system [total alkalinity (TA), total inorganic CO2 (TCO2), pH, and either fugacity (fCO2) or partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2)] to calculate the other two parameters at a set of input conditions (temperature and pressure) and a set of output conditions chosen by the user.
Yes, quite a few. For example:
Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE) (http://www.rite.or.jp/English/E-home-frame.html) in Japan was founded in 1990 as a "research hub ... for the development of innovative environmental technologies and the broadening of the range of CO2 sinks."
GREENTIE, the Greenhouse Gas Technology Information Exchange, (http://www.greentie.org/) an initiative of the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), was established in 1993 "to improve the awareness of, and facilitate the access to, suppliers and experts of `clean technologies', particularly technologies that help mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases."
CADDETT (http://www.caddet-re.org/), the IEA/OECD Centre for the Analysis and Dissemination of Demonstrated Energy Technologies, "provides an international information network to help managers, engineers, architects, and researchers find out about the energy-saving techniques that have worked in other countries."
ScientecMatrix (http://www.scientecmatrix.com) is "a community of over 1000 scientists and technologists working on subjects as diverse as clean energy production from waste."
All of the reports, graphics, data, and other information on the CDIAC website are freely and publicly available without copyright restrictions. However as a professional courtesy, we ask that the original data source be acknowledged. Suggested citations appear at the bottom of the Web page for each data set. If the citation is unclear, simply contact CDIAC through our Web form. Please identify the URL of the Web page in which the information or graphic appears.
These educational links on global climate change were chosen because we have found them useful in responding to those with inquiring minds. These links will take the user outside of CDIAC, and are by no means comprehensive. We are not responsible for the content or intent of these outside links.
Privacy & Security Notice · Berkeley Lab · ESS-DIVE · Contact Us · This page was last modified: 06/30/15.


text:
Tag: penis enlargement medicines
What you need to know about the penis enlarging drugs
When it comes to erectile dysfunction, it's a lot of money.
A new study has found that penile enlargement drugs can cost up to $10,000 to $20,000 a year for a typical man, while men can cost thousands more.
According to the study, written by Dr. Peter G. Risch, M.D., of the University of Washington School of Medicine, erectile problems could be treated by medications ranging from testosterone to vasopressors to anti-inflammatories.
It's not just the drugs themselves that could make a big difference, but the drugs' side effects.
For the study published in the journal Urology, the authors analyzed data from over 6,500 men, ages 20 to 75, who took a combination of erectile stimulants and erectile drugs for erectile function.
The drugs were all approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The authors found that, after six years, there were a total of 6,074 men who were able to have normal erections without any side effects or medication.
The median age of the participants was 25, and they ranged in age from 22 to 65.
About one in four of them experienced a side effect, such as an inability to have sex or ejaculate during sex, the researchers said.
In addition, almost one-third of the men experienced side effects that included pain, redness, swelling or tenderness, and about one in five reported a dry mouth, dry or irritated penis or testicles.
"The average male patient has had more than 50 surgeries in the past six years," said Dr. Rsch.
"In the last three years alone, over 600 procedures were performed on the penis."
In the study participants were divided into two groups: those who received erectile medications for erections at least three times a week, and those who were given erectile stimulation medications for about 20 minutes a day.
After six years of follow-up, there was no significant difference in the number of erections that were reported.
The study also showed that erectile disorders are more common in the elderly, and that the more erectile-stimulating the medication, the higher the risk of erect disorders in the younger age group.
One of the researchers, Dr. J. D. Brown of the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, said the study may explain why men are being prescribed these drugs in high doses.
"This study adds a new wrinkle to the equation," Dr. Brown said.
He said doctors should take this information with a grain of salt. "
We're seeing this drug class of medications become more popular because we're seeing so many side effects and side effects are going to become more common," Dr Risch added.
He said doctors should take this information with a grain of salt.
"There's a possibility that it's just a coincidence," he said.
But he said there's no evidence that these medications are effective at reducing the number or frequency of erecting problems in men.
"Most of the data is correlational, which means it's correlating between the two," he explained.
"If you're having problems with your erections, you need something to alleviate those symptoms.
It should be an antidepressant, but there's a correlation between these medications and erect problems."
A recent study found that erections can improve with some medication, but it doesn't mean that all men with erectile issues should take them.
"Men should be cautious about the prescription of these drugs, and the best way to tell them apart is by their side effects," Dr Brown said, adding that doctors should discuss with patients what side effects to expect.
Tags: family medicine salary, internal medicine, penis enlargement medicines, seattle reproductive medicine

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Full Challenge: The ability of districts to identify high-quality computer science curriculum.
Challenge Description: Many districts struggle to identify high-quality computer science curriculum.
Washington STEM Steps Up to Support High-Quality CS Learning in Districts Across the State.
Teachers lack funding to provide quality STEM instructional experiences.
"Where will I find the time, resources, support, professional development?"
Many teachers lack access to quality STEM curriculum.


text:
Andy Hertzfeld Net Worth 2019
Andy Hertzfeld is a well-known computer scientist and inventor of American nationality who is famous as the member of the development team of Apple Macintosh and of Google+ Circles. He was also named as Computer wizard for his great work in Apple. He is the man who will always be discussed in the history of Apple. Keep reading to know more about this wizard's net worth in 2019.
Andy Hertzfeld was born on 6th of April in the year 1953 in Philadelphia, United States. He has a graduate degree from Brown University and also from the University of California. He is one of the key people in the history of Apple. He was always focused on his job so did not felt to start his own family. He did not share much information about his personal life with the media but as of his professional life he is a very successful person. He has always contributed well to whichever firm he is working and added well to the evolution of the firm.
Andy Hertzfeld's career began when he bought an Apple II in the year 1978 and by developing software for it, he was chosen as a system programmer by Apple in the year 1979. This was where his actual journey began. He was chosen as a development team member of the Macintosh. He worked in Apple until the year 1984 and contributed really well to the firm and emerged as Computer wizard. After leaving Apple, he started his own companies named as Radius which was started in the year 1986, General Magic which was started in the year 1990, and Eazel which was started in the year 1999. Later in the year 2005, he joined Google. In Google also, he did his magic and contributed to the development of Google+ Circles. Later in the year 2013, he retired from Google. He was recently seen in two documentaries named as Silicon Valley Revolution and The US Festival 1982: The US Generation Documentary.
Andy Hertzfeld was accoladed well for his works in the field of computer systems. He was honored a lot for his work in the Apple and whenever the biography of Steve Jobs or history of Apple is discussed, his name was always mentioned in it. He has also worked for promotions of an open source software with the Open Source Applications Foundation. He is also known for his work in the designing of the Google+ Circles.
Net Worth of Andy Hertzfeld
Andy Hertzfeld has earned a net worth of $55 million till now in his career. His most of the net worth was contributed by his work in the Apple firm from the year 1979 until the year 1984. Some of his net worth was also contributed by his work in the Google. He has also written a book titled as Revolution in the Valley and has also worked in many documentaries based on Apple or based on the life of Steve Jobs. Currently, his net worth is increased by his work in the documentaries.
Andy Hertzfeld is a well-known computer scientist and inventor of American nationality who has earned a net worth of $55 million. He is a man who loved computers a lot and his work depicted that well. He always contributed well to the evolution of the firms he was working for. He worked on some great projects like of Apple Macintosh and of Google+ Circles. He will always be remembered as a Computer wizard in the history of Apple.


click nearly any image to download hi res picture.
cats than here on human beings.
lose for what. You lose everything. we lose nothing because we have nothing.
should respect at least American opposition.
translation: can killing and deportation of the innocent be the way for the abolishion of dictatorship or to build another dicatorship?
Übersetzung Amer Abbas: Saddam was constantly humiliating Iraqi people. For Iraqis it is a relief to see him fall.
ebers of his family have been victimized by the Saddam Hussein regime. An oncle was killed because of political resistance.


text:
Top Business Schools in Puerto Rico 2019
On this page you can search for Universities, Colleges and Business schools in Puerto Rico. You will easily find all information about the top ranked universities in Puerto Rico. Click on"Read more" for a detailed description of the university and an overview of the study programs offered.
Find universities in Puerto Rico and browse through their programs to find the ones that suit you best. Get all info about the various study options in Puerto Rico and compare the tuition fees and length of study. You can save time and contact universities in Puerto Rico directly: fill out the"Request free information" form, which will put you in contact with the admissions office.
6 Results in Puerto Rico
Aguadilla Pueblo
Bajadero
Comerío
San Germán
Tecnológico de Monterrey - ITESM
US Tecnologico de Monterrey is a private institution, non-profit, independent and unrelated to political and religious parties. It was founded in 1943...
University of Puerto Rico - Río Piedras
Vision and missionOur vision is to offer technical services of excellence to the university community of our Campus to guarantee the best use of techn...
Universidad Metropolitana (UMET)
About the school Universidad Metropolitana is a private post-secondary educational institution and a member of the Ana G. Méndez University System (A...
Ponce Health Sciences University
Ponce Health Sciences University is dedicated to providing the highest quality graduate medical education programs available. This goal, in addition t...
University of Health Sciences Antigua
Founded in 1982, the University of Health Sciences Antigua (UHSA) located in Downhill, Piccadilly Antigua is an outstanding academic institution dedic...
Inter American University of Puerto Rico
The Inter American University of Puerto Rico is a private, nonprofit higher education institution, with Christian roots. For over 100 years, it has be...


The application period for the European Solar Prize 2019 is open until 31 July! Applications can easily be submitted via the application-form.
Due to the fact that EUROSOLAR is a non-profit organisation, we cannot pay any prize money.
What information does my application has to include?
The abstract is a significant part of the application. The judges' first impression of the goals and innovative aspects of the submission will be based on it. Your application can be supplemented by additional documents (such as photographs, brochures, diagrams, newspaper articles, videos). Additional material may be sent by e-mail or post. Ideally, the submissions also include key figures (e.g. 40 % of the consumption is generated from renewable sources) or mention the technology used. In the case of architectural objects, please specify the usable area, energy needs, portion of demand covered by renewable energy, reduction of CO2 emissions and the place/address.
What do I have to consider in my application?
Eligible projects are either fully completed or sufficiently advanced to provide first results. The Solar Prize will not be given in recognition of products, books or inventions.
Please pay attention to the quality of your documents. Please consider which informations and complementary materials are relevant for the assessment process and which are not. In your application, please make a clear reference to the evaluation criteria and describe the extent to which your project or initiative fulfills these requirements. It is also always an advantage, if you visualize your application with pictures and graphics so that the judges can get a better impression.
For technical reasons you can only upload one file with a maximum file size of 10 MB. If you wish to submit multiple items we recommend that you pack them in a zip file or combine them into one PDF file. If you wish to send in more extensive materials, kindly mail us a digital storage device.
How can I submit proposals?
How are applications and proposals assessed?
It should be noted that depending on the category, the weighting of the evaluation criteria varies.
How are the prize winners selected?
The individual prize winners are determined by a qualified jury, which is convened and put together by EUROSOLAR every year. The members of the jury are appointed on an objective basis and guarantee a practical and professional assessment of the incoming applications and proposals.
The European Solar Prize is awarded annually in addition to the national Solar Prizes of the various EUROSOLAR sections. The European Prize Winners will be determined from the applicants for the respective national Solar Prizes and the direct applications to EUROSOLAR.
After expiry of the application period, the EUROSOLAR head office reviews all applications and prepares the documents for the evaluation process. Afterwards, the prepared application documents are made available to the jury members electronically. In the framework of a joint meeting, the judges make final decisions on the award winners.
Applications and proposals must be received before the end of the respective application period. A selected panel of qualified judges, appointed by EUROSOLAR, will select the ultimate winning entries. The judges may assign projects to other categories than applied for, if necessary. No liability or responsibility is accepted by EUROSOLAR for materials sent in, including no recognition of any other legal claims associated therewith, such as the return of documents. All decisions are final.
EUROSOLAR fosters the public perception of the award winners through advertising initiatives in its networks and a festive ceremony. The partizipation in the European Solar Prize Award is free of charge. No prize money will be paid.
Confidential data from the applications will not be published by EUROSOLAR or passed on to third parties. Honoring texts and public information on the projects/initiatives are communicated and coordinated with the award winners before publication.
All private and public renewable energy installations, natural and legal persons and as well public bodies in Europe are eligible to participate. The applicant accepts with his/her application the statute of the Solar Prize.


text:
Home Celebrity Jane Fonda and Lawrence Bender are Good for the Environment
Jane Fonda working the live auction
Photograph by Kari Mozena
The Entertainment Industry
Jane Fonda and Lawrence Bender are Good for the Environment
Both livened up UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability Gala
Kari Mozena
"I think the MVP of this evening is Jane Fonda, clearly," Al Gore said Thursday at UCLA's fourth Institute for the Environment and Sustainability Gala. Fonda had just pulled out all the stops at the live auction, sitting on a bidder's lap and giving him a smooch to up the ante. She also sweetened the pot for a trip to Patagonia, getting the bidding up to $250,000: "Maybe you could visit my favorite ex-husband's ranch in Patagonia," she offered of Ted Turner's property. "Whoever wins, tell me your name and number, and I'll try and set it up for you. But this is a really, really special trip."
Ambassador Nicole Avant and Netflix's Ted Sarandos
Photograph by Chelsea Lauren / Vivien Best
The evening began with cocktails at the incredible estate of Jeanne and Tony Pritzker in Bel Air. When I arrived, Tony was on bended knee picking up a broken champagne glass—even billionaires have to clean up once in awhile. The evening highlighted the work of UCLA's IoES, which provides data and a "hands-on approach to environmental research and practice" and honored Netflix's Ted Sarandos, Wendy and Eric Schmidt, and Jeff Skoll of Participant Media for being "Champions of our Planet's Future." Both Sarandos and Skoll gave producer Lawrence Bender props for introducing them to their wives. The evening also served as in introduction to the new director of the Institute, Peter Kareiva.
Al Gore and Goldie Hawn
John Salley hosted, and the tent was filled with notables like Al Gore, Goldie Hawn, Rosario Dawson, and Norman Lear. Natasha Bedingfield killed onstage, as did Alice Smith, who closed out the evening. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Gore left attendees with a final thought on climate change. "We're winning, but it's very important that we win faster than we are presently winning."
Jeanne Pritzker
Tony Pritzker
Lawrence Bender
Previous articleLocol's One-Dollar Premium Brew Has the Coffee World Buzzing
Next articleThis Interactive Route 66 Guide Will Give You Leadfoot
Following His Climate-Fueled Globes Speech, Joaquin Phoenix Is Arrested for Demonstrating in D.C.
Globally Influential Activist Greta Thunberg to Join Youth Climate Strike in L.A. on Friday
Jane Fonda, Still a Revolutionary at 81, Was Arrested During a Climate Change Protest


text:
ELocalPost
Our sites 228
The History of Thistletown
Posted on Jan 28, 2016 by Olga
Thistletown, late 1960s
100 acres on the north side of the West Humber River, lies Thistletown.
In 1845-46 Grubb purchased Lot 33 of Concessions A & B and hired a local surveyor to form a plan of subdivision for a village to be named St. Andrews after his home in Scotland.
The village, which was never incorporated, was the first Etobicoke village to be registered with the County of York on June 11, 1847.
The village was renamed to Thistletown, in honour of Dr. William Thistle by his son John who became the first village postmaster.
Elm Bank is one of the five oldest homes in Toronto built between 1802 and 1820 made of ledge stones brought up from the close West Humber River and is a unique surviving example of a Regency cottage.
Around the 1950s planner Rex Heslop began development of a massive industrial and residential estate. Today, 1960s-style retail strips are main built-form.
Email Tweet
Ottawa Region
Oxford County
Peterborough County
County of Frontenac
Hastings County
Waterloo Region
Central Ontario
Hamilton Region
International Village
Westdale Village
Ottawa Street
Concession Street
Barton Village
Glanbrook
West Rouge
Gerrard Street East
Pape Village
Harbord Village
Church and Wellesley
Woodbine Heights
Kingsview Village
Downtown Oakville
Kerr Village
Downtown Burlington
Mirvish Village
Junction Triangle
Lawrence Heights
Wychwood Park
Toronto Island
East Danforth
Whitchurch - Stouffville
Jackson's Point
King Township
Station Gallery
In 1967, a group of passionate arts enthusiasts in Whitby started a community gallery, operating under the name Whitby Arts...
Whitby Read more
Settlers on the Ganaraska River
The name of Port Hope's Ganaraska River was attributed to the area by the indigenous peoples of the region and...
Port Hope Read more
Importance of the Harbour
The settlements that make up today's Cobourg were founded by Loyalists in 1798. Cobourg was originally a group of smaller...
Cobourg Read more
Belleville was originally the site of a village known as Asukhknosk, inhabited by Canada's indigenous Mississauga peoples in the 18th...
Belleville Read more
American Immigrants
Woodstock was first settled in 1800 after Sir John Graves Simcoe, governor of Upper Canada, determined that the area would...
Woodstock Read more
English and French Settlers
Prior to European exploration and settlement, the Windsor area was inhabited by Canada's indigenous peoples and Native Americans. Windsor was...
Windsor Read more
Rideau Canal Attracts Settlers
The Ottawa area was used for wild edible harvesting, hunting, fishing, trade, travel, and camps for over 6500 years by...
Ottawa Read more
Geographic and Political Importance
The Ottawa Region has always been an important location in Canada, due to its accessibility from the Atlantic Ocean via...
Ottawa Region Read more
Changing Boundaries
In 1788, the Hesse District was established within Upper Canada covering the territory of what is today southwestern Ontario. Four...
Oxford County Read more
Part of the Underground Railroad
Essex was one of the first counties to be settled in Upper Canada, later to become Ontario, mostly by French...
Essex County Read more
A Key Military City
The first more permanent encampments by aboriginal people in the Kingston area began about 1500 years ago. European commercial and...
Kingston Read more
From Scott's Plains to Peterborough
Prior to the 1800s the area was home to various indigenous peoples for over a millennium, and in 1615 the...
Peterborough Read more
Irish Settlers Brought In
Indigenous peoples settled in the area at least 3,000 years ago, and a few of these groups to settle in...
Peterborough County Read more
Visit The Islands
The County of Frontenac was originally proclaimed in 1792, as part of the newly-created Midland District. The County of Frontenac...
County of Frontenac Read more
A Home for Loyalists
Northumberland County was first settled by indigenous peoples, including the Cayuga peoples, who migrated there from New York in 1779....
Northumberland County Read more
© 2021 elocalpost.com Inc. How to Terms of service Privacy policy Advertise Business Solutions Contact us


What Is The Preppers Movement?
The prepper movement is not a totally new phenomenon. Whether justified or not, there has always been a fringe survivalist element in society that holds the dimmest view of the future and took actions to prepare for the potential collapse of civilization, which they assumed was imminent. What is new about the prepper movement is how their survivalist message is resonating with many mainstream and ordinary people who in past eras would be oblivious to calls to prepare for societal breakdown. Survivalists are no longer just people in hunting gear who spend their weekends playing war games in the woods. Survivalism has gone somewhat mainstream and now includes a wide variety of people from all walks of life who are colloquially known as "preppers" (people who are preparing for a major crisis and/or the collapse of civilization).
What is Driving The Growing Preppers Movement?
It is hard to pinpoint exactly what is driving the preppers movement that appears to have gained momentum during 2012. Perhaps the widely discussed Mayan December 21, 2012 end of the world prophecy has made people consider if they are prepared for such a cataclysmic event? Perhaps the 2008 and 2009 financial crisis that in some ways has lingered into 2012, as both European governments and the United States government grapple with fiscal and debt issues, has caused people to feel uneasy about the economic future? Perhaps the constant drone of Iran reportedly working on attaining nuclear weapons has revived people's dormant fears of a nuclear annihilation? Perhaps the awe inspiring power that hurricanes Katrina and Sandy unleashed has made people realize how inept government and collective society can be in protecting against and responding to disasters? Or, perhaps the explanation is as simple as the fact that the preppers movement has been made widely known by a popular television program called Doomsday Preppers that started airing in early 2012 on the National Geographic Network? Whatever the reason(s), 2012 appears to be the year in which preppers and the preppers movement moved out of the shadows and entered the mainstream of societal consciousness.
The term "preppers" covers a wide variety of people that are preparing for disasters and societal breakdown. Neither preppers nor traditional survivalists (the ones that are hunkered down in remote bunkers and already fending for themselves) like to associate the preppers movement with survivalism. Some call it "survivalism-lite", since many preppers do not go to the extremes that many survivalists have, and generally carry on relatively ordinary lives when they are not preparing for life after societal breakdown.
Preppers are for the most partordinary people (soccer moms, people working 40 hours a week, etc.) who are acting out of concerns for the safety of themselves and their families, and want to be prepared for future disasters, including the possible total breakdown of social order. The preppers movement is often group oriented. Instead of just preparing independently for disasters and possible societal breakdown, many preppers have realized that there is safety and strength in numbers, and have actively recruited their friends and neighbors to join their local preppers network to prepare for the worst with them.
Preppers generally prepare for future disasters and societal breakdown by putting together a "bug out bag", which is a bag that contains essential items that they believe they will need to initially survive after a disaster and possible ensuing societal breakdown. A bug out bag is designed to be easily grabbed and loaded into a vehicle, if preppers feel it is time to leave their home quickly and move to a pre-determined bug out location, which typically is a rural location that they believe will be relatively safe until order is restored. Preppers also learn: how to take care of medical emergencies themselves, store essential items, store protective gear, how to use firearms and methods of self defense, alternative ways of producing energy, and how to grow their own food and find alternative sources of nutrition in the wilderness.
Since bug out time may never come and a decision may be made to stay put and ride out a disaster and social disorder within their home, preppers also prepare to defend their home and neighborhood from potential looters and desperate mobs. This includes taking actions to secure a home by adding security measures, such as a safe room and window and door guards, and learning how to use firearms and self-defense strategies to keep looters and desperate mobs out of their homes and neighborhood.
Are Preppers Just Paranoid Or Are Their Actions Justified?
The decision about whether to join the preppers movement, either in practice or in spirit, or to just ignore it comes down to whether one feels the preppers are just being paranoid or if their actions are justified by real threats of disaster or catastrophe. Nobody knows for sure what is going to happen in the future and whether society will be able to handle future disasters, either natural or man-made, without dissolving into chaos. So, therefore learning at least some basic survival skills and taking reasonable measures to prepare for the unknown is a good idea for every able bodied person. However, letting preparing for disaster and social chaos consume one's life and one's life savings is another matter.
The reality is that dire predictions have been around since the dawn of civilization, and yet civilization is still here. The reality is also that one is far more likely to die from an every day event, such as a car accident or heart attack, than a catastrophic society ending event. So, legitimate questions can be raised about whether preppers' money and time would be better spent on buying the safest car possible, learning how to drive more safely, and eating a healthy diet, if they are truly concerned with self preservation. Legitimate questions can also be raised about whether many preppers are just wasting their time by not taking a holistic approach to prepping. For example, an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack could render many electronic devices useless (see: An Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack is a Major Security Concern for the Developed World). All the prepping in the world may prove useless if electronic devices that preppers are relying on to work are not protected properly from an EMP attack and are rendered inoperable in post-EMP apocalyptic world.
Whatever your opinion is of preppers and the preppers movement, it appears that they are here to stay and you will be hearing about them more in coming years. There certainly is no shortage of cataclysmic events to worry about, with weapons of mass destruction spreading, the potential for a pandemic viral outbreak always present and growing, and global warming apparently producing more intense storms, many more people may be drawn to the preppers movement out of fear that governments cannot be relied upon to protect their or their family's safety and preparedness actions need to be taken.
What Do You Think Of The Preppers Movement?
Preppers are being prudent in preparing for future disasters.
Preppers are being paranoid and are generally wasting their time.
I agree that it is a good idea to be prepared for the unexpected, but would not go as far as joining the Preppers.
I am too busy to worry about such things.
Why Are Millions Of Preppers Preparing?
You can never be prepared for everything, but I think a little preparation could go a long way toward getting through a disaster.
Thanks for checking in fpher48. I agree with you that it's a good idea to be proactive and prepare for unexpected disasters. 3 major blackouts in 14 months in my area was certainly a big wake up call for me to do some soul searching about how well I am prepared to deal with the unexpected.
I voted this UP, useful and interesting....and I feel that this hub is exactly that. I have always been in favor of "being prepared." We cannot ever know when any type of emergency/disaster will strike. By their vary nature, they are largely events that occur without much or any warning.
Regardless of the "reason," having a plan plus supplies of some sort, in the event of an emergency is a good move. It surely can't hurt.
Just in normal living day to day....the electricity can go out, flooding can occur....and depending on where one lives, you can experience incidents of violent storms.......I'm not an "official prepper," but I do believe in being proactive!


text:
Brian Kernighan
Professor, Undergraduate Department Representative
Ph.D., Princeton University, 1969
bwk (@cs.princeton.edu) (609) 258-2089 311 Computer Science
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk
CDH, CITP
Interests: Application-specific languages, document preparation, user interfaces, software tools, programming methodology.
Member, National Academy of Engineering, 2002; USENIX Association Lifetime Achievement Award, 1997.
Programming Languages / Compilers
Professor Brian W. Kernighan, who earned his doctoral degree in electrical engineering from Princeton in 1969, joined the department in 2000. Before returning to Princeton, he worked for 30 years at the Computing Science Research Center of Bell Laboratories, where he was head of the Computing Structures Research Department from 1981 to 2000. Professor Kernighan was a member of the editorial board for Software―Practice & Experience, 1990-2009, and has been the adviser for the Addison-Wesley series on Professional Computing since 1990. His research Interests include software tools, application-oriented languages, programming methodology, user interfaces and technology education. He was elected to the National Academy of Engineering in 2002 and to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2019.
"The Elements of Programming Style" (with P. J. Plauger). McGraw-Hill, 1974; 2nd edition, 1978.
"Software Tools" (with P. J. Plauger). Addison-Wesley, 1976.
"The C Programming Language" (with D. M. Ritchie). Prentice-Hall, 1978; 2nd edition, 1988.
"Software Tools in Pascal" (with P. J. Plauger). Addison-Wesley, 1981.
"The UNIX Programming Environment" (with R. Pike). Prentice-Hall, 1984.
"The AWK Programming Language" (with A. V. Aho and P. J. Weinberger), Addison-Wesley, 1988.
"The Practice of Programming" (with R. Pike), Addison-Wesley, 1998.
"AMPL: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Programming" (with D. Gay and R. Fourer), Cengage, 2nd edition, 2002.
"The Go Programming Language" (with A. A. A. Donovan), Addison-Wesley, 2016.
"Understanding the Digital World", Princeton University Press, 2017.
"Millions, Billions, Zillions", Princeton University Press, 2018.


Obtaining finance for a small business is no laughing matter.
With peer-to-peer loans expected to hit $1 trillion globally over the next decade, the crowdfunding concept is taking the world by storm.
SME financing – Is there a better way?
As Founder and CEO, Craig is responsible for overseeing the overall strategic direction and managing the day-to-day operations of Beehive.
Over the past few years, a surge in the amount of research, number of organizations and events dedicated to the small to medium sized enterprise (SME) space has taken the world by storm.


It's 2005 vs 2018 for the latest series of tests of the guys from head-to'head as they pit the Honda NSX against the brand-new Civic Type R.
It's a race between turbocharged vs N/A and the NSX has 280hp, while the Type R has 320hp. So can the latter teach the old dog some new tricks? Stick with us to find out!