Tuesday, April 29, 2008

It's the cows

Recently the Vulcan Project at Purdue released a map of US CO2 emissions

The sharp eyed folks at Wired noticed that this pretty well mapped out population and asked Purdue to redo the map per capita

Ronnie Raygun was right, trees cause pollution.


Anonymous said...

Interesting that the warmer states and western states are high. You would think people in the Northern states have more heating and transport needs that could be a factor. Do they have any other countries?

Dano said...

Sprawl, single-use zoning and resultant higher VMT. A/C over a long period. Amenities driving up land rents making 'drive 'til you qualify' a necessity.



Michael Tobis said...

Petroleum and gas production and refining.

Dano said...

Petro refining is a good one. Missed that one.

Note, also, the west side Cascadian forests in OR and WA - highest NPP on earth outside of sitka forests in AK. They appear to swamp emissions with their sequestration, but on the east side (say, WA), ag ops have high emissions, as well as no transit existing. Great Plains prairie soil sequesters much C as well.

So, I stick by VMT, but add mt's observations in there as well, meaning: look carefully at human actions.



Again, as I said, the claim is that a list of papers, above, given in 26, found here, purportedly is a list of scientific papers that refutes AGW.

This claim is false.

This claim is unsupportable if one reads the actual papers, as they say no such thing.

I pointed out that a simple exercise, such as looking at 6 randomly chosen papers, could easily show this list is false. None showed what the list purveyors claimed they did. Some were the opposite of the claim.

This exercise has been done a thousand times. The list of papers does not do what the denialists claim it does. No more energy needs to be expended upon this list.

This is what the denialists have had to resort to for years. This is all they can do: point to a list that doesn't support their claim.

Asked and answered, years ago. There is no scientific body of work on the denialist side. There are a few papers, maybe a dozen empirical papers. That's it.



EliRabett said...

Houston/Galviston is not blood red, so I am afraid it is not refineries. BTW, here is a great map of refinery locations