[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: fHuman vs. natural influences on the environment



charliew wrote:

> Thanks for admitting the error.  Incidentally, until the last
> 10 years or so, we couldn't measure 300 ppb.  Even 1700 ppb
> only corresponds to 1.7 ppm.  No matter what greenhouse
> effect you attribute to methane, unless you assume a
> ridiculously high value for this effect, 1.7 ppm is not going
> to make any kind of measureable change to anything of
> importance.

Whether you think so or not, Methane is a significant greenhouse gas.
It is not a simple matter to determine its significance in units
equivalent to CO_2 because the effect is dependent to some extent
on the time scale.   But according to the IPCC, the contribution from
methane to enhanced greenhouse warming is a significant portion of the
total.   Since the people doing these calculations did so subject to the
criticism of peer review, and since there is little controversy
about that conclusion, I am afraid I am just going to take their word
over yours.  If you think you can prove that methane can't have any
singificant effect, you should publish this in Science or Nature,
because it will come as a great surprise to atmospheric chemists and
radiation physicists who thought they understood the matter.

-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois



Follow-Ups: References: