- Tuesday, 10 November 2009
- INQ Mobile
- RSS
People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like - Abraham Lincoln
Google Earth gets green gas
He who smelt it dealt it
Friday, 20 February 2009, 11:21
A TEAM OF US boffins from Purdue University has created an interactive Google Earth mapshowing carbon dioxide emissions across the United States.
The high-resolution map, which can be seen here, shows carbon dioxide emissions in metric tons.
It took three years to complete. The next stage will be to narrow down the readings with the great unwashed feeding information into the system.
The United States accounts for some 25 per cent of global emissions of carbon dioxide, but has consistently denied that it causes global warming and promises to keep on polluting because it can do what it likes since it has nukes. µ
L'INQ
AP
Share this:
Share
Advertisement
Subscribe to the INQ Newsletter
Sign-up for the INQBot weekly newsletter
INQ Whitepapers
Business Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Jobs
Advertisement
INQ Poll
Why are so many journalists so clueless?
You have done it!! This is the first time the link between # of Nukes a country has and percieved pollution.
Has been so fully stated!
Again BRAVO!
@ "Climate Expert" - seriously, about the only source less credible than the Inquirer that I can think of would be ... let me see ... someone who thinks that global warming is not real.
The county I live in now puts out less than the county I used to live.
My old county's population: 34,909
My new county's population: 578,698
I never would have guessed a coal fired powerplant puts out more CO2 than 543,789 people.
...by spending huge amounts of unsustainable resources to study greenhouse gases. One step in fighting 'AGW' is to turn off teh computers studying the problem.
The U.S. is under new management. Perhaps you hadn't heard?
Actually the U.S. only puts out 25% of the man made emissions, which only constitute 3% of totall carbon dioxide emissions("nature" produces the other 97% mostly oceanic outgassing) which means that the U.S. puts out 3/4 of a percent of the worlds carbon dioxide not 25%. Also funny that you didn't mention China, which both produces more CO2 and denies CO2's impact on temperature even more.
Since the economy took precedent over the environment and now the economy is messed us as bad as the environment, will this equilibrium intensive, poll positive for the environment? Or the economy?
Remember most political systems of the day is democratic, and eeeverybody democratic thinks that eeeeverything is up to a vote!! Now, did the environment lie or is it the economy? OUCH! Does that hurt? Sorry, Gotta get that bullet out!
Geez, IF 'funny figures' is right, then the writer has overstated the point and contributed to the 'talking past each other' issue that surrounds Global Warming. It doesn't help for someone to do so much research IF they fail to scope the meaning for their audience. It looks like good research, but IF 'funny' is right, people will fail to trust the results. A shame, given the hard work.
The latest science tech says that global warming has been overstated and that regular and irregular climate cycles are a large part of the warming.
I think there is some global warming that is man made, but more importantly I think that it's being used as the newest global tax fiddle on the poor tax payer.
The UK government are just using it for tax purposes. In fact their policies of "recycling" our waste are causing more CO2.
Instead of 1 lorry taking my rubbish 1x a week, we now have 4 different lorries. How can that be good for CO2 when they all pump out CO2?
It's all big tax con. Just like the global banking crisis, caused by Alan Greenspan and his friends who are actually going to make a fortune out of that (some already have, George Sorros).
Why did Alan Greenspan put up US borrowing rates 15 times in a row? Why did he deliberately make it so that people who could afford a mortage, couldn't after his massive rate rises?
Why did Alan Greenspan put up borrowing costs by more than 300%?
You can argue green house gasses.
You can not argue pollution - water poisoning, contamination of all sorts.
Even if you don't believe in global warming, that poles arn't melting, or weather it's man made, the toxic mess were leaving future generations is not okay and needs to be stopped.