Dicke and JamesH, CO is flammable and converts to CO2. It has a heating value (higher and lower are equal) of 10.9 MJ/kg.

It was commonly used as fuel in the past as a component of coal gas and wood gas (along with hydrogen and contaminants like sulfur and nitrogen oxides). The main reason coal gas and wood gas aren't used directly as fuel today is that CO is toxic to humans (and methane, aka "natural gas", is cheaper today).

The Fischer-Tropf process for synthesising liquid fuels from coal or biomass produces alkane chains and water from CO gas and hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst.

I thought Bob Carters piece was really funny. Then I realised he wasn't being facetious.

I'm still not sure if Bob thinks the ABC aired "An Inconvenietn Truth" and that it received a warm reception.

Do I bother replying with logic to a piece deviod of any?
Lets just all "Do a Durkin" instead.

Somewhere here I have Bob's 6th grade report. He failed science. Therefore Bob cannot be a scientest. I rest my case. But wait, what's that you say? He went on to university and gained a degree. Well I think that's a moot point.

Sound familiar?

Except for something like this, it's pretty obvious common sense. Screw your environment and you're screwed. Just because we are talking about gases here and therefore can't see them, doesn't mean that we are not altering considerably the functioning of our ecosystem. When you consider human activity, how much of it there truly is, and how many of us there are, it doesn't need a degree in rocket science to appreciate our effect on the environment is not going to be one that enhances our atmosphere, but most definitely the opposite is most likely.

I am persuaded about climate change and I doubt any one could dissuade me, no matter how clever the conjuring tricks of the media. Our environment is degrading everywhere and more than demonstrably so.

The author of this piece insults our intelligence and intends to. It is why he uses insulting terms.

Hi GYM-FISH,

"The real issue is that we are, in one way or another, fouling our own nest. The earth is four or five billion years old - the idea that we, in two hundred years or so, can have such a direct effect on some of its fundamental parameters seems a bit hard to accept."

Surely not that hard to accept. It can take centuries for a mighty tree to grow, but these days, only five minutes to cut it (many of them) down.

would be well advised to adopt the Precautionary Principle and immediately gag Mr Carter ("environmental scientist") from spruiking more of his inane sophistry.
Posted by dickie, Friday, 13 July 2007 7:28:54 PM

Did not Joseph Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc gag dissidents?

I think there was even a time that scientists were persecuted as heretics by the church, because the church did not approve of their inquiring minds.

Dicke and JamesH, CO is flammable and converts to CO2. It has a heating value (higher and lower are equal) of 10.9 MJ/kg.

Posted by xoddam, Friday, 13 July 2007 9:52:35 PM

Thanks for that, xoddam.

I had a huge smile on my face when all these people turned off the electric lights to reduce CO2 emissions and then they lit candles.

Yep that makes huge sense, reduce CO2 from one source and create more CO2 from another. I would suggest a hugely practical way to reduce CO2 emissions would be for people to put a plastic bag over their heads, (some really dumb people might actually do it) to capture the CO2 they breathe out.

“Did not Joseph Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc gag dissidents?” – Yep.

“I think there was even a time that scientists were persecuted as heretics by the church, because the church did not approve of their inquiring minds.” – Yep.

The Bush Administration tried to ‘gag’ James Hanson (not you?) from NASA – Yep.

They also ‘gagged’ government scientists from even mentioning the word “Global Warming” in their correspondence – Yep.

They even promoted the word “Climate Change” in favour of Global Warming – Yep.

The US even tried to ‘gag’ the IPCC – Yep.

Of course, I am being facetious – Yep, it’s Sunday.