Global Warming ?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

great, but that is not a result of CO2, thats the result of banning CFC's

Isn't the chemical that replaced CFC's one of the leading causes of
" Global Warming" ?

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Isn't the chemical that replaced CFC's one of the leading causes of
" Global Warming" ?

Never heard that. I believe HFC's are about ten times weaker than CFC's in regards to global warming, and 50 times weaker in regards to ozone depletion.

Hey wasn't the ozone hole a big scam as well???
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[striperman36]

Worester's high of 58 today tied the all time record set in 1892.z

No other records than Salty's ranting about Barry's vacation costs were tied or broken today.

[UserRemoved1]

Ok now that was friggin funny

There is no such thing as global warming. It's all been dreamed up.

It's really Obama's fault.

Originally Posted by striperman36

Worester's high of 58 today tied the all time record set in 1892.z

No other records than Salty's ranting about Barry's vacation costs were tied or broken today.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Never heard that. I believe HFC's are about ten times weaker than CFC's in regards to global warming, and 50 times weaker in regards to ozone depletion.

Hey wasn't the ozone hole a big scam as well???
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From Wikipedia...
The interim replacements for CFCs are hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), which deplete stratospheric ozone, but to a much lesser extent than CFCs.[10] Ultimately, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) will replace HCFCs with essentially no ozone destruction (although all three groups of halocarbons are powerful greenhouse gases).

I don't know if it was a scam but do you know it was not?

[RIROCKHOUND]

I don't know what you mean by a 'scam'?
Ozone was a real issue, and globally it was a significant achievement to reduce the depletion of Ozone in the atmosphere by eliminating CFC's

Note; I don't have time to dig out a text and look it up, but from memory, with the caveat that I'm not an atmospheric chemist:

HFC's are a greenhouse gas. Not as effective at trapping solar radiation as CFC's, so besides the ozone benefit of banning cfc's there is a reduction in greenhouse gas, albeit a slight one. We are essentially swapping one GHG with another, with the added benefit of not destroying the Ozone layer.

the amount of HFC's in the atmosphere vs CO2 is orders of magnitude smaller, although ideally, a non-greenhouse gas would be used as a propellant or coolant. the net benefit of HFC's over CFC's to the ozone layer is significant, even if there was no significant reduction in greenhouse gas. Think of it as the lesser of two evils.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

I don't know if it was a scam but do you know it was not?

Was a joke. People said the same thing about the ozone hole years ago, environmentalists just trying to wreck the economy, but you don't hear that today.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Was a joke. People said the same thing about the ozone hole years ago, environmentalists just trying to wreck the economy, but you don't hear that today.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Todays crisis is tomorrows old news.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Todays crisis is tomorrows old news.

Then why not lobby to roll back to CFC's? They're a lot easier to make.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Then why not lobby to roll back to CFC's? They're a lot easier to make.

-spence

I don't really care either way. I'm more concerned about my water bottles.