I don't mean a literal count, giving an actual number of trees, but they do want to know how large the forests and vegetation areas are, whether that measurement is in acres or whatever. And, they want to know if the vegetation areas are growing larger. They want to determine whether the number carbon dioxide-eating plants are increasing. Is our carbon dioxide vegetation increasing as a result of carbon dioxide emitting sources increasing? And, how much of the carbon monoxide is being absorbed by the plants?
(It should be noted, the new mission will monitor not only carbon monoxide, but other green house gases, as well.)
Only 25-30 percent of carbon monoxide emitted by cars and power plants ends up back in the atmosphere. The rest? I suppose it is absorbed by plants. So, having a plant system that eats up the carbon dioxide is as much of the answer to global warming as is reducing emissions.
I've always thought our green plants were being chopped down faster than new ones could pop up. We hear about deforestation, and how the Amazon rainforest is being encroached upon. So, what is this: We might actually be experiencing more carbon monoxide-fighting plants? Some scientists seem to believe so. If that is happening, it would play well with the theory that the earth can heal itself.
The idea is to get data to determine what is going on. The Geostationary Carbon Cycle Observatory, (GeoCARB) is to offer observations each day on the green house gases and plant life in the Americas.
If we are to know whether greenhouse gases are a threat, and if we are to know how much of a threat they are, we must study. He who will not study a problem is not worthy of an answer. So, I suggest the GeoCARB program is probably a worthy one. I do have concern for the cost, however. It comes with a $166-billion bill. That is a high expense, and I wonder if there are ways to reduce the costs without hurting the program.
(Index -- Climate change info)
No comments:
Post a Comment