View full lesson: ed.ted.com/less... What exactly is the carbon cycle? Nathaniel Manning provides a basic look into the cyclical relationship of carbon, humans and the environment. Lesson by Nathaniel Manning, animation by Jill Johnston.
Type “noooo” in the comments if you watched this video for homework or for school purposes. Edit: damn that’s a nice amount of noo’s, I hope yall are still alive after watching bc I sure wasn’t
I have an idea to fix (or at least improve) the problem we have with CO2. Every building with a flat roof should have tons of plants planted on it, and then people should collect the CO2 and put it into the plants (only a little, the rest of the CO2 for the plants would come from the atmosphere). Over time, people would be pushed to get new roofs with plants on them, even if they have a normal roof. This may not do much, but it sure helps.
What bugs me is that we know what the problem is and how to fix it but it's not being taken seriously enough because it interferes with the game of whoever has the most money wins.
One of the things I do to help the environment is to use printing papers that are printed on one side as scrap papers (using the blank side). THIS METHOD SAVES A LOT OF TREES!
Cool video; the narrator has a great sense of optimism for a sustainable future that I can only envy. I like this outlook on the climate crisis because it focus on what we are capable of as a planet rather than this idea of impeding doom that I think a lot of young people today feel and I can somewhat relate to. I hope his attitude can inspire lots of people, because to create a future that we can live in, we first have to be optimistic about these ideas.
Our industrial output contributes about 2% of the total earth's carbon output. Studies show that as scientific literacy increases, belief in climate change as a human problem decreases. The Antarctic ice shelves are larger than they have been since measurements were made. Hurricane levels of intensity and frequency over the last 10 years have decreased. So, why are we worried about nothing? Deforestation, however, is a problem on many levels.
In other words, the coming generations must form a new system that is not dependable on profit. Profit must become a vain concept in our society, but how to achieve this is another matter. It appears to be so that every major change on society is achievable only via revolution and momentary chaos.
Feeling positive about future technologies or possible breakthroughs breeds complacency. We need solutions immediately. Cars and cows are our biggest problem, if we don't directly deal with those two issues immediately, we're completely screwed.
That's actually not true... Many major petroleum companies (such as Exxon) do support and fund R&D in renewable energy sources. It is important to be realistic and realize that as of right now renewable energy is not capable of being dominant source of energy for Earth.That doesn't mean that won't change in the future, of course.
Most of the electromagnetic radiation we receive from the sun is visible light (there is a reason why the eye evolved to see it) and as you know, when it hits the earth, the earth gets hotter. Of course this heat doesn't magically disappear. The earth slowly radiate it back to space as infrared radiation, eg radiative cooling. Greenhouse gases have the ability to absorb the infrared radiation going to space while letting the sun's visible light pass, which slows down radiative cooling.
Wow! A lot of great stuff in only a couple of minutes. Every words is at its right place. I guess that is pretty good video, or even, dare I say it, a perfect video.
I appreciate the people saying "Save the EARTH!" But really we cant save the earth, nor we can destroy it. Earth has been here billions of years before any lifeforms, its nothing but a cradle for life and potential. I can go on without us for BILLIONS of more years. We dont have anything that can save or destroy it. We do have the ability to save or destroy life as we know it.
I recommend you look up sonic bloom, bigger plants = Less C02 and for bigger plants sonic bloom is your answer. It can both help climate change, poorer family's in agri-cultural country's and stop world hunger.
It is correct that there is limitless potential for invention, but as demonstrated through world history, periods of great advancement have come along with freedom both intellectually and financially. Unfortunately we seem to be losing freedom and liberty due to the ever expanding intrusion of big government into our lives. Henry Ford did not develop the Model T because it was mandated by the government.
We do have the technology to replace our current primitive reliance on fossil fuels, we just don't take it seriously enough because there is still oodles of money to be made until it's all gone.
I know it has something to do with their molecule not being symmetrical but I'm not a physicist and so I dont know the details. That doesn't really matter. Even if scientists had no idea whatsoever why CO2 absorbs IR, it's something we can demonstrate empirically as you can see on this video: watch?v=Ot5n9m4whaw
Yes, of course, lots will die off, but also a lot will continue to live and adapt (such as rodents, bacteria, and other animals that can sustain the climate change). Of course I'm not saying that we shouldn't do anything about it, life will be crap if we destroy our ecosystem on that scale.
teaching people that technology will eventually solve all our problems instead of teaching people to be aware of the problem and trying to reduce their carbon footprint Its just as bad as telling people they can staple their stomachs to help them slim down instead of telling them to reduce their food intake and exercising This is not the way to teach-that there are fast solutions to everything and that the solution will fall in people`s laps
But most of our species AREN'T idiotic or greedy. It's the artificial outdated system that we've created for us combined with the lack of knowledge that is the problem. I'm talking about the monetary system which remains unquestioned. While it was necessary a few centuries ago, that very system is holding us back. Studies have shown that people are inherently empathic. If money was out of the equation, majority of our problems would go away.
There are numerous studies and history as evidence that shows people aren't motivated to work for money. Atleast not the stuff that matters atleast. When it comes to repetitive jobs, money is a perfect motivator. But when it comes to creativity and innovation, money doesn't play a role at all. Look at Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Newton etc. they weren't motivated by money but their passion for something they loved. I'm limited to 500 characters but I have a video for you watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
