近排拿起本「National Geographic」睇下，其中一篇講「Global Warming」。好簡單，大氣中既「CO2」會困住陽光線中的熱能(被地面折射的陽光光線(Radiation)部份不能逃離大氣層)，從而令地球氣溫長期維持於一個較溫暖的水平。如果沒有上述恆溫系統(Green House Effect)，地球根本不宜人類居住。
但問題是人類每年不斷增加「CO2」之排放，令空氣中的「CO2 密度」上升，結果係全球氣溫非自然地暖化，亦即「Global Warming」。現在「CO2 Density」大約為525 ppm，科學家估計如果全球「CO2 Density」及「平均氣溫」會因應未來人類排放「CO2」之數量而變化:
1) 如果維持現時「CO2」排放之增長率，2057年「CO2 Density」會升至800 ppm，而全球氣溫可能比現在上升5.0度 (夠恐怖嗎?)
2) 如果維持現時「CO2」排放水平，2057年「CO2 Density」會維持於525 ppm，而全球氣溫可能比現在上升3.0度 (都唔野小)
3) 如果減低「CO2」排放量，2057年「CO2 Density」會下跌至450 ppm，而全球氣溫可能比現在上升2.0度 (不是太差)
相信大多數有D「Sense」既人都想第三個情況(甚至更低的排放水平)會發生。將來會點實在難估，有一點可肯定的是人類之將來命運取決於現在。點做?? 可考慮以下三個大方向:
1) 增加用能源的效益(Efficiency)及保存(Conservation)
2) 「CO2」儲存，用於發電廠
3) 核能及再生能源(Renewable Energy: 包括太陽、風、水等)
下次談多一點再生能源，尤是「Bio-Fuel」.....
9 則留言:
呵呵, 又係介紹東方不敗的時間.
其實碳中和係咪一個解決方法呢 ?
另外就係使用CO2做冷媒（即係我地叫雪種），因為現今用緊冷媒會破壞臭氧層，導致溫上升原因之一。聯合國有計劃將現今的冷媒分階段淘汰。
檸檸啡:
有外國地方於電廠附近將"CO2"存入地下，等待自然轉化。我想大家係咪想緊同一樣野??
大地小侍衛:
"冷媒"，即"Coolant"也。"Idea"幾好，不過不知是否乎合"成本效益"??
題外話，"CFC"導致臭氧層變薄，在人們十餘年努力下，情況有明顯改善。現在，我們要正視"Climate Change"。
Albert:
CFC issue is a big big liar. Think about these facts:
1. Why the ozone hole happens only in Australia not in any northern hermisphere? The human activities are much much higher than the southern hermisphere.
2. The scientists who "discovered" the ozone depletion was based on the data from 1979 to 1984. (Before that time, there was no satilites to detect the TOMS data)
3. I am not being racist. But think about the skin color of the aborginals. It implies there was a long long time probably a few hundred thousands years for them to evolve to adapt the high UV environments. (Darwin's theory)
Albert,
其實開始有D frustrated..因為講完都無用既。2012 世界可能真系會沒日啦！
雖然大家既 awareness 會多左，但班美國佬自已都唔 buy，中國印度又話要開始嘆世界...
唯一林緊惦解唔全面禁煙呢？
Investment:
Unfortunate to say, your view on "CFC" could be beyond "Appropriate Reasoning". Using the "Aborginals Case" may not reflect the reality, the British (actually most are Scots & Irish) emigrated to New Zealand & Australia as early as early 19th centuries, or more than 200 years from now. Your "Darwin's theory" may not hold pretty well.
More evidence showing the "Ozone Depletion"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Min_ozone.jpg
It is undeiable that the ozone density had been dropping CONSIDERABLY between 1980 and 1995, before the situation started to stablize (after the launch of "Montreal Protocol" since 1989)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ozone_cfc_trends.png
The above URL link shows the total CFC density has been dropping since 1990.
The trend in "CFC Density" & "Ozone Density" may be more comvincing, compared with your "Hoax" claim.
Unreasonable arguments also held by George W Bush, who previously claimed "Climate Change" to be a hoax.
Well, be smart!
大師:
咁又唔駛太悲觀ge。
就算美國條"殊仔"無腦，高油價同弱美金都會逼D花旗人"Rethink"。"General Motor"D"大食油"車近幾年俾日本仔打到落花流水，就反映消費者既睇法。
"中國"反而可以看好一點，國家領導人係比較"Considerate"同"Visionary"。"十一五"計劃中較著重"再生能源"及"高效益發電"。
所以亦解釋"東方不敗"為乍會係呢10年受惠"綠色國策"既上市公司。
發佈留言