Fitzgerald Gliders might be getting more attention than they’d like

That's California, no one cares about them except themselves.

 

My initial response was to both whoever was claiming LA pollution was at it's worst, and Tucker who was saying it wasn't bad at all. It's gotten better, but there's some reason which is causing it to trend upward in the past two years.

 

To many people like every other place with to much pollution.

 

Maybe it's that simple, maybe it's some weather pattern that loads the area from elsewhere, or maybe there's more pollution than originally expected. Whatever it is, it would be good to find out through research, especially if it can be beneficial elsewhere.

 

OK, The air pollution in the big cities is going to better because 95% of it is caused by GAS burning engines. In that arena, the catalytic converters have been highly successful. Not so for diesels, they burn more fuel and all of the spinoff pollution from making all of the BS needed for the DEF systems more than cancels out what is being reduced at the engine exhaust.

Now.... Lets put some things in perspective about humans causing global effects. In ONE MINUTE the amount of energy that falls on this earth from the sun greatly exceeds ALL of the energy produced and consumed by mankind ALL across the globe in a YEAR! This includes nuclear energy! Now how many minutes are there in a year? Does this teach anyone anything about how insignificant the greatest things all of mankind can accomplish stack up in comparison to the cosmic forces that regulate the conditions of this planet?

Also, the oceans are incredibly huge "sinks" for CO2, and methane. Naturally occuring slight temperature changes cause huge atmospheric feedback effects here that dwarf all of mankind's "pollution" effects.

Then there are plate tectonics, and related volcanic activity that also dwarf anything us humans can throw at this planet.

Man made global warming? Really.

 

Also, water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse "gas" than CO2 or methane. Just a 1% change in humidity swamps out anything that a 100 parts per million increase in CO2 can cause. But......wait a minute........, water vapor can't "technically" be mentioned as a greenhouse "gas"! Why? Because "technically" it is a VAPOR. See what intentionally leaving that itty bitty tidbit out of the reports from the scientific studies can cause! LOL

 

Yes really. Our output is overloading the natural removal methods, being plants, ocean absorption, and weathering. We've been overloading the system by about 3% for decades and that has added over 50% to the total atmospheric CO2. And that giant nuclear furnace in the sky? That's all the energy the green house gasses retain instead of allowing more to escape.

 

The capacity of the atmosphere to contain water vapor is dependent on the temperature and so when you increase CO2 water vapor adds to the effect. I already mentioned this and a previous video I posted covers it in detail.

 

Lets see, when did CARB require DPF's on all trucks? Perhaps they are the cause of the spike in emissions the last two years, according to your logic.

 

Ok now I understand your saying the huge swing of average temps of 2 or 3 degrees is very concerning compared to the near 100 degree swing between the dinosaur era vs. the ice age.
Makes sense...