It also saves more lives, and make modern civilization possible. You always have to look at both the pros and the cons.
Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
41–50 of 249 posts
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#42One alternative to traditional concrete is autoclaved aerated concrete[1], a 70 year old material that's more eco friendly. Some of the advantages are mentioned in this video[2]. I'm guessing higher upfront cost means it's not competitive with traditional concrete.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoclaved_aerated_concrete
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
CO2 is a subset of pollution.
CO2 is not pollution. The concentration of CO2 on the atmosphere only has negative effects through warming (which is really bad). Plants actually enjoy increased CO2 concentration.
Now I am wondering, how much CO2 is too much for plants? And now when more CO2 is available, why don't see new forests appearing in places where there never were any forest.
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#44In terms of greenhouse gasses, the biggest polluter is probably the ocean pumping all the water vapor into the atmosphere. Water vapor has by far the greatest greenhouse effect, accounting for about 65-85% of the greenhouse effect vs human generated CO2 that directly contributes 0.12%.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/01/calcul...
If we really want to change things, we'll have to get rid of the ocean.
Seriously, though, I'd like to see some real numbers that if we completely eliminated human CO2 emissions, what is the actual difference that would make? What does that say about the significance of practically achievable reduction in human CO2 emissions? What amount of CO2 would we have to recapture to make a difference? What amount can we practically capture?
I am getting the impression that these numbers might paint the CO2 dilemma as completely unsolvable. Sure, maybe in some way every little bit helps, but maybe it helps like using a squirt gun to put out a volcano. It'd be nice to know just how relevant our efforts would actually be if everyone unified and did the absolute best we could do, even so far as drastic population reduction or even complete elimination of human beings. Would even such Thanos like measures do anything, or would that just be bringing a second squirt gun to the volcano?
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#45Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#46In our research, we see that the easy alternatives are being used almost to capacity already, making future improvement difficult. For example, there is basically no unused fly ash in Europe, and it is sometimes imported from as far away as India. Similarly, burning wastes for "free" heat is also limited by the availability of waste (residues from chemicals industry, tires, etc). This is particularly true in areas where waste incineration is the norm - plants built to service a certain volume of waste are struggling as wastes volumes decline due to diversion to recycling. Consumer waste has a rather high water content, so wastes with high energetic content help the incineration run better. This is why e.g. paper or plastic is sometimes burned instead of being recycled.
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#47One good thing the US and Canada does is to not use cement for houses ! It is somewhat negated by the terrible insulation in most homes in the US (and the fact that homes tend to last less long I guess). Does anyone have any data on how much gets emitted for house construction depending on the material ?
The us doesn't use concrete for residential walls (very often) but that is actually quite good from an insulation perspective. Hollow wood framed walls have a lot better r factor than solid concrete. We do have solid concrete foundations. Edit: hollow walls filled with fiberglass to keep the air still
> The us doesn't use concrete for residential walls (very often) but that is actually quite good from an insulation perspective
That is an incredibly incorrect set of statements. The insulation value of concrete, it's R=0.52 per inch of thickness. A vast amount of housing in many regions across the world is concrete (including the walls). Obviously, it is more common in multifamily construction and/or hurricane prone areas. Hollow wood framed walls w/o insulation depends on the relative humidity, but it's R<2. Fiberglass batt (R-12 and higher) is basically the only source of insulation in a wood sheathed wall.
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
CO2 is not pollution. The concentration of CO2 on the atmosphere only has negative effects through warming (which is really bad). Plants actually enjoy increased CO2 concentration.
Now I am wondering, how much CO2 is too much for plants? And now when more CO2 is available, why don't see new forests appearing in places where there never were any forest.
[deleted]
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
CO2 is not pollution. The concentration of CO2 on the atmosphere only has negative effects through warming (which is really bad). Plants actually enjoy increased CO2 concentration.
Now I am wondering, how much CO2 is too much for plants? And now when more CO2 is available, why don't see new forests appearing in places where there never were any forest.
Greenhouse operators often provide their plants with an atmosphere of 1200-1500 ppm CO2, which would fall into the
economically advantageous range. No idea where the "too much" range starts though.
Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World
#50Telling a lie then saying 3 Hail Marys means you are forgiven for the lie, it doesn't fix the lie. As such, planting a tree to be forgiven for going on a flight that burns carbon-laden jet fuel doesn't fix what you did. Fossil fuels are excess carbon atoms sequestered safely deep inside the Earth. Unless you can find a way to put them back there, there's no fixing the situation. Planting a tree does capture carbon. H…
Trees rotting produces compost and over time soil, soil which ultimately contains organic carbon. Perhaps overtime the organic carbon from the original tree is entirely gassed into the air somehow, but in the meantime you've been growing a second, third, and forth. Growing and composting plants does contribute to the sequestration of carbon and more importantly prevents methane production.
Rotting trees produce methane which is a potent greenhouse gas.
We do need massive re-forestation programmes though.