[newbie!]

well i need to write an essay titled "global warming is it inevitable"
i've got myself a few articles to read up on but i'm trying to understand the basics.
i realised i'm not too familar with. we hear so much about global warming in the media we think we just understand it.
so basically greenhouses gasses are bad (in excess) and this is the main problem because we are producing way more greenhouse gases than what the atmophere (mesosphere,troposphere...?) can break down? thus causing a hole in the ozone layer? letting radiation in?

i think i'm really wrong lol and sorry i probably sound ignorant, but one set me right pls :-]

[Borek]

Greenhouse gases are one thing, ozone layer is another thing. For sure there are gases that are both greenhouse gases AND destroy ozone layer, but in general these are separate issues.

[newbie!]

ok so whats the problem with climate change?
- that there are too many greenhouse gases or that there is a hole in the ozone layer?

[newbie!]

and what gas(es) are causing the problems? CO2 because...?
in notes from a course i did a while ago on environmental chemistry i have written that N2 and O2 are most abundant (in the atmosphere) becasue N2 is inert and O2 is constantly produced through photosynthesis.
are they contributing factors to climate change?
should i be mentioning the different layers of the atmosphere or is it of little relevance in climate change? i think different gases are broken down in different areas? and residence times also - according to my note CO2 has a residence time of 4 years (360ppm).
the greenhouse effect - from my notes this looks liek something to do with light getting to the earth, the ozone hole etc. it contributes to global warming?

[Borek]

Please start with wikpedia, plenty of information there. We can help you when you will have detailed questions.

[newbie!]

we're not allowed to use wiki to source info for our essays.

[Borek]

I don't suggest to use wiki as the only reference, but as a starting point. You can learn there basic facts.

[Arkcon]

we're not allowed to use wiki to source info for our essays.

You can though read the references on the Wikipedia page, go to the library and look up that reference, read it, and reference that.  Or use the authors name in the Wikipedia reference, to find other stiff they've written, and reference that.

Often, you've asked us to explain everything to you.  Question:  how would you reference that?  What's your bibliography going to look like:

¹Arkcon, some guy I met online, 2011

²Borek, I think he runs a buffer webpage somewhere, 2011

Your teacher won't accept those either.

[newbie!]

^ lol .
credit where credits due.

and ofcourse i'd find facts and reference that but its nice to know the basics.
sometimes the internet neglects them.

i keep reading that deforestation contributes a lot of CO2 emisions and that forests are natural CO2 resevoirs that help reduce the volume of CO2 in the atmosphere.
and yes i'll sound ignorant so why cant we stop cutting down rainforests then?
its things like this. i get oone piece of info but then i cant find the rest to complete the story.

so why cant we simply stop burining down rainforests?

[fledarmus]

Because "we" is too many people with too many different needs.

I've read that people in SUVs are safer in case of an accident than people in smaller cars. So why don't we quit driving smaller cars?

I've read that motorcycles get better gas mileage than cars. So why don't we all ride motorcycles?

I've read that disposal of computers is a major environmental hazard. So why don't we quit using computers?

Telling people to quit doing something is rarely helpful, regardless of how good a reason you have for telling them to quit. You either have to change the situation so that what they get by quitting is better than what they get by continuing, or you have to coerce them. People that start with "why don't we just quit..." are rarely the ones making the sacrifices required to quit, are usually headed down the coercion route, and consequently get very little welcome by the people that do have to make the sacrifices

[newbie!]

ok let me rephrase then?

i've found the pro's to stopping deforestation, but what are the cons? (in regard to climate change?)
i mean like why do they even do it in the 1st place. isnt it to do with land and stuff?
sometime oil..?

[Borek]

why cant we stop cutting down rainforests then?

Valid question, answer lies somewhere between economy and sociology. Short version - greed (they turn rain forest into arable land) and increasing population (arable land again). Plus some wood to sale.

[fledarmus]

One man's greed is another man's productivity. We plowed up all our prairies to grow food, they cut down or burn out their rainforests to grow food. Either way, they are trying to take land which is not productive by their definition and turn it into land which is.

We could stop the rainforest being cut down right now. Let's just trade them our prairie land acre for acre for their rain forest. Hmmm, the continental United States is about eight million square kilometers and the Amazon rain forest is about five and a half million square kilometers - we'd still have about a third of the United States left to grow food on. Well, there's some non-productive land here too, like mountains and deserts...

The point is, the people who own resources would like to use those resources to improve their standard of living. If we're going to stop anybody from improving their lives by using their own resources, we'd better have some damn good incentives to offer.

[Borek]

Sorry if I sounded accusing, that wasn't the idea.

Still, greed plays an important part here. Way too often it is overexploitation (working on a short time scale only) instead of a reasonable use.