Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
seeder

Greenhouse gas 7000 x more powerful than CO2

19 posts in this topic

Newly discovered greenhouse gas '7,000 times more powerful than CO2

Perfluorotributylamine is an unregulated, long-living industrial chemical that breaks all records for potential climate impacts

A new greenhouse gas that is 7,000 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at warming the Earth has been discovered by researchers in Toronto. The newly discovered gas, perfluorotributylamine (PFTBA), has been in use by the electrical industry since the mid-20th century.

The chemical, that does not occur naturally, breaks all records for potential impacts on the climate, said the researchers at the University of Toronto's department of chemistry.

"We claim that PFTBA has the highest radiative efficiency of any molecule detected in the atmosphere to date," said Angela Hong, one of the co-authors.

The study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, found PFTBA was 7,100 times more powerful at warming the Earth over a 100-year time span than CO2.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/10/new-greenhouse-gas-powerful-chemical-perfluorotributylamine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The things we do to this planet its a wonder its not dead.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we can expect to see strict regulations on this chemical now, right?

...right?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead punishing those companies and people who made it... The production is increasing im sure :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't punish a company for doing something nobody in the world knew was harmful! It is the same as punishing you for farting because 20 years from now they find that certain types of people produce a fart that is 10,000 times more dangerous than cyanide. All they can do is produce findings to the governments of the world who will hopefully clamp down on this by bringing in laws and policies to stop the release of this gas ever occurring. It is after this is brought in that they can then punish a company for doing it in the future, because there is a clear law in place.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead punishing those companies and people who made it... The production is increasing im sure :)

At the moment, there's not much of this in the air - lucky us. There are other chemicals related to CFCs that are almost as bad, but are still legal.

ExoPaul: if a person's/company's activities are known to be harmful at the time they did them, they can be sued in a civil complaint. The people bringing the suit have to be able to show how they were harmed.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This report needs scientific confirmation and some idea of how it actually behaves in the atmosphere as opposed to in a lab. If the danger holds up, I am sure bans will soon be put in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we would plant more trees, on to any empty field should grow trees. They love co2 , they give us o2

Edited by qxcontinuum
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we would plant more trees, on to any empty field should grow trees. They love co2 , they give us o2

Yea; where we had a pasture we put in an orchard -- not that we gain anything from it since people going by steal all the fruit before we have the chance -- but because we thought (this was mostly my wife's initiative but of course I wrote the checks) it would be better for the air (trees as opposed to cows) and just maybe we might harvest here and there a mango or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It belongs to an entire class of chemicals used for industrial applications whose effects on the atmosphere remain unknown.

This is the relevant section of the article, in my opinion.

We have had no proper due diligence in many fields of industry as to what is used in the process of production and how it impacts the environment we depend on to survive. Someone invents a process for producing something we deem useful, and we have only considered a part of the process for environmental impact.

Governments need to act to ensure all our industrial activity is properly assessed, because only then can we make any claims as to what impact we are having on the planet's eco-environment with any degree of certainty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something goes wrong and the immediate outcry is the government needs to pass a law making a regulation that will prevent its repeat. So they pass the law and several dozen more forms are developed for everyone to fill out and one of two things happens. Either people find ways around the law or people stop developing new things.

To an extent we have to hold people who put dangerous things out there responsible for the consequences, but trying to regulate it a priori does more harm than good. A certain level of testing is appropriate, but there is no way to test for every negative thing that might possibly happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something goes wrong and the immediate outcry is the government needs to pass a law making a regulation that will prevent its repeat. So they pass the law and several dozen more forms are developed for everyone to fill out and one of two things happens. Either people find ways around the law or people stop developing new things.

To an extent we have to hold people who put dangerous things out there responsible for the consequences, but trying to regulate it a priori does more harm than good. A certain level of testing is appropriate, but there is no way to test for every negative thing that might possibly happen.

I agree, but that does not mean we should not be more diligent. We are not ignorant, we just choose to be because it is expensive (and time-consuming) to be wise.

We know there is a possibility we could negatively impact our environment to the extent it can no longer support the level of society we currently enjoy. We should take this possibility seriously and not "brush things under the carpet" in the hope they are not detrimental.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly those gases will linger in our atmosphere for vast amount of time and we cannot easily reverse whats already done. The thing is we still have a chance why not change our ways to more environment friendly, its not that easy but we can make it one step at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, here we go again! Just when global warming has been exposed for the scam that it is, along come the grant-dependant mob with another scary death-gas that'll cause all life on 'Planet Earth' to curl up and go crispy at the edges!

Open your wallets and purses, everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only global warming we have is coming from the hot air emitted by the global warming disciples, including the author of this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7000 times, and nobody realize that before? Oh, by the way, here in Canada, we are freezing at -20 celsius or less for a ******* week, and winter has not even begun. **** why Hydro-Quebec is producing clean electricity? WE NEED Perfluorotributylamine, damn it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In spite of continuing warnings from all the respectable scientists, the political opposition to doing anything about greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continues to prevent anything meaningful from being done and give the politicians cover for their obstructionism.

Well time will tell. I'm seventy years old and so will probably not live long enough to suffer the consequences. I feel sorry for younger people. I can only hope that technologies will come along to rescue humanity from its blind folly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Initially I thought this story was about a greenhouse dwelling dwarf made of gas that had an impact on CO2. I was sadly mistaken. If anyone knows of such dwarf, please let me know about him or her, it will be appreciated.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOH!

LOL.

Global warming also consists of global cooling. So they had to change the name to climate change.

Now they find a different gas, because we all know the science behind CO2 being a "bad guy" is seriously inadequate. What will they think of next, just to keep us in fear and keep us from burning our leaves off, or owning a wood-burning stove or anything that doesn't put money into energy companies?

I see it has the chemical "fluoro" in it. Does that mean we can all stop fluoridating the tap water or stop taking those antidepressants with "fluoro" in it, that we p into the environment?

Edited by regeneratia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.