SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The world's carbon-dioxide problem doesn't just affect the atmosphere — the gas is starting to fill our homes, schools, and offices, too.
Indoor levels of the gas are projected to climb so high, in fact, that they could cut people's ability to do complex cognitive tasks in half by the end of the century.
That prediction comes from three scientists from the University of Colorado Boulder and the University of Pennsylvania, who presented their findings last week at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union. The study is still under peer review but available online in the repository Earth ArXiv.
The findings show that, if global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions continue to rise on their current trajectory, the concentration of CO2 in the air could more than double by 2100. Based on measurements of how humans function in spaces with that much CO2, the scientists warn, we could find ourselves scoring 50% lower on measures of complex thought by the end of the century.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @09:53AM (23 children)
Not sure how every commenter but you (and I) are not understanding this.
CO^2 is not particulate. It can't be filtered out mechanically (er, not without much bigger problems).
How are these people both 1) visiting a site for nerds and 2) spouting off on things that they so clearly don't understand? Have they no sense of - oh right online communities and signal to noise reducing bad actors. :(
(Score: 5, Funny) by barbara hudson on Monday February 17 2020, @11:51AM (5 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @12:56PM (2 children)
It's summertime. I'm in the Southern Hemisphere you insensitive clod!
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Monday February 17 2020, @03:31PM (1 child)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @08:57PM
Most of the population in southern hemisphere does not live in Australia... and even then, CO2 levels don't vary that much.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/chem/surface/level/overlay=co2sc/orthographic=-347.95,-7.74,427 [nullschool.net]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @02:00PM (1 child)
It is unwise to throw stones in a glass house.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Wednesday February 19 2020, @03:24AM
Inhabitants of domiciles
of vitreous formation
With lapidary fragments
are unwise to make iactation.
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Monday February 17 2020, @12:37PM (16 children)
Just fire up those carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) machines that we keep hearing about.
(Score: 4, Funny) by c0lo on Monday February 17 2020, @01:26PM (9 children)
Just like the free market fairy, those don't exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @02:55PM (4 children)
Yeah exactly. We should just do what they do on the ISS to get rid of all that CO2 - open a window and air the place out a bit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @05:42PM (3 children)
Drink our own urine?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Monday February 17 2020, @09:21PM (2 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 18 2020, @02:41PM (1 child)
Interestingly enough, it's only the US astronauts that are required to recycle and drink their own urine. The total efficiency gain from the process is mostly negligible. The Russians, for instance, do not drink their own urine - but they do give theirs to the Americans to enjoy.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Wednesday February 19 2020, @03:25AM
The Russians presumably drink their own vodka.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 18 2020, @12:20AM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 18 2020, @04:08AM (2 children)
Nope [insider.com], only cleaning them up of the old carbon.
Besides, plants and machines [etymonline.com], there's a big difference between them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 18 2020, @04:12PM (1 child)
I didn't say anything about plants. We were talking about carbon sequestration machines, which just happen to overlap with the category of plants. After all, what is a "carbon sequestration machine"? It's not a typical machine that does mechanical work because carbon sequestration is not a mechanical problem that can be solved that way. So already you have left the semantic gates wide open for nontraditional machines like those growing in the Australia outback.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 18 2020, @08:46PM
A carbon sequestration machine is;
- genus proximus: a machine - that is a contraption ("device, contrivance," from Latin machina "machine, engine, military machine; device, trick; instrument" (source also of Spanish maquina, Italian macchina), from Greek makhana, Doric variant of Attic mēkhanē "device, tool, machine;")
- specific difference: that sequester carbon.
Since plants are not in the genus proxium...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by aclarke on Monday February 17 2020, @02:27PM (5 children)
Office plants?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @03:03PM (4 children)
Are you referring to some of our employees?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 17 2020, @05:08PM (3 children)
Are you referring to some of our employees?
Only the ones working for Putin
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 18 2020, @02:28AM (2 children)
Their mission in life is definitely not carbon capture and sequestration, don't rely on them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 18 2020, @06:30PM (1 child)
A machine doesn't have a mission. Its users do.
We already rely on forests alone to store [cnn.com] about 1.5 times as much carbon as was introduced by humans into the atmosphere (160 Gtons in 1 trillion trees -> 480 Gtons in 3 trillion trees with 300 Gtons of CO2 estimated in atmosphere from human sources). I think you're a bit late with your warning.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 18 2020, @08:42PM
Please revisit
Because... [xkcd.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford