Food waste in general shouldn't be adding extra CO2 in the environment, unless they are extrinsically adding tons of CO2 to the system from e.g. synthetic chemicals derived from oil.
First of all, you *do* use synthetic chemicals derived from oil in agriculture -- well, more accurately, from natural gas (ammonia). Second, you *also* use extra amounts of oil-derived fuel to grow this waste food. And third, of course, there's also the issue of methane being much more efficient at trapping heat than carbon dioxide, so even if you're neutral in terms of (physical) CO2 consumed and produced, you're still not necessarily neutral in terms of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions.
and water is a much stronger greenhouse gas than methane.
The antihumanists should just unite behind water, pretty sure people are so dumb now they can be convinced to stop drinking and get all this over with quickly.
and water is a much stronger greenhouse gas than methane.
[Citation needed]
In any case, water in atmosphere is self-limiting. If you attempt to put more in it, it will condense out rather rapidly (and the condensed form even reflects sunlight efficiently). This is not the case with methane; you can emit as much of it as you want and it will stay in the atmosphere for quite some time.
So the answer would be "no", then? Water vapor accounts for 2-3% of the atmosphere whereas CO2 accounts for only 0.04% of the atmosphere. The fact that water vapor has less than triple the effect of CO2 while being present in almost two orders of magnitude higher concentration means that it's a weaker greenhouse gas rather than a stronger one than CO2.
Seems like a stupid argument to me. (Score:1, Insightful)
Food waste in general shouldn't be adding extra CO2 in the environment, unless they are extrinsically adding tons of CO2 to the system from e.g. synthetic chemicals derived from oil.
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Seems like a stupid argument to me. (Score:1)
and water is a much stronger greenhouse gas than methane.
The antihumanists should just unite behind water, pretty sure people are so dumb now they can be convinced to stop drinking and get all this over with quickly.
Re: (Score:3)
and water is a much stronger greenhouse gas than methane.
[Citation needed]
In any case, water in atmosphere is self-limiting. If you attempt to put more in it, it will condense out rather rapidly (and the condensed form even reflects sunlight efficiently). This is not the case with methane; you can emit as much of it as you want and it will stay in the atmosphere for quite some time.
Re: (Score:1)
quick google
https://iedro.org/articles/wat... [iedro.org].
Water vapor accounts for 60-70% of the greenhouse effect while CO2 accounts for 25%
But that's the first time I've ever heard it called into question.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Seems like a stupid argument to me. (Score:2)
Why do you not simply save us all those posts and simply google which one he stronger is?
It is not that hard ...
Re: (Score:2)