Climategate

[DuncanONeil]

The levels required to satisfy the believed "necessary" reductions in CO2 are such that they will also have, in themselves, an environmental impact.
Plants require CO2 to live. The proposed reductions could adversely affect food production. Also adversely affect the amount of O2 produced. Sufficient reduction in plant life can progress to a reduction in animal life.
The need to reduce CO2 emmisions is very likely to seriously affect the ability of large percentages of people to actually even get to their jobs. Thereby forcing an major shift in the population demographics, likely resulting in crowded conditions. Said crowding can have its own problems.
Other requirements to support the planned levels of CO2 could necessitate rationing of many things we take for granted now.

All of this taken together paints a picture of a society that can not be supported at its current levels. How could the world population be effectively culled under this scenario?

What does CO2 reductions have to do with being unable to live, work and feed ourselves?

Some places have done this successfully. Myth or not (climate change), but being able to live in a more environmentally friendly does not require us to stop eating, or living.

[Lion]

The levels required to satisfy the believed "necessary" reductions in CO2 are such that they will also have, in themselves, an environmental impact.
Plants require CO2 to live. The proposed reductions could adversely affect food production.

Where did you get this from? (That the reduction will cause adverse affects to food production, not the photosynthesis bit)

[DuncanONeil]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
The levels required to satisfy the believed "necessary" reductions in CO2 are such that they will also have, in themselves, an environmental impact.
Plants require CO2 to live. The proposed reductions could adversely affect food production.
Where did you get this from? (That the reduction will cause adverse affects to food production, not the photosynthesis bit)

I believe that you have made an error in transcription. If you will note I did not say what you claim.

[Lion]

I believe that you have made an error in transcription. If you will note I did not say what you claim.

The proposed reductions could adversely affect food production.

This is what I'm asking. I haven't changed any words around.

[DuncanONeil]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
I believe that you have made an error in transcription. If you will note I did not say what you claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
The proposed reductions could adversely affect food production.
This is what I'm asking. I haven't changed any words around.

The point is that a forced reduction in CO2 reduces the amount available for plant respiration. With sufficient reduction plant life would need to produce less offspring to survive. Hence less to support other life on up the chain.