Australian Politics Forum - US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #15 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 8:06am

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2013 at 4:56pm:

Ajax wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 9:51am:

Hey muso we don't really know exactly how much of the Co2 increase is manmade and how much is natural.

If the majority of the CO2 increase is natural there isn't much we can do about, if its manmade there still isn't much we can do about, unless you want to go and live in caves.

That's no more internet, power at your finger tips, warmth, air conditioning etc etc.

Would you be prepared to live in such a world.....???????

Below from the link you provided, look like we can live in a CO2 world with 5000ppm (0.5%).

Short term exposures, Ajax. For a healthy worker 40 hours a week.

Pregnant women are more susceptible to CO2, and the indications are that long term exposures at 1000 ppm can lead to decalcification in bones and calcification in body organs with resulting serious health effects up to shutting down of the renal system.

Where are you getting this information from..............?????

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #16 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:24am

Didn't you read the link I gave you?
Quote:

In summary, OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% CO2 (5,000 ppm) averaged over a 40 hour week, 3% (3,000 ppm)

Also Google the Healthy Worker Effect.

They quote a 1000ppm limit for HVAC systems and the US EPA limit.

Just about any reference for HVAC systems will quote 1000ppm. Air starts to get stuffy at 600 ppm.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic Gold Member Offline πολιτικός Posts: 4826 Mawson Base Gender:	Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2 Reply #17 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:40am Ajax wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 8:06am: muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2013 at 4:56pm: [quote author=Ajax link=1380921713/1#1 date=1380930675] Where are you getting this information from..............????? Lol
Back to top	Mini Ice Age (2014-2029) Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #18 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:53am

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2013 at 4:23pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 10:02pm:

It has been known for some time that the risk of cancer and mutations etc from radiation exposure has no lower threshold limit. That is, there is NO safe level of exposure to radiation and that the risk is cumulative over time.

We can discuss that in another thread, but basically that implies that "natural" alpha, beta and gamma radiation is somehow benign whereas the slightest trace of synthetic radiation, even at 1/1000 of natural levels starts to become carcinogenic, even though the radiation itself is identical and the compounds are no more toxic.

I can't understand how any person capable of comprehending advanced concepts could buy into that.

Natural exposure to radiation is not benign

There is a zero threshold for safe exposure to radiation. Internal and external. Irrespective of the source. We are talking about particles possessing a certain amount of energy and entering the body whereby they can do cell or DNA damage etc. then we have radionuclides that can lodge in various organs in the body and irradiate local tissue with extremely high doses. Atoms such as uranium can also attach to the DNA strands or create single and double strand splits. (Known since the 1960s)

That's why people who take long flights, or work in the aviation industry have a higher cumulative health risk to radiation exposure. And workers who work in nuclear power plants. As well as children who live near nuclear power plants. Have you read the KIKK study done in Germany on childhood cancer rates near nuclear power plants?

Anyway, you're right, this serious stuff belongs somewhere else.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Innocent bystander

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4220
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #19 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am

Uh oh

We try to keep CO2 levels in our U.S. Navy submarines no higher than 8,000 parts per million, about 20 time current atmospheric levels. Few adverse effects are observed at even higher levels. – Senate testimony of Dr. William Happer, here

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=84...

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #20 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 1:13pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am:

Uh oh

We try to keep CO2 levels in our U.S. Navy submarines no higher than 8,000 parts per million, about 20 time current atmospheric levels. Few adverse effects are observed at even higher levels. – Senate testimony of Dr. William Happer, here

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=84...

The healthy worker effect. Why don't they allow pregnant women in submarines ? (The CO2 induces labour)

Renal Calcification is a recognised occupational illness resulting from working in submarines.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/41351

Of course Wattsupmybum thinks it's all a conspiracy... from papers written in 1979. Hmmm.

Quote:

Given what I’ve learned about the Navy exposure, I think this is just another scare tactic to make CO2 look like an invisible boogeyman.

Quote:

Stupid is as stupid does.

(Forrest Gump)

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Innocent bystander Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4220 Gender:	Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2 Reply #21 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 1:18pm Another inconvenient truth that you don't like
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #22 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 1:23pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am:

Uh oh

We try to keep CO2 levels in our U.S. Navy submarines no higher than 8,000 parts per million, about 20 time current atmospheric levels. Few adverse effects are observed at even higher levels. – Senate testimony of Dr. William Happer, here

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=84...

So you will be content with a 8000 ppm CO2 concentration in the earths atmosphere based upon a US senate comment ?

interesting way of planning the future

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Innocent bystander

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4220
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #23 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 2:09pm

This is why sceptics are sceptics, for every scientific report you can wheel out about climate change I can wheel out another thats says the opposite, the difference with global warming hysterics is they just choose to ignore any other inconvenient truths that don't fit their beliefs, or they descend into total idiocy and claim its all an oil company conspiracy LOL, sceptics look at all the available information, thats why being a sceptic is the only one true path when it comes to climate change debate. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #24 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 3:01pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 2:09pm:

This is why sceptics are sceptics, for every scientific report you can wheel out about climate change I can wheel out another thats says the opposite, the difference with global warming hysterics is they just choose to ignore any other inconvenient truths that don't fit their beliefs, or they descend into total idiocy and claim its all an oil company conspiracy LOL, sceptics look at all the available information, thats why being a sceptic is the only one true path when it comes to climate change debate. Wink

You talk about IPCC Reports, but you've never read one. You also say things like:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 3rd, 2013 at 3:37pm:
Quote:

Ha ha I told you "skepticalscience" would rot yer brains

You don't look at all available information, therefore you are not a sceptic. You are a denier.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #25 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 3:06pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 1:23pm:

So you will be content with a 8000 ppm CO2 concentration in the earths atmosphere based upon a US senate comment ?

interesting way of planning the future

That's not a typical value, that's a ceiling value. Any higher than that even short term, and the submariners have severe symptoms. Typically, you're looking at 3000ppm for a month at a time. Typical symptoms of CO2 poisoning include the effects of decalcification of the bones and increased calcium in the bloodstream resulting in the calcification of body organs. This has also been noted in studies of laboratory animals at levels of 1000- 3000 ppm.

Of course, it's fully reversible as long as you have low CO2 air to breath.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Innocent bystander

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4220
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #26 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 3:20pm

muso wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 3:01pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 2:09pm:

This is why sceptics are sceptics, for every scientific report you can wheel out about climate change I can wheel out another thats says the opposite, the difference with global warming hysterics is they just choose to ignore any other inconvenient truths that don't fit their beliefs, or they descend into total idiocy and claim its all an oil company conspiracy LOL, sceptics look at all the available information, thats why being a sceptic is the only one true path when it comes to climate change debate. Wink

You talk about IPCC Reports, but you've never read one. You also say things like:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 3rd, 2013 at 3:37pm:
Quote:

Ha ha I told you "skepticalscience" would rot yer brains

You don't look at all available information, therefore you are not a sceptic. You are a denier.

You just don't get it do you?, I don't need to read anything to know there are two sides to the debate and therefore the logical position is the sceptical one.
I have read an IPCC report and I've had a look at "scepticalcranks" , there are thousands of well respected scientists that are sceptics, until they are convinced and we have a real consensus instead of a sceptical cranks manufactured consenus I think it would be prudent and logical to keep an open mind on the subject.

Back to top

IP Logged

Ajax Gold Member Offline CO2 has never controlled temperature on Earth Posts: 11070 Australia Gender:	Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2 Reply #27 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 5:51pm Life flourished on earth when we had 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere........??????? The only thing that can kill the AGW religion is time................enough time so they can hand themselves.............!!!!!!!!
Back to top	1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax 2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #28 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 6:51pm

Ajax wrote on Oct 8^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

Life flourished on earth when we had 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere........???????

The only thing that can kill the AGW religion is time................enough time so they can hand themselves.............!!!!!!!!

....so you are placing all your eggs in the "CO2 is not a by product of fossil fuel combustion and its not a Greenhouse gas" basket

Good luck with disproving the AGW fact

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: US EPA maximum continuous exposure of 1000ppm CO2
Reply #29 - Oct 8^th, 2013 at 6:53pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 6:37pm:

As with all contrary data put forward by global warming hysterics it consists of some obscure report that we should listen to instead of the hundreds of reports that say the opposite ... its a minority report Grin

WAR IS CONDUCTED IN THE ECONOMIC SPHERE Huh

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged