Almost every piece of machinery we run produces heat, either by design or as a waste product.

All of that heat getting pumped into the atmosphere must make a difference. Has anyone measured how much it is relative to greenhouse gases?

Modern day volcanoes, i.e. the last few thousand years seem to be responsible for noticable cooling effects on the climate, i.e. Mount Pinatoba, Tambora etc.  This is i assume is down to dust, ash and sulphur dioxide been spewed into the air and reflecting incoming solar radiation.

 Although it seems volcanism in earths geological history appear to be responsible for notable warming events, attributed to greenhouse gas emmisions.  I know the residence time of greenhouse gasses are usualy longer than ash, dust and sulphur aerosols, however continued eruptions i would imagine would keep a constant supply of sulphur in the atmosphere thus cooling the planet.

Please explain this contradiction.

Thanks

Mark

We are encouraged to generate renewable energy and to sell our surplus to the grid. A householder sells a few kWh of energy at 240v. How far away can this be used? Just on the local loop or anywwhere in the country - which would require transmission at higher voltages?

Is it better to boil water in a kettle or on a gas hob. Which is better for preventing global warming?

Weather across the UK and Western Europe appear to be strongly affected by the position of the jet stream and its involvement in moving storms across the Atlantic.

From what i've read the temperature contrasts between the subtropical and polar air mass along with the corriolis force create a strong wind high up in the atmosphere.  What I want to know is why the jet stream migrates northwards and southwards with the seasons and meanders around a bit?

 I can understand why the jet stream might be slower during the summer as the temperature contrasts between the air massess are lower, but i still dont understand the physics of why it moves.

How do people think the jet stream will respond to climate change?

I want to know what are some good ways to motivate Upper Secondary Students, from years 10 to 12, about helping reverse climate change.

I am the same age as the students I am trying to motivate, but some other perspectives would be good, because I want to try and get as many students involved as possible. 

I thought it would be possible to get students to think about the difference between infra red light and heat by making a lens of water ice and using it as a burning glass. However, I wondered whether this would work if you made a lens of dry ice? I know that carbon dioxide absorbs strongly in the infra-red, so it would be a good way of demonstrating the link between carbon dioxide and global warming (although I guess nearly impossible to do in practice). All the dry ice I have been able to obtain for school is always pearly white.

Obviously there are other experiments I can do to demonstrate this using gaseous carbon dioxide.

Assuming no other action, how many Earth Hours do we need every year in order to avoid dangerous climate change?

One suggestion to combat climate change is that we should become vegetarians as livestock is more environmentally damaging than growing crops.

However, if we stopped eating meat, livestock would still live, so is the suggestion correct? Or are we expected to cull any remaining pigs and cows?

Ella Gribben, London, UK