On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Jul 25, 10:47*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

It is faulty logic. *I too have an
engineering background.

Then let's see you put it to use here.

The effect of releasing a lb. of CO2 into the
atmosphere is the same regardless of where it came from.

No, it's not, Dan. Do you need an example here to see the point?

--
Ed Huntress

What ever. I have put my engineering background to use. Saying the
source of CO2 makes a difference is absurd. Some people will
understand, some never will.

Dan

Thermodynamically, you're correct Dan. Kinetically...a different
matter.

As has been noted in other threads, it's the fact that carbon is being
released much faster (millions of times faster) than it is being
consumed that makes the difference. You are correct that the effect
of releasing one pound of carbon into the atmosphere is the same
regardless of the source. The difference is not the amount but the
rate of release.

And FWIW the (bulk) carbon in coal and oil *is* (slightly) different
from the carbon in the life cycle. It has no significant amount of
carbon 14. Insofar as chemical reaction goes, that difference is not
significant, though. Carbon reacts pretty much the same whether it's
C-12, C-13, or C-14.