?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Bad Canned Air

« previous entry | next entry »
May. 9th, 2007 | 01:58 pm

I learned something depressing...

Canned air is basically global warming in a bottle. The canned air I'd picked up contains difluoroethane, CAS #75-37-6, which according to this greenhouse gas equivalent listing is likely to be 43 or 120 times as potent as CO2 at making our planet toastier.

I wonder where I can get a pocket vacuum.

Link | Leave a comment | Share

Comments {8}

her other side

(no subject)

from: saltbox
date: May. 10th, 2007 12:12 am (UTC)
Link

Oh yeah! That's the stuff I used to study in grad school!

Reply | Thread

Diane Trout

(no subject)

from: alienghic
date: May. 10th, 2007 06:43 am (UTC)
Link

As in calculating the global warming effect of various chemicals?

Reply | Parent | Thread

her other side

(no subject)

from: saltbox
date: May. 10th, 2007 02:25 pm (UTC)
Link

Yup!

Reply | Parent | Thread

Dilinger

information

from: dilinger
date: May. 10th, 2007 02:32 pm (UTC)
Link

And I thought I was going to get a mini education. I suppose I have to pay for what I get... no free lunch.

Reply | Parent | Thread

her other side

Re: information

from: saltbox
date: May. 10th, 2007 02:46 pm (UTC)
Link

Well, the short of it is that these gases happen to, like carbon dioxide, absorb strongly within the "greenhouse window"--the spectrum region in which most radiation would otherwise except back out of the atmosphere. So like carbon dioxide, they contribute to global warming. The difference between these gases and carbon dioxide is that carbon dioxide has natural "sinks"--like forests and oceans and stuff. Whereas these gases don't. Plus they don't get destroyed through natural chemical processes very quickly (i.e., not within hundreds of years), and so they hang around for a really really long time, absorbing radiation that would otherwise escape, and thus contribute to global warming. (My own research went into stuff about carbon-halogen bonds and molecule rotations and atomic polar tensors, which aren't nearly so primarily related to global warming, but are kind of interesting in a physical chemistry way, as well as for aiding with the design of compounds with similar beneficial effects but fewer greenhouse gas contributions.)

Reply | Parent | Thread

Dilinger

Re: information

from: dilinger
date: May. 11th, 2007 02:40 pm (UTC)
Link

I was trying to make a thank you post for educating me, but then going into a diatribe about how hard it is to referece a blog. O how to convince my head in the sand friends that the information if factual and not propaganda.

They have gotten really good about discrediting much of the debate by saying everything is opinion.

I digress. Thanks for the information, It was nice to read this morning.

Reply | Parent | Thread

her other side

Re: information

from: saltbox
date: May. 11th, 2007 04:15 pm (UTC)
Link

Yes, they've gotten good at that, and I don't really know how to counter their effects--being funded by oil companies provides a lot of resources, you know. I actually talk a bit about this in the public sphere (i.e., outside of LJ) so that's my way of trying to help. But it's hard!

Reply | Parent | Thread

(no subject)

from: clynne
date: May. 10th, 2007 08:15 pm (UTC)
Link

When I worked at New.net, we bought a computer vacuum from CDW, IIRC. It cost (I think) about $150, but it was so worth it. Lots of sucking power, and got things WAY cleaner than compressed air. In particular it dealt very handily with that superfine dust that ends up all inside everything.

Reply | Thread