Which Greenhouse Gas is Actually the WORST? | Hot Mess 🌎

↓ More info and sources below ↓

Earth’s atmosphere naturally contains greenhouse gases. Without them, the world would be way too cold for humans. But we are adding extra greenhouse gases, which are causing Earth to heat up and disrupting weather patterns worldwide. So which of these many gases is heating Earth the most?

Connect with us on:

-----------
Host/Editor-In-Chief: Joe Hanson, Ph.D.
Writer: Adam Levy DPHIL
Creative Director: David Schulte
Editors/Animators: Karl Boettcher
Producers: Stephanie Noone & Amanda Fox
Story Editor: Alex Reich
-----------

Produced by PBS Digital Studios
Theme Music: Eric Friend/Optical Audio
Music: APM

[gardenhead]

It would have been cool to cover why certain gases have a stronger greenhouse effect than others!

[DarkFlame]

Would pumping out sulfur hexafluoride be a possible terraforming tactic for heating up an atmosphere to a habitable temperature?

[dejayrezme]

Methane might be worse though. There are something like 5 gigatons in the athmosphere right now, but there are more than 800 gigatons of methane trapped in permafrost or in arctic submarine permafrost etc. If "only" 50 gigatons would be released in a big "methane burb" then it might already be over and way faster than we think.

[NaturalViolence]

I'm very surprised that nitrous oxide was not mentioned.

[xchopp]

Joe: At 2:35 one of these thing is not like the others. The cow! The cow's carbon was recently in the air, so 99.999% of livestock carbon is atmospheric carbon. And if the cow didn't eat the plant, most of the plant carbon would return to the air anyway, via decomposition and fire. But fossil fuel CO2, CH4, and landfill CH4 are different: their carbon would not enter the atmosphere without human action; most would stay underground for millions of years. Blaming meat consumption for global warming is therefore just wrong; it's like blaming it on our own farts and respiration. Worse, it plays right into the hands of people who shout "Look, they want to outlaw your burger!". So please let's stop this nonsense now. Yes, we should feed cattle seaweed to reduce methane emissions. Yes, we should consider eating less meat for an host of other reasons (health, land use, deforestation, to reduce animal suffering) -- but we should NOT continue to muddy the waters by listing cows as a major cause of global warming. That's just a Cowspiracy Theory (pun intended).

[davidmatthews]

Co2 is a nutrient for plants. They eat it. It’s a building block of life. Basic science

[GTfour]

Except.... there isn't any causation of temperature rise by CO2 rise.
I'll bet the last near two decades not warming up must be a real pain in the butt for you.

[peanutmmssuck]

These videos have enhanced my perspective on the topic of global warming, and as a result I have been successfully able to change my life style significantly. One of which includes maintaining a healthy and sustainable vegiterian diet :)

[fudgedogbannana]

Why "turn thing around" when scientists say that they don't know if more CO2 is a good or bad thing. We are at almost 8 billion humans on this earth, we need food, the earth is greener because of the 400 parts per million CO2, the plants will die if they get less than 150 parts per billion, are they sure we should be cutting down on CO2? at what level do they think they can fine tune this earth when it comes to CO2?

[steven]

Increasing Co2 and a slight increase in temperature is great news for an ever-increasing population.

[WilborArthur]

carbon dioxide represents 0, 04% of our atm composition, and the manmande is arround 0, 01% is really that is heating earth? (bytheway I´m not a fan of garbage gas on our atm, but not because its heating earth but because is not good for us breath those other gasss)

[eslyndoe]

It's interesting that *NO ONE* speaks of the sun as it relates to global warming and climate change!

[artuselias]

I think in normal conditions, the worst greenhouse gas you can emit is laughing gas. Seriously.

[gravijta]

I eat chickens rather than cows. So, I guess I'm saving the Earth? Or perhaps if we ate all the cows, then we'd be saving the Earth? ...I'm confused.

[peterm.eggers]

Incorrect! CO2 in almost all cases follows global temperatures. Also, we are in a CO2 draught that is limiting plant growth -- we need more, much more, like at least 1500 ppm though plants would appreciate up to 5000 ppm. It has been estimated that when the Earth was at its highest peak of productivity, CO2 was at 2800 ppm. You also didn't mention that CO2 has its limits too. The Earth is covered by 70% water that absorbs great quantities as the Earth cools and releases great quantities as the Earth warms, typically lagging the Earth's temperature by 800 years, but doesn't follow temperature in lockstep due to the many other processes that affect CO2 levels in the atmosphere. There is no set point for H20 in the atmosphere. It also increases and decreases with Earth's temperature represented by the local dew point. Also, which you failed to mention, is that H2O can form clouds, dramatically reversing it's warming effect by reflecting solar energy away from the Earth! Of the many processes that affect Earth's climate, only one has predictive value, and that is solar radiation which changes due to Earth's tilt, wobble, and orbit on orders of millenia (Milankovitch Cycles) and on at least 2 Sun activity cycles.  Every other climate parameter that I can find is driven by the solar energy arriving on Earth, though weather is still chaotic.

[nikolatesla]

I'm not saying that the rest are bad, but Joe is my favourite.

[MykolasSimutis]

The video is all sorts of great, but I really miss any call to action. I understand that it might upset some people even to the point where some of those who now clicked the "like" button could click "dislike" just for "being told what to do".

But do we have any other choice but to make some people unhappy? Fly planes less, use public transportation or bikes more and car less, eat less meat and other animal products and best, ditch them entirely. Consume less needless crap. Protest environmentally unfriendly businesses and policies. Encourage your friends to take the same actions.

[NotYowBusiness]

Can you please do a video on why Climate Change deniers saying we shouldn’t worry about CO2 because Methane is a stronger gas is the wrong thing to say? From what I understand, Methane is a short-lived GHG, while CO2 is a lot more permanent, so, over the long term, any heat increase caused by methane is decreased when it dissipates into CO2.

[RaniSingh-bcce]

Please provide video on Indian climate in easy language

[christianhonisch]

I've attended a scientific talk about climate change. The speaker said that the comparison between the effect of CO2 and CH4 is difficult, maybe not even possible. The key difference is that the impact of CO2 scales with the totally emitted amount, while for CH4 the annual emissions have to be taken into consideration. I think it is because CH4 will decay in the atmosphere.
Can you comment on that?
If it is true, I think it is a very important difference to understand. It means that even very low CO2 emissions are not a sustainable condition, as the effect will get bigger with ongoing emissions. On the other hand, CH4 emissions would be allowed in order to keep a certain level of warming.
Also, cutting all CO2 emissions to zero would just mean that the current state is kept. Global warming would still be a thing and it would take millennia (probably that is still not enough) until the carbon is removed from the atmosphere by fossilization.
Cutting all CH4 emissions to zero would even improve the situation and reduce the degree of warming.

Anyway, I am not a climate scientist. And I would like to hear your comment on this.