Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

SCIENCE DISCUSSION ONLY

Geology, Geophysics, Oceanography, Meteorology etc.

Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1021  Postby Macdoc » Oct 07, 2021 7:02 pm

getting to monsoon level rain ...

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/06/weat ... index.html

But in Italy not Cairns.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1022  Postby Macdoc » Oct 11, 2021 3:59 pm

some small win for the science community ....

Google prohibits ads that promote or make money from climate change denial

Ban applies to claims that climate change is a hoax, content that denies human activity contributes

The Associated Press · Posted: Oct 08, 2021 11:15 AM ET | Last Updated: October 9

A woman walks below a Google sign on the campus in Mountain View, Calif. On Thursday, the company announced it will restrict digital ads that promote false climate change claims, hoping to stop those making such claims from profiting from them and limit the spread of misinformation on its platform. (Jeff Chiu/The Associated Press)
Google is cracking down on digital ads that promote the idea that climate change is a hoax or make money from that kind of content, hoping to limit revenue for climate change deniers and stop the spread of misinformation on its platforms.

The company said in a blog post on Thursday, Oct. 7 that the new policy will also apply to YouTube, which last week announced a sweeping crackdown of vaccine misinformation.

more
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/google- ... -1.6204593
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1023  Postby Macdoc » Oct 16, 2021 4:27 am

Earth is already becoming unlivable. Will governments act to stop this disaster from getting worse?


https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... maps-cop26
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1024  Postby Macdoc » Oct 16, 2021 2:08 pm

paper is behind a paywall...forgive the venue but a very interesting approach

A cheap and efficient way to directly convert industrial CO₂ offgas into oxygen and solid carbon
Saturday October 16, 2021 · 1:36 PM AEST


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1 ... lid-carbon
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1025  Postby Macdoc » Nov 02, 2021 5:51 am

Really good explanation of the role of increased water vapour on the impact of AGW.

Vapor Storms Are Threatening People and Property
More moisture in a warmer atmosphere is fueling intense hurricanes and flooding rains
By Jennifer A. Francis | Scientific American November 2021 Issue

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... -property/
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1026  Postby felltoearth » Nov 02, 2021 12:07 pm

Macdoc wrote:paper is behind a paywall...forgive the venue but a very interesting approach

A cheap and efficient way to directly convert industrial CO₂ offgas into oxygen and solid carbon
Saturday October 16, 2021 · 1:36 PM AEST


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1 ... lid-carbon

Rough back of envelope calc. It would take Canada 1/3 of all its electrical production to offset its 2019 Carbon emissions. That is if all energy inputs are being captured here, which my spidey sense says no.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14718
Age: 55

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1027  Postby felltoearth » Nov 02, 2021 10:46 pm

felltoearth wrote:
Macdoc wrote:paper is behind a paywall...forgive the venue but a very interesting approach

A cheap and efficient way to directly convert industrial CO₂ offgas into oxygen and solid carbon
Saturday October 16, 2021 · 1:36 PM AEST


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1 ... lid-carbon

Rough back of envelope calc. It would take Canada 1/3 of all its electrical production to offset its 2019 Carbon emissions. That is if all energy inputs are being captured here, which my spidey sense says no.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So I just asked a chemical process engineer friend what the energy output of a tonne of CO2 is

C+O2 --> CO2 yields 393 kJ/mol CO2 = 32 130 kWh per tonne of CO2 which is the minimum you'd need to put IN to reverse the reaction per the 1st law.

C and O2 have heats of formation of 0 at STP because they are elements. CO2 heat of formation is -393 kJ/mol. /44g per mol x 1000 g/kg ×1000 kg/T /1000 kJ/MJ / 0.28 kWh/MJ


I don’t know where they get the 230kWh figure from. They’re short about 32,000 kWh

Edit: Oops got it wrong 2411 kWh. They’re out by a factor of ten.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14718
Age: 55

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1028  Postby Macdoc » Nov 05, 2021 6:56 am

Early work on climate earns a Nobel ...

https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/10/a-nobel-pursuit/

This blew me away.

Manabe extends this result to predict a temperature increase by 2000 of 0.8ºC based on a 25% increase in CO2, which was pretty close.

1970 !!!
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1029  Postby felltoearth » Nov 05, 2021 3:59 pm

felltoearth wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
Macdoc wrote:paper is behind a paywall...forgive the venue but a very interesting approach

A cheap and efficient way to directly convert industrial CO₂ offgas into oxygen and solid carbon
Saturday October 16, 2021 · 1:36 PM AEST


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1 ... lid-carbon

Rough back of envelope calc. It would take Canada 1/3 of all its electrical production to offset its 2019 Carbon emissions. That is if all energy inputs are being captured here, which my spidey sense says no.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So I just asked a chemical process engineer friend what the energy output of a tonne of CO2 is

C+O2 --> CO2 yields 393 kJ/mol CO2 = 32 130 kWh per tonne of CO2 which is the minimum you'd need to put IN to reverse the reaction per the 1st law.

C and O2 have heats of formation of 0 at STP because they are elements. CO2 heat of formation is -393 kJ/mol. /44g per mol x 1000 g/kg ×1000 kg/T /1000 kJ/MJ / 0.28 kWh/MJ


I don’t know where they get the 230kWh figure from. They’re short about 32,000 kWh

Edit: Oops got it wrong 2411 kWh. They’re out by a factor of ten.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Final post on this.

My friend created a post on LinkedIn about this. Good read and the comments are enlightening.

Paul Martin on LinkedIn: A cheap and efficient way to directly convert industrial CO₂ offgas | 81 comments
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/paul-martin-195763b_a-cheap-and-efficient-way-to-directly-convert-activity-6861451772913950720-FTD9



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14718
Age: 55

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1030  Postby Macdoc » Dec 04, 2021 10:38 am

one of those million Manhattan Projects that reducing carbon requires...this is really neat...especially what comes out. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/01/euro ... index.html

forgive the title ....

snip
"When we add nitrogen from air to the slurry, it changes the environment to stop methanogenesis basically. So it drops the pH down to just below six and we're catching that early. So it stops the breakdown of those methane microbes that then release the gas to the air," Puttick said, adding their patented technology is the only one of its kind.
What comes out of the machine is an odorless brown liquid, called NEO -- a Nitrogen Enriched Organic fertilizer.
According to N2, their NEO has double the nitrogen content of regular nitrogen fertilizer; one of the most commonly used fertilizers to boost production of corn, canola and other crops.
Puttick said independent tests showed their technology reduces methane emissions from slurry by 99%. It also cuts by 95% the emission of ammonia; described by the EU as one of the main sources of health-damaging air pollution.
On a 200-cow dairy farm this equates to "a reduction of 199 tons of carbon equivalent every year with one machine," said Puttick, adding that they're now looking to scale out the technology across the UK livestock sector, and have recently installed it at a pig farm


costs about what a tractor does and likely subject to carbon rebates.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1031  Postby Macdoc » Feb 15, 2022 5:41 am

buy farmland in Antartica? long view :coffee:

The age of extinction
Environment
Flourishing plants show warming Antarctica undergoing ‘major change’
Dramatic spread of native plants over past decade is evidence of accelerating shifts in fragile polar ecosystem, study finds
Image


https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... change-aoe
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1032  Postby tuco » Mar 22, 2022 6:03 pm

Did not know where to put this, but its a climate change related fun fact IMO:

Astronomy's contribution to climate change rivals the emissions from some countries

"Just to give you some perspective — 20 million tonnes of CO2 — this is the annual carbon footprint of countries like Estonia, Croatia, or Bulgaria," says Jürgen Knödlseder, an astronomer at IRAP, an astrophysics laboratory in France.


[snip]

"Some of our colleagues are a bit shocked by this idea," says Tibaldo. "What we really think is that these options must be on the table. The emergency we are facing is so big and clearly we are playing a role in it with our work."

The astronomers hope that other scientific fields will be inspired to take a similar global inventory of the greenhouse gas emissions from their research infrastructure. "As far as I know," says Knödlseder, "this is the first time that this kind of study has been done for any research field."


https://www.npr.org/2022/03/21/10872036 ... me-countri

---

If I was to guess, before reading this, I would probably guess something like a city with a 1mil population.
tuco
 
Posts: 15921

Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1033  Postby Macdoc » Apr 11, 2022 9:55 pm

Arctic Drift on Netflix and elsewhere is wonderful and cinematography outstanding

2 hours well spent IMNSHO

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSAiC_Expedition
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1034  Postby Macdoc » Apr 21, 2022 7:58 am


Australia’s coal export boom forecast to end abruptly amid big drop in demand from China

Study finds Chinese consumption will fall within two to three years as Australian coalmining communities warned to reduce dependence on industry

Australia’s coal export boom will come to an abrupt end because of an “imminent and substantial” drop in purchases by China, and local coalmining communities should brace for the change, the lead author of a new study says.

The peer-reviewed paper, published on Thursday in the journal Joule, forecasts China’s thermal coal imports will contract at least a quarter from 2019 levels of 210m tonnes by 2025, mostly as improved transport links will give local suppliers an edge.

If China pursues more ambitious efforts to cut carbon emissions, the decline will be almost twice as fast, with imports sinking to 115m tonnes by 2025. Shipments of coking coal used in steelmaking face a similar downward trajectory, the researchers found.

The study used satellite and other data sources to compile a more detailed picture of individual power and steel plant coal demand. It also analysed how new transport links have expanded supplies from inland Chinese provinces and Mongolia to coastal users, supplanting Australian and Indonesian exporters.

“This was actually somewhat of a surprising outcome for us,” said Jorrit Gosens, a researcher at the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Public Policy and the report’s lead author.

“China reducing imports of thermal coal and coking coal by roughly a quarter over the next five years, that’s a major drop and not something that is far off into the future.”

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... from-china
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1035  Postby Macdoc » Jun 26, 2022 5:47 am

FEBRUARY 3, 2021
The Arctic Ocean was covered by a shelf ice and filled with freshwater
by Alfred Wegener Institute


Image

https://phys.org/news/2021-02-arctic-oc ... water.html

explains a few things :coffee:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 75
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1036  Postby Spearthrower » Oct 27, 2022 9:59 pm

https://www.unep.org/resources/emission ... eport-2022

As growing climate change impacts are experienced across the globe, the message that greenhouse gas emissions must fall is unambiguous. Yet the Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window – Climate crisis calls for rapid transformation of societies finds that the international community is falling far short of the Paris goals, with no credible pathway to 1.5°C in place.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 32145
Age: 46
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1037  Postby THWOTH » Oct 28, 2022 6:16 am

That's not to say there isn't a credible pathway to 1.5°, just that there isn't one in place.

I expect the fossil friendly media to present the UN's latest assessment as an admission that we can't do or change anything.
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Posts: 37217
Age: 57

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1038  Postby OlivierK » Nov 14, 2022 2:28 am

There isn't a credible pathway to limiting warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial. There wasn't when the Paris agreement was signed, either.

We're only just short of 1.5C, and even if we got to net zero tomorrow, worldwide, the GHGs currently in the atmosphere are enough to finish the job. We'll have El Nino years over 1.5C soon, and trend temps over 1.5C over preindustrial by the late 2030s.

That's absolutely not to say that limiting warming to as little as possible over 1.5C isn't a matter of absolute urgency, and I agree there's a danger that this will get spun as "there's nothing we can do to keep under 1.5C, so why try?". But we're already having short periods over 1.5C above preindustrial even if trend temps aren't there for a little while yet. Hell, we were handily over 1.5C the month Paris was signed, and each of the next 4 months to boot.
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9872
Age: 56
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1039  Postby THWOTH » Nov 14, 2022 9:45 am

I guess it depends on what we mean by credible. The 2022 IPCC full Climate Change mitigation report (PDF 105MB) (see Chapter 2) said there is only one credible pathway to limiting warming to 1.5°C (>50% confidence, or; more likely than unlikely) - a truly massive reduction in fossil fuel extraction and use by 2030 accompanied by serious measures to achieve global net zero by 2050. However...

"Global GHG emissions in 2030 associated with the implementation of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) announced prior to COP26 would make it likely that warming will exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century. Likely limiting warming to below 2°C would then rely on a rapid acceleration of mitigation efforts after 2030. Policies implemented by the end of 2020 are projected to result in higher global GHG emissions than those implied by NDCs. (high confidence)."

IPCC AR6 Summary for Policymakers Headline Statements B.6


In short, what isn't credible are governments' policy commitments to reducing global GHGs, and the longer they leave it the harder it becomes.

So we have to understand what credibility is here, and not let policy makers or the media etc conflate it with possibility.
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Posts: 37217
Age: 57

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Climate Change Science [Strictly Moderated]

#1040  Postby Spearthrower » Nov 14, 2022 12:07 pm

Politically not credible - the democratic re-election trap wherein shorter term economic growth goals are prioritized over long term sustainability.

My best assumption of what's going to happen in the future is that we're going to fall short, face the consequences, and just have to muddle through - I hope we learn from our mistakes and that the lessons prove valuable contingently for the future of humanity.

In the short term though - i.e. the next 20-200 years, I am not keen on being a spectator in what we're likely to face.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 32145
Age: 46
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Earth Sciences

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest