|
Post by trbixler on May 23, 2011 23:51:20 GMT
I cannot imagine how this could possibly have any affect on anything. Further how could the sun have anything to do with this anyway. I am sure that it is a direct forcing of CO2. "Iceland volcanic ash cloud forces airlines to change flight schedules Densest parts of Grimsvötn volcano's thick ash clouds expected to exceed a new air travel safety threshold" www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/may/23/iceland-grimsvotn-volcano-erupts-video
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jun 5, 2011 20:52:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by justmeanu on Jun 5, 2011 21:05:16 GMT
Yes it's a ridiculus notion Trblix, I don't think the moon and sun affect the tides either, another thing my cat died last week bluddy global warming
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jun 12, 2011 13:58:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jun 12, 2011 15:57:58 GMT
More Maybe sharpshooters could fly over the volcanoes and blast away at the SO2 and stuff being tossed out. Maybe a government study or two. Why I bet there is a defensible hockey stick buried in there. Maybe we could measure the thickness of the layering of the ash and develop a proxy for the warming induced. www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2098666.ece
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Jun 13, 2011 0:08:45 GMT
Between the Chilean volcano and the recent Icelandic volcano [both with names I can't pronounce] it appears to me that enough sulphur dioxide and fine ash would have reached the stratosphere to produce a significant depression in planetary temperature. From memory, I think that Mt Pinatubo managed 1.5 degC.
I also notice that solar flux is flattening out again - looks more like solar minimum than maximum.
If Svensmark is half right, and solar activity is the key to climate variability, I think the outlook is for much improved skiing, and much less food.
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Jun 13, 2011 0:33:48 GMT
Between the Chilean volcano and the recent Icelandic volcano [both with names I can't pronounce] it appears to me that enough sulphur dioxide and fine ash would have reached the stratosphere to produce a significant depression in planetary temperature. From memory, I think that Mt Pinatubo managed 1.5 degC. I also notice that solar flux is flattening out again - looks more like solar minimum than maximum. If Svensmark is half right, and solar activity is the key to climate variability, I think the outlook is for much improved skiing, and much less food. I consider these volcanoes to be precursors to larger events and don't believe that either, so far, will have affected temps significantly. Svensmark's more than half right. ;D
|
|
ZL4DH
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 128
|
Post by ZL4DH on Jun 13, 2011 2:04:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by julianb on Jun 13, 2011 6:45:45 GMT
New Volcano in Eritrea, SW of Red Sea. Have a look at the hourly satellite images here; www.sat24.com/en/etNot very high yet, so could be just local nuisance, or a Rift Valley rift?
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jun 15, 2011 3:41:47 GMT
More stuff my CO2 model showed in retrospect. My SUV started the positive feedback seen in the photo. Well maybe it did have something to do with the solar minimum but really. "Perth flights cancelled as Chile's volcanic ash plume reaches WA" www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/06/15/3244373.htm
|
|
|
Post by dusty09 on Jun 15, 2011 21:53:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by socold on Jun 15, 2011 22:15:39 GMT
We are betting the farm. Shoving 30 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year (and that number will no doubt increase) is betting the farm.
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Jun 15, 2011 23:52:50 GMT
What would really be betting the farm would be to try to reduce those (alleged because no one really knows) tons of Carbon Dioxide without the full cooperation of the countries causing the bulk of it.
Or, to put it more plainly, we can guess but we do not know how much CO2 is being released, or how much is being removed from the atmosphere. But we do know that at this rate China will be consuming as many tonnes of fossil fuels in another decade as the world did in 1980.
It would be both economic and cultural suicide to unilaterally reduce CO2 unless China does the same.
Stranger
|
|
|
Post by socold on Jun 16, 2011 10:02:07 GMT
That's why pressure has to be exerted on China to do so.
If North Korea was threatening to pump out millions of tons of sulfur hexafluoride into the atmosphere each year, a greenhouse gas over 20,000 times a strong as CO2, the world wouldn't think twice about threatening military action against them.
Except of course if climate skeptics ruled the world we would just bury our heads about what North Korea was doing. We'd assume that North Korea can't have any effect on climate because climate has changed in the past before North Korea even existed.
We'd assume that North Korea's sulfur hexafluoride emissions weren't a threat because there was no proof. Sure there would be a load of scientists and models warning that it produced significant climate change, but that's not "proof" is it?
We could even wheel out the G&T paper to claim North Korea's actions couldn't have any effect because the greenhouse effect doesn't exist.
So North Korea would be allowed to get away with such an attack if climate skeptics ran the world.
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jun 16, 2011 13:32:13 GMT
|
|