General Discussions:
Green Talk
Kids Eco Corner
Spam-Carbon Footprint
Natural Skin Care
Transportation:
Eco Roadside Assistance
Biodiesel/Clean Diesel
Carbon Offsets
Electric Bicycles
Electric Vehicles
Fuel Cell & Concept Vehicles
Hybrid Vehicles
Public Transportation
CNG/LNG
Clean Power Alternatives:
Batteries & Storage Devices
Geothermal & Ground Source Power
Hydro-Electric
Solar Power
Wind Power
Green Events:
Eco Chic Events
Green Hollywood
Garage:
Hazardous Material Storage/Disposal
Garden & Yard:
Green Garden & Yard
Compost
Recycling
Household:
Green Building
Energy Efficient Homes
Food
Green Furniture
Retrofitting Older Homes
Stop Your Junk Mail
Water:
Quality New!
Supply New!
Desalination New!
Want Us to Add a Forum?
click here
Green house effect
almost, but the full story is:
water vapour concentrations is too short lived to change the climate !
If you were to read through the table of climate forcings in the IPCC report or at NASA's page about forcings in its GCM, you won't find water vapour there at all. This is not because climate scientists are trying to hide the role of water vapour, rather it is because H2O in the troposphere is a feedback effect, it is not a forcing agent. Simply put, any artificial perturbation in water vapour concentrations is too short lived to change the climate. Too much in the air will quickly rain out, not enough and the abundant ocean surface will provide the difference via evaporation. But once the air is warmed by other means, H2O concentrations will rise and stay high, thus providing the feedback. solar stacks
hey jstack,
These are good and valid points ;^) And in the realm of pure science, the ability to isolate such a tiny signal <0.2% out of the noise, is a testament to the reasoning abilities of the "climate scientists"*.
My point is that the feedback effects are the controlling element on the loop. The drift caused by the GHGs is nothing worse than a small drift in the calibration of the baseline. As long as the oceans are wet, and there is some dry land the water cycle will remain in control.
The net temperature of the Earth will be determined by the amount of energy emitted by the sun, and the amount intercepted at the 1AU distance. There will be excursions, that is undeniable.
The desire for a placid, stable, unchanging climate is primitive. It might be a comforting desire, yet it is an unrealistic expectation. The seas will rise and fall, desert will consume farm, forests will fall to the axe, and topsoil will erode. Sorry, that's the price for civilization.
Look at the bright side, Iran may now have the bomb... That means the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists might move the Doomsday Clock closer than it's current 5 min to midnight. It'll all be over soon.
Objoke:
*Climate Scientist - The modern PC term for a weatherman without the good looks necessary to make it out of the local UHF TV station.
All of this talk about the environment, wow, I mean, talk about fitting our lives into the bubble of what the environment should be... Are we to be controlled by the environment or are we going to really do something about it? We have the technology and ability to make of the warming/cooling situation anything we want. Vortex Tube theory alone suggests a way to cool the local and wide area temperatures using the Coriolis effect as the only driving force. A simple segmented berm fence 20 to 30 miles in diameter angled in such a way that the rotation of the earth causes air to accumulate inside, will push air up into a high pressure zone and naturally cause the hot air to dissipate. By the way, this updraft will also be usable for fuel-free transportation. Another berm fence arranged so that the air is taken from the circle causes a low pressure zone, and suddenly you have a air highway for gliders.
Thank you ctyankee
I am certainly not limiting the design to just one, but just one would be enough to lock in the jetstreem to that location. Or push it away if that is the desired configuration. What I am getting at, is we have engineering on our side. We all have seen the power of one small tornado, or hurricane. I am talking about a tornado that covers over a thousand square miles. Maybe slower wind speeds for safety, but locked in place. Left handed for heat, Right handed for cool. The basic principal is the vortex tube. Throw in some Ionic breeze air acceleration...
I know it's a bit out there but it is nowhere near the feet of the Hoover Dam. I also know that it would take concerted effort, and the land space of a smallish city... The U.S. is almost 10million sq mi, and 40 mi divided by 2 then squared and multiplied by pi gives us about 1200 sq mi, like you said about 10,000 to one. That's a little better than the drain in my bathtub, and unlike the bird splat in the previous example, this would be active like the drain, moving the air up to the edge of the troposphere 10 mi up. This columb of disturbance would attract or repel the jetstream possibly pull it down. The result would lock the arctic air up nouth or with the flip of a switch pull it south for the summer.
Hi Tom,
And did you know the most potent greenhouse gas is... <drum roll> Dihydrogen Monoxide... aka H2O
Yes water vapor, not CO2, which has a GHG value of 1.0 (the default) not Methane GHG=2, not SO2 GHG=4, and not SO3 GHG=-50 (aerosol sulfates)
Water has a GHG value of 23,000, and instead of existing in the atmosphere at a few hundred PPM, H2O varies from almost zero to several percent and saturates the atmosphere at times (rain).
:^) The Light is Green!
New Forum Topics
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 EV battery system
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 Solar battery system
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 EV & Solar battery system
- Saying Thanks
- PROGRESS-how do we measure it
- American Clean Coal
- People who refuse green
- Clean Coal Power
- EthicalSingles - dating & friendship for eco-friendly people
- Compressorless Air Conditioniing
- Clean Coal Power
- see Electric Vehicles or POST yours
- Clean Coal Power
- Clean Coal Power
- The Energy Trust Better Living Show 2009
- Clean coal Companies
- Program Unveiled for Green Energy Summit 2009
- 2010 Prius due in Jan 2009
- Presidential GREENESS
- Converting an existing diesel engine to biodiesel
Active Forum Topics
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 EV battery system
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 Solar battery system
- EVPST---High performance LiFePO4 EV & Solar battery system
- Saying Thanks
- People who refuse green
- PROGRESS-how do we measure it
- Presidential GREENESS
- green lawn equipment, not green
- American Clean Coal
- Can CNG be filled into LNG tanks?
- PHEV plug-in hybrids
- Convert your old fridge into a heat pump
- Clean Coal Power
- Ed, need help to find eco home inspection in Detroit area
- E-Bicycle in Arizona
The greenhouse effect was theorized by Joseph Fourier in 1824 and was first investigated quantitatively by Svante Arrhenius in 1896. It is the process by which absorption and emission of infrared radiation by atmospheric gases warm a planet's lower atmosphere and surface.
Recent increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). The monthly CO2 measurements display small seasonal oscillations in an overall yearly uptrend; each year's maximum is reached during the Northern Hemisphere's late spring, and declines during the Northern Hemisphere growing season as plants remove some CO2 from the atmosphere.Existence of the greenhouse effect as such is not disputed. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 °C (59 °F), without which Earth would be uninhabitable
____________________
Tom