Uncharted Territory, rapid warming greatly exceeds models' forecasts

[The Barbarian]

And he went to his grave believing global warming was going to threaten our comfort zones, didn't he?

I have no evidence to show what do you have?

Arrhenius was the first to use the principles of physical chemistry to estimate the extent to which increases in the atmospheric carbon dioxide are responsible for the Earth's increasing surface temperature. His work played an important role in the emergence of modern climate science.

So nothing about going to his grave believing global warming was going to threaten our comfort zones? Do you have anything at all to support your claim?

 

[AV1611VET]

So nothing about going to his grave believing global warming was going to threaten our comfort zones? Do you have anything at all to support your claim?

In his last years he wrote both textbooks and popular books, trying to emphasize the need for further work on the topics he discussed. In September 1927, he came down with an attack of acute intestinal catarrh and died on 2 October. He was buried in Uppsala.

SOURCE

 

[The Barbarian]

In his last years he wrote both textbooks and popular books, trying to emphasize the need for further work on the topics he discussed.

Show us his comment that global warming was going to threaten our comfort zones.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Dang, 52°C is 126°F. That is scorching.

Isn't that drop dead kind of temperature?

If there's less people, then there's less pollutants being used - not the solution we were looking for tho.

 

[AlexB23]

Isn't that drop dead kind of temperature?

If there's less people, then there's less pollutants being used - not the solution we were looking for tho.

Yeah, 52C is deadly, and depopulation is bad. Also, this is a bit of an older post.

 

[AV1611VET]

Show us his comment that global warming was going to threaten our comfort zones.

Oh, please.

 

[AV1611VET]

Isn't that drop dead kind of temperature?

AKA: Malthusian catastrophe.

 

[loveofourlord]

Is it fair to say this is due to sloppy scientific work?

Is it fair to say this is due to science being myopic?

Given how bad big chunks of the US and canada were this year plus other countries with extreme heat your just in denail and wrong?

 

[loveofourlord]

I never understood how carbon dioxide representing a mere 0.04% of total atmospheric gases and having the lowest warming potential index of 1 could be responsible for warming. To me CO2 cannot be the main cause of warming at best a minor contributor.

I read recently that the measurement used in showing warming are situated on top ( flat tar roofs) of building within cities, the bulk of the measurements are are from these temperature recording devices... go figure why....

I noticed also that the trillions of dollars generated from carbon taxes go somewhere but where and in what proportions?...who pockets this money?

most of the carbon emissions are from China, Pakistan, India, yet they continue and no one intervenes.

CO2 has become a cult and is not based on science, now people think CO2 is toxic. Yet the minimum concentration of atmospheric CO2 for vegetation to grow is only half of the current value or about 200 PPM, we are close to that minimum.

since CO2 has increased in the atmosphere also vegetation coverage has increased in proportion, if you visit the greenhouse of some botanical gardens, they inject extra CO2 for a total of 1200 ppm or 3 x the current atmospheric values to promote vegetation growth.... no need to explain that without vegetation we would all die quickly.

All these facts I have researched and verified many years ago, I encourage people to do the same.

how can cyanide that only takes up 0.00001% of the body kill you!. the dose makes the poison, and while CO2 has a low score, it stays there far longer in the atmospher and traps heat over a longer period then water and such.

 

[AV1611VET]

Given how bad big chunks of the US and canada were this year plus other countries with extreme heat your just in denail and wrong?

So the models were correct?

 

[eclipsenow]

I still think there's hope.

A recent Ai study analysed 1500 climate policies and isolated the toop 63 that worked the most effectively in reducing climate change - and isolated out the variables. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adl6547 They’ve now identified STP’s - or Social Tipping Points - like a cultural “Butterfly Event” where tiny actions can shift systems and have huge consequences. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1900577117#sec-1 The exponential deployment of renewable energy is now being fed into emissions models, which are now less extreme in outcome. A simple framework for likely climate projections applied to tropical width - Climate Dynamics In short - while we must ‘Buckle up’ because we’re going over 1.5 (Johan Rockstrom) - it’s not the end of the world. Climatologist Simon Clark explains.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory just captured ominous signals about the planet’s health​

Carbon dioxide is accumulating in the atmosphere faster than ever.
View attachment 347648

Still ratcheting upwards.

For the first time, the May average exceeded 430 parts per million, reported scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Mauna Loa Observatory and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego.

"Another year, another record," said Ralph Keeling, director of the Scripps CO2 Program. "It's sad."

 

[Nithavela]

Still ratcheting upwards.

For the first time, the May average exceeded 430 parts per million, reported scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Mauna Loa Observatory and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego.

"Another year, another record," said Ralph Keeling, director of the Scripps CO2 Program. "It's sad."

We will not go down in history as the species that didn't save itself because it was too expensive.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Still ratcheting upwards.

For the first time, the May average exceeded 430 parts per million, reported scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Mauna Loa Observatory and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego.

"Another year, another record," said Ralph Keeling, director of the Scripps CO2 Program. "It's sad."

At last, the President has found a way to prevent the 'Keeling Curve' from ratcheting upwards!

The Trump administration recently released its draft budget [PDF] for the country's premier analytical agency focused on Earth systems, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Among the many cuts to NOAA research proposed in the draft was one that would represent a death blow to the Mauna Loa Observatory, the source of the data fueling the most iconic chart in all of climate research, the time-honored and justly venerated Keeling Curve.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Higher temperatures cause more wildfires, that increases more carbon emissions.

Them missing this isn't a surprise since the clock advanced rapidly after the fukishima reactor sent nuclear waste into the atmosphere.

 

[eclipsenow]

Higher temperatures cause more wildfires, that increases more carbon emissions.

Them missing this isn't a surprise since the clock advanced rapidly after the fukishima reactor sent nuclear waste into the atmosphere.

Not quite sure how the second thought follows the first - is there a joke or reference here I'm not getting?

 

[Tuur]

or someone can explain scientifically how nuclear fallout does not increase the temperature?

Let's see...the decay of radioactive material results in the element becoming something stable. It can produce what's known as decay heat. Looking it up, one metric ton of spent fuel produces 10 KW decay heat in the first year, dropping to 1 KW after ten years (per Wikipedia).

Doing some searching, 43 grams of I-131 and 4 kg of Cs-137. There were other materials, of course, but that gives us some idea. Using 10 KW per metric ton for a ballpark figure, 10 KW x 4.43 kg /1,000 kg = 4.43 / 100 = .0443 KW = 44.3 W. Keeping in mind this is a ballpark figure, these two radiative materials should produce a little more heat than a 40 W incandescent bulb.

Now, that's a very rough guess. Each material should have it's own decay heat and the above is based on spent nuclear fuel so it should only give an idea of the scales involved. The question then isn't whether radioactive decay from from the material released from Fukushema reactors produces heat, it's how much heat they produce, and it seems not very much on a global scale.

Without looking, someone could compare world temperatures after Chernobyl to see if there was a noticeable rise from decay heat.

 

[eclipsenow]

Let's see...the decay of radioactive material results in the element becoming something stable. It can produce what's known as decay heat. Looking it up, one metric ton of spent fuel produces 10 KW decay heat in the first year, dropping to 1 KW after ten years (per Wikipedia).

Doing some searching, 43 grams of I-131 and 4 kg of Cs-137. There were other materials, of course, but that gives us some idea. Using 10 KW per metric ton for a ballpark figure, 10 KW x 4.43 kg /1,000 kg = 4.43 / 100 = .0443 KW = 44.3 W. Keeping in mind this is a ballpark figure, these two radiative materials should produce a little more heat than a 40 W incandescent bulb.

Now, that's a very rough guess. Each material should have it's own decay heat and the above is based on spent nuclear fuel so it should only give an idea of the scales involved. The question then isn't whether radioactive decay from from the material released from Fukushema reactors produces heat, it's how much heat they produce, and it seems not very much on a global scale.

Without looking, someone could compare world temperatures after Chernobyl to see if there was a noticeable rise from decay heat.

I heard it was the extra water vapour from the volcano. Generally speaking I thought big volcanic explosions cooled - but apparently that's only if they kick out a lot of sulphur and dust. This water-explosion kicked up a lot of water vapour way up higher than it normally goes - above the weather line.

Nature can be violent!

---

The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere​

Following the 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption, several trace gases measured by the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) displayed anomalous stratospheric values. Trajectories and radiance simulations confirm that the H2O, SO2, and HCl enhancements were injected by the eruption. In comparison with those from previous eruptions, the SO2 and HCl mass injections were unexceptional, although they reached higher altitudes. In contrast, the H2O injection was unprecedented in both magnitude (far exceeding any previous values in the 17-year MLS record) and altitude (penetrating into the mesosphere). We estimate the mass of H2O injected into the stratosphere to be 146 ± 5 Tg, or ∼10% of the stratospheric burden. It may take several years for the H2O plume to dissipate. This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O.

Key Points​

• Following the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption, the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder measured enhancements of stratospheric H2O, SO2, and HCl
• The mass of SO2 and HCl injected is comparable to that from prior eruptions, whereas the magnitude of the H2O injection is unprecedented
• Excess stratospheric H2O will persist for years, could affect stratospheric chemistry and dynamics, and may lead to surface warming

Plain Language Summary​

The violent Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption on 15 January 2022 not only injected ash into the stratosphere but also large amounts of water vapor, breaking all records for direct injection of water vapor, by a volcano or otherwise, in the satellite era. This is not surprising since the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai caldera was formerly situated 150 m below sea level. The massive blast injected water vapor up to altitudes as high as 53 km. Using measurements from the Microwave Limb Sounder on NASA's Aura satellite, we estimate that the excess water vapor is equivalent to around 10% of the amount of water vapor typically residing in the stratosphere. Unlike previous strong eruptions, this event may not cool the surface, but rather it could potentially warm the surface due to the excess water vapor.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2022GL099381

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Let's see...the decay of radioactive material results in the element becoming something stable. It can produce what's known as decay heat. Looking it up, one metric ton of spent fuel produces 10 KW decay heat in the first year, dropping to 1 KW after ten years (per Wikipedia).

Doing some searching, 43 grams of I-131 and 4 kg of Cs-137. There were other materials, of course, but that gives us some idea. Using 10 KW per metric ton for a ballpark figure, 10 KW x 4.43 kg /1,000 kg = 4.43 / 100 = .0443 KW = 44.3 W. Keeping in mind this is a ballpark figure, these two radiative materials should produce a little more heat than a 40 W incandescent bulb.

Now, that's a very rough guess. Each material should have it's own decay heat and the above is based on spent nuclear fuel so it should only give an idea of the scales involved. The question then isn't whether radioactive decay from from the material released from Fukushema reactors produces heat, it's how much heat they produce, and it seems not very much on a global scale.

Without looking, someone could compare world temperatures after Chernobyl to see if there was a noticeable rise from decay heat.

I heard it was the extra water vapour from the volcano. Generally speaking I thought big volcanic explosions cooled - but apparently that's only if they kick out a lot of sulphur and dust. This water-explosion kicked up a lot of water vapour way up higher than it normally goes - above the weather line.

Nature can be violent!

---

The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere​

Following the 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption, several trace gases measured by the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) displayed anomalous stratospheric values. Trajectories and radiance simulations confirm that the H2O, SO2, and HCl enhancements were injected by the eruption. In comparison with those from previous eruptions, the SO2 and HCl mass injections were unexceptional, although they reached higher altitudes. In contrast, the H2O injection was unprecedented in both magnitude (far exceeding any previous values in the 17-year MLS record) and altitude (penetrating into the mesosphere). We estimate the mass of H2O injected into the stratosphere to be 146 ± 5 Tg, or ∼10% of the stratospheric burden. It may take several years for the H2O plume to dissipate. This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O.

Key Points​

• Following the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption, the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder measured enhancements of stratospheric H2O, SO2, and HCl
• The mass of SO2 and HCl injected is comparable to that from prior eruptions, whereas the magnitude of the H2O injection is unprecedented
• Excess stratospheric H2O will persist for years, could affect stratospheric chemistry and dynamics, and may lead to surface warming

Plain Language Summary​

The violent Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai eruption on 15 January 2022 not only injected ash into the stratosphere but also large amounts of water vapor, breaking all records for direct injection of water vapor, by a volcano or otherwise, in the satellite era. This is not surprising since the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai caldera was formerly situated 150 m below sea level. The massive blast injected water vapor up to altitudes as high as 53 km. Using measurements from the Microwave Limb Sounder on NASA's Aura satellite, we estimate that the excess water vapor is equivalent to around 10% of the amount of water vapor typically residing in the stratosphere. Unlike previous strong eruptions, this event may not cool the surface, but rather it could potentially warm the surface due to the excess water vapor.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2022GL099381

Thank you both, that helps clear things up.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Heat indices could hit 120 as sweltering temperatures grip eastern half of US​

Parts of Mississippi and Louisiana are on alert for heat indices up to 120 degrees.

On Sunday, Tampa, Florida, broke an all-time heat record -- reaching 100 degrees for the first time in 130 years of record-keeping. [So not the record for today's date, but ever.]