Adaptation and fast mitigation in ways that make sense – reducing methane, black carbon, tropospheric ozone, nitrous oxide, CFC’s. Restoring ecosystems and building carbon stores in agricultural soils. Without taxes and caps.
The obsession with carbon dioxide is a misguided and dangerous aberration.
– Ian H | August 22, 2014 at 12:34 am | Reply
As I have always understood it there are two main process that propel water into the deep oceans. The first is salinity driven and carries mostly hot saline water down into the depths from shallow equatorial atolls warming the deep ocean.–
Well perhaps rather being two main processes, perhaps these two processes are instead the most commonly mentioned processes.
Perhaps a quantification of each of these two process could lead to the conclusion that they are the two main process, and of the two of these process which is greater and how much greater.
So how much occur from “cold water sinks at the poles”?
I would assume it’s much greater amount than the “equatorial atolls warming” and how much more?
As rough ballpark, it seems the flow volume of the Gulf Stream gives clue to scale of this exchange. Or it’s one effect of poleward cold water being replaced with warmer tropic waters. And being that it’s on the surface and known about and measured for centuries, one say it’s easier. [Though it seems to me it’s obvious that south pole is actually cooling and transporting greater amounts, but just taking Gulf stream as starting point.
So Gulf Stream flow rate:
“The Gulf Stream transports nearly four billion cubic feet of water per second, an amount greater than that carried by all of the world’s rivers combined. ”
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/gulfstreamspeed.html
Wiki gives meters [better]:
“As a consequence, the resulting Gulf Stream is a strong ocean current. It transports water at a rate of 30 million cubic meters per second (30 sverdrups) through the Florida Straits. As it passes south of Newfoundland, this rate increases to 150 million cubic metres per second. The volume of the Gulf Stream dwarfs all rivers that empty into the Atlantic combined, which barely total 0.6 million cubic metres per second. It is weaker, however, than the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream
So 150 million cubic meters per second has to be replaced with 150 million cubic meter second water returning.
And have about 31.5 million second in year. Or 4730 trillion cubic meter a year- or about 4.7 million cubic km of water a year.
This is a flow of energy. And an energy source from the denser water falling is gravity, as is the source of energy from hydro dams is gravity. Or less gravity is causes less energy, having higher gravity results in more energy.
Mars has 1/3 gravity as Earth, same dam on Mars as one one earth, has 1/3 the energy.
So in terms energy driving ocean currents, one factor which varies could be how fast does denser water fall. One has also has other factors: tidal energy, wind energy, the spin of the Earth, amount of warmer more buoyant in tropic water, momentum of waters, and etc -which can also effect neutral buoyant and denser water’s speed of falling.
When interviewed they don’t believe the science. If asked if Man is the main contributor to warming they have a sure ‘no’ as an answer. They are not allowed to say any different from this. There have been exceptions such as Schwarzenegger who was charismatic enough not to need fossil fuel money, but the typical congressman is not going to win with charisma.
A lot of the skeptics have given up too easily on the idea that CO2 can be stabilized at levels below 500 ppm. They need to look into what is being proposed, not from the fossil fuel perspective, but from the innovation perspective. There is a lot of unrealistic economics alarmism floating around. Given how small energy costs are as a fraction of GDP, subsidies would solve price problems, if any occur in the first place. Stabilizing the GHGs effectively removes much of the uncertainty too, and uncertainty is the enemy of growth.
Ummmm, that was my point – excuse my inarticulateness.
The side caught lying, all day, every day knows they have been busted; so they seek to project their vices unto those exposing them. The fact that they even acknowledge “both sides” is a step forward, while still being half a lie.
“The top contributing industry sectors — finance and real estate, lawyers and lobbyists, healthcare, communications, and energy and transportation — provided a combined $1.2 billion in campaign money to federal candidates in 2008.” And:
“Industry giving to the two major political parties was roughly even across sectors, with Democrats receiving 56 percent of total contributions.”
finance and real estate: 203 million [dems] and 173 million [R]
lawyers and lobbyists: 201 million [dems] and 71 million [R]
energy and transportation: 45 million [dems] and 84 million [R]
http://www.acrreform.org/research/money-in-politics-who-gives/
Per capita [in zip codes] New York gives most at $600, followed by:
Los Angles: $390, DC $376, and Chicago $246
and US generally: $10
Howard | August 23, 2014 at 4:14 pm |
“If water use efficiency was not implemented, the current severe drought would be a disaster.”
Can you cite a source for this comment; including the definition of “a disaster?” Does a water disaster in California justify imposed water conservation in Oregon or Louisiana? Would it be better for California to spend the $billions allocated (and spent) for high speed rail on water infrastructure?
Stephen: Some of your comments here are devoid of reality. Seriously, it’s like I’ve been thrown down the rabbit’s hole. Your advocacy for a middle of the road goal of reducing black carbon, etc is good. However, when you claim to know things about the south, conservatives, church sermons, and the tea party, all of which I know about from experience, there is a problem. It appears you have pieced together a view of the world based on isolated experiences and cherry picked reading.
When I first went to college outside of Jackson MS I would spend many hours talking with my friends in the dormitory. It was in 1959 when MS was segregated and all of my friends in the dormitory were white. However, I never, not once heard any racially charged word or discussion from those students, except one time, when an obvious country redneck said things that were totally stupid. Would it be appropriate to use that one experience as proof that all the students at that college are racist? I think you are doing this regarding climate in describing the churches and people of the south. Have you considered that perhaps the church-conservative-climate link is not as direct as you think. Do you know what Methodists and Catholics think? Do you think that people of these religions are overwhelmingly conservative and are strict constructionists regarding the bible? And finally, why, if you don’t like what your pastor is preaching, don’t you go to another church?
Democrats have AGW views across the spectrum, so at least their funding is not distorting their view of the science disproportionately. They don’t have litmus tests on scientific beliefs.
“Power lines alone might kill up to 175 million birds a year” etc. Ivanpah output averages around 100mw (400mw nominal * 25% capacity factor). The USA consumes around (?) 500,000mw. So multiply Ivanpah by about 5,000 to get a fair comparison. Then ask : are there alternatives which would kill less birds?
A carbon dioxide target is wrong thinking. Carbon dioxide is the smallest part of the emissions equation. The ongoing obsession with this is tedious and misguided.
What is needed is a multi-gas, conservation and development strategy.
PMHinSC (or are you a right-wing sock puppet of Joshua?)
Do your own homework and prove me wrong. Shifting your case to other random states proves you are desperate to “win” the argument to stroke your biased motivations.
Schopenhauer mocks you from the grave.
Perhaps you are correct: wasteful spending of water, energy, food, money, good will, etc. are commendable practices while conservation and efficiency are bad. I am sure all of starving poor in the developing world agree because deep in their hearts, they understand it is your birthright. Please support your hypothesis with peer reviewed journal articles.
An omega male never fights for his food.
He could be an old alpha that the new alpha tries to outcast, though.
Thank you, this confirms an impression of an inept government.
Tonyb,
Truth is a very powerful force and will not be hidden by would be world tyrants.
It’s climate stabilization. Who doesn’t want a stable climate?
11. Clive Palmer Australia. He actually engaged Al Gore to promote his activities.
How can the warmest year scenario be again running in land/sea based measurements of temperature when the Satellites are running colder and the areas we live in have been having extremely cold years. Record snow in Australia and America.
Further have the past yearly records 2005 and 1998 changed yet?
According to Zeke changes in past records are made on a daily basis where such information comes in to all past records.
Hence we should have a slightly lower 1998 and 2005 record to beat in 2014 than 2013. Is this correct?
If not, why not.
What sort of computer programme adjusts the past data but does not adjust the past yearly records?
