Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51]   Go Down

Author Topic: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.  (Read 21787 times)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1000 on: July 11, 2018, 09:45:07 AM »

Live in equilibrium with nature, are you mad?  We insist on being active during the hottest parts of the day, you can't do that if it's too hot. Other mammals understand this.

NYC has rules for carriage horses: "Temperature Restrictions: Carriage horses are prohibited from working when the temperature is 18 degrees F or below, or when the temperature is 90 degrees F or above, or the wet bulb is 85 degrees F or above. [There is no consideration for the humidity index or wind chill factor.]"

Here's all the regulations.  Horses in NYC have more protection than people.  We can work the latter at any temperature.  :)
http://banhdc.org/archives/ch-fact-20060511.html

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10848
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1001 on: July 11, 2018, 10:13:52 AM »

Denialism. . .

Wow. Now there's a word you ought to define, so we know where you stand.

Kevin Gallagher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 655
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1002 on: July 11, 2018, 11:15:44 AM »

      Hi guys,

   A couple of observations on the AC thing and I'm out of this thread :)

   I can remember being told by a contractor when I was specing out a new AC/HW/Furnace system for our house that AC systems are designed so as not to lower the temperature more than 20F below the ambient air. The reasoning was that it would be too much for many people's bodies to cope with.

  Again, if memory serves, he explained that this began happening in the 20's-30's with the advent of AC in movie theaters. Apparently there were quite a few cases of people having heart attacks after emerging from the very cool theaters into the outside heat and humidity.

  Anyway, in the 60's to the 80's I was a supermarket meat cutter. The cutting room was typically kept at 45F with the walkin cooler being around 35F or so. I also was a fairly heavy smoker in those days, having picked up the habit while in Uncle Sam's employ. We had several days in a row where the temp was right around 100F during the day with brutal humidity. Anyway, after spending 8 hours in the 45 degree back room I punched out and headed for my car outside. I swear to God, it felt like the first couple of breaths were not going to work!! After that I learned to hang out tin the store for a few minutes before heading outside!

Logged
Kevin In CT
All Animals Are Equal But Some Are More Equal
 George Orwell

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 967
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1003 on: July 11, 2018, 01:25:44 PM »

      Hi guys,

   A couple of observations on the AC thing and I'm out of this thread :)

   I can remember being told by a contractor when I was specing out a new AC/HW/Furnace system for our house that AC systems are designed so as not to lower the temperature more than 20F below the ambient air. The reasoning was that it would be too much for many people's bodies to cope with.

  Again, if memory serves, he explained that this began happening in the 20's-30's with the advent of AC in movie theaters. Apparently there were quite a few cases of people having heart attacks after emerging from the very cool theaters into the outside heat and humidity.

  Anyway, in the 60's to the 80's I was a supermarket meat cutter. The cutting room was typically kept at 45F with the walkin cooler being around 35F or so. I also was a fairly heavy smoker in those days, having picked up the habit while in Uncle Sam's employ. We had several days in a row where the temp was right around 100F during the day with brutal humidity. Anyway, after spending 8 hours in the 45 degree back room I punched out and headed for my car outside. I swear to God, it felt like the first couple of breaths were not going to work!! After that I learned to hang out tin the store for a few minutes before heading outside!

Living in Canada in winter trains you to go from a heated indoors to a viciously cold outdoors. :)
Logged
--
Robert robertroaldi.zenfolio.com

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1004 on: July 11, 2018, 02:40:40 PM »

Living in Canada in winter trains you to go from a heated indoors to a viciously cold outdoors. :)

Well, it will get better when the climate warms up.  :)

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 967
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1005 on: July 11, 2018, 07:02:13 PM »

Well, it will get better when the climate warms up.  :)

It might not, we might just wilder swings.
Logged
--
Robert robertroaldi.zenfolio.com

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1461
    • advantica blog
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1006 on: July 11, 2018, 07:38:12 PM »

Living in Canada in winter trains you to go from a heated indoors to a viciously cold outdoors. :)

That only the first few months in the year. Now, it's from cooled indoors to viciously hot outdoors.

Frans Waterlander

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1007 on: July 11, 2018, 10:03:01 PM »

That only the first few months in the year. Now, it's from cooled indoors to viciously hot outdoors.

Really? You got any data to support your claim?
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1461
    • advantica blog
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1008 on: July 11, 2018, 11:39:26 PM »

Really? You got any data to support your claim?
If you mean the cooled indoor temperature, I don't turn my A/C on until it gets over 28C.
The outdoor temperatures were much higher in Ontario this summer than the last summer. I've been swimming or just cooling off in several lakes and rivers, including Lake Ontario and Superior.
Lake Superior was still numbingly cold, but yesterday I swam in Lake Simcoe which was quite balmy (23-25C, depending on the exact location and time of day).

Here is a screen shot from Weather Canada site showing temperatures for the first week of July. Saturday, June 30 was the hottest day, reaching 35.5C (Humidex 45C).

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9861
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1009 on: Today at 08:57:50 AM »

It's not a hypothesis. The Carbon isotope ratio proves that the warming is caused by CO2 that originates from old fossil plant sources and the Carbon / Oxygen ratio shows that it comes from the burning of that fossil fuel. These are facts, measurable facts, whether you choose to deny them or not.

I never realised that, Bart. ;)  So Obama was right when he claimed 'the science is settled'?  ;)

If that's the case, I don't think we can afford to continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on climate research. Wouldn't it be better to retrain most of those climatologists in more rigorous scientific disciplines, so they could assist in the development of more efficient solar panels and other types of renewables?

Oops! I recall that you wrote in post #850, "DUH, of course climate science isn't settled, nobody claimed that anyway (so why invoke a strawman's argument?). In fact, science will never be settled but it will evolve with new insights based on better data."

That seems a bit confusing, Bart. What term describes a proven scientific theory that is not settled?  ;)
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1010 on: Today at 10:08:28 AM »

Ray,  Interesting article about North American forest CO2 sequestration.  But I don;t understand what the 22% means.  Here're the questions I sent to one of the researchers.  Maybe you can clarify.

What does the 22% limit mean in real terms relative to the amount of CO2 that will be sequestered? In other words, how has the 78% sequestered?, how much? over what time period?  The 22% could have been 30% or 15% but it has no meaning in itself.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05132-5

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1011 on: Today at 10:11:24 AM »

Ray, it would be like me saying that the people in North America have a life span expected to last another 22%.   What would that mean?  What did the researcher mean?

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 800
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1012 on: Today at 10:37:59 AM »

Alan,

From the article...
In addition, we calculated a ratio of the current vs. future modeled biomass in a geographic context, which summarizes the extent of current biomass approaching the future biomass under the best-case scenario (no disturbance). As an example, this ratio is 0.780 0.438 for the current vs. the 2080s RCP8.5 future (Fig. 4), that is, the current forest biomass is on average 78% relative to the future biomass for the 2080s under the RCP8.5 best-case scenario. Because of the no-disturbance assumption, the actual future biomass is likely to be lower, and the actual ratio is likely to be higher, indicating that the biomass is likely to be even more saturated than 78%. In other words, under the unlikely best circumstances of no disturbances, North American forest carbon will only increase at most 22% over the current level to the 2080s
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18722
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1013 on: Today at 12:04:02 PM »

Alan,

From the article...
In addition, we calculated a ratio of the current vs. future modeled biomass in a geographic context, which summarizes the extent of current biomass approaching the future biomass under the best-case scenario (no disturbance). As an example, this ratio is 0.780 0.438 for the current vs. the 2080s RCP8.5 future (Fig. 4), that is, the current forest biomass is on average 78% relative to the future biomass for the 2080s under the RCP8.5 best-case scenario. Because of the no-disturbance assumption, the actual future biomass is likely to be lower, and the actual ratio is likely to be higher, indicating that the biomass is likely to be even more saturated than 78%. In other words, under the unlikely best circumstances of no disturbances, North American forest carbon will only increase at most 22% over the current level to the 2080s


Ah, now I get it!

:-)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1014 on: Today at 12:33:01 PM »

What does that mean in English in 25 words or less.  :)

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 800
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1015 on: Today at 05:01:47 PM »

unless we plant significantly more, it won't have much more effect. 11 words.

Note: there is a lot of spread in the extrapolated model prediction for 2080 - ~ +/- 50%.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1016 on: Today at 08:49:54 PM »

unless we plant significantly more, it won't have much more effect. 11 words.

Note: there is a lot of spread in the extrapolated model prediction for 2080 - ~ +/- 50%.


I don't know about planting.  But did they consider additional forestry and thus more carbon sink due to raising temperatures?  They seemed to have made an awful lot of assumptions.  GIGO? 

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9861
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1017 on: Today at 08:52:48 PM »

Ray,  Interesting article about North American forest CO2 sequestration.  But I don;t understand what the 22% means.  Here're the questions I sent to one of the researchers.  Maybe you can clarify.

What does the 22% limit mean in real terms relative to the amount of CO2 that will be sequestered? In other words, how has the 78% sequestered?, how much? over what time period?  The 22% could have been 30% or 15% but it has no meaning in itself.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05132-5

Alan,
I haven't got much time to reply because I'm busy preparing for a trip to China. However, my first impression of the modeling study is that, like most models, it restricts or limits itself to the consideration of just a few factors; in this case, the effects of temperature and precipitation changes in circumstances where there is no significant deforestation or afforestation.

The study doesn't, for example, consider the enhanced growth due to any increase in atmospheric CO2 levels.

A general principle is that young forests sequester carbon more rapidly as they grow, than mature forests.
To quote from the article:

"Across forest types, higher temperature generally increases the saturated aboveground biomass but decreases the half-saturation stand age; more abundant precipitation increases both the saturated biomass and half-saturation age."

Following are other relevant quotes, at the risk of being accused of cherry picking.  ;)

"Our analysis comes with several possible limitations. First, it does not consider environmental change factors other than climate (temperature and precipitation). Changes in atmospheric composition, such as CO2 and nitrogen, have been shown to enhance forest growth. On the one hand, our past and current periods (19902016) might not be sufficiently long to detect the CO2 and nitrogen fertilization effects. On the other hand, our future periods (2020s, 2050s, 2080s) might have different levels of CO2 concentration and nitrogen deposition than today, and they could affect forest dynamics and biomass. The potential impacts of CO2 and nitrogen fertilization are knowledge gaps that worth further investigation."

"Second, our study could miss the influences of future land-use changes on forest biomass, such as afforestation and deforestation from urban growth, conversion to other types by agriculture practices, and woody encroachment into grasslands. All these changes might affect forest carbon sequestration potential as forests grow and recover. "

"Finally, our analysis does not include the belowground components due to data limitation. Belowground carbon pools (eg., root and soil carbon} have been shown to have different recovery trajectories and responses to climate change compared with aboveground componenets. Therefore, our results should be specifically limited to the aboveground biomass carbon."
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1018 on: Today at 09:09:20 PM »

Ray, I noticed those important exclusions as well.  So without including these important variables which they knowingly excluded in their analysis, how can they make the conclusions they did?  All their studies, mathematics, and opaque writing arrives at a conclusion that is  meaningless.  They might as well be guessing. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
    • Flicker photos
Re: Global Cooling. The sky is falling.
« Reply #1019 on: Today at 09:10:10 PM »

PS Enjoy your trip to China.  Bring back some pictures. 
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51]   Go Up