Heat Waves (4) A Climate Case Study:

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 6:26 AM GMT en Julio 19, 2011

Share this Blog
9
+

Heat Waves (4) A Climate Case Study:

In the last article I wrote that the extreme events of 2011 were providing us with the opportunity to think about climate and how to cope with a warming world. The U.S. is experiencing an extreme heat event this week (Masters @ WU). This heat wave is the consequence of a strong, stationary high pressure system over the central U.S., and it will move to the east over the next few days. Back on July 14th The Capital Weather Gang did a nice write up on the forecast of the heat wave. At the end of this blog are links to my previous blogs on heat waves and human health.

When thinking about weather, climate, and extreme events an important idea is “persistence.” For example, a heat wave occurs when there are persistent high temperatures. Persistent weather patterns occur when high and low pressure systems get large and stuck; that is, they don’t move. In the Figure below, you need to imagine North America and the United States. There is a high pressure center over the proverbial Heartland. With blue arrows I have drawn the flow of air around the high pressure system, and in this case moist air. There is moisture coming from the Gulf of Mexico and, in fact on the date when this was drawn, from the Pacific. This is common in the summer to see both the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific as sources of continental moisture.



Figure 1: Schematic of a high pressure system over the central United States in July. While generic, this is drawn to represent some of the specifics of 2011. The green-shaded area is where there have been floods in 2011. The brown-shaded area represents sustained drought in the southern part of the nation.

At the center of this high pressure system there is a suppression of rain, because the air is moving downward. This sets up a situation where the surface heats from the Sun’s energy. There is not much mixing and cooling, because of the suppression of the upward motion that produces rain. Hence, if this high pressure system gets stuck, then there is persistent heat. This is a classic summer heat wave.

Let’s think about it some more. There is lot of moisture being drawn around the edge of the high pressure system, and this moisture contributes to the discomfort of people. People – just a short aside about people: if we think about heat and health, then we are concerned about people’s ability to cool themselves. It is more difficult to cool people when it is humid because sweat does not evaporate. Suppose that in addition to this moisture, there is a region where the ground is soaked with water from flooding. Then on top of already moist air coming from the Gulf, there is local evaporation into the air being warmed by the Sun. If on the interior of the high, where the rain is suppressed, there is hot, wet air, then it becomes dangerous heat.

It’s not easy to derive a number that describes dangerous heat. But in much of the eastern U.S. a number that somehow combines temperature and humidity is useful. Meteorologists often use the heat index. It’s the summer time version of “it’s 98 degrees, but it feels like 105.” For moist climates, the heat index is one version of the “it feels like” temperature. Jeff Masters tells me that in Newton, Iowa yesterday, July 17, 2011, the heat index was 126 degrees F. (see here, and 131 F in Knoxville, Iowa on July 18)

Another measure of heat and humidity is the dew point; that is, the temperature at which dew forms, and effectively limits the nighttime low. The dew points in Iowa, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are currently very high and setting records. Here is a map of dew point for July 19, 2011.



Figure 2: Exceptionally high dew points centered on Iowa.


Now if I was a public health official, and I was trying to understand how a warming planet might impact my life, then here is how I would think about it. First, the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific are going to be warmer, and hence, there will be more humid air. This will mean, with regard to human health for the central U.S., heat waves will become more dangerous, without necessarily becoming hotter. It is also reasonable to expect heat waves will become more frequent and last longer, because those persistent, stuck high pressure systems are, in part, forced by the higher sea surface temperatures. If I am a public health official here is my algorithm – heat waves are already important to my life, and they are likely to get more dangerous, more frequent, and of longer duration. But by how much? Do I need to know by how much before I decide on a plan for action?

If I think about the air being more humid, then I might expect to see trends in the heat index. I might expect to see trends in dew points, and trends in the nighttime minimum temperatures getting higher. (That’s where a greenhouse effect really matters.) I worry about persistent heat, warm nights, and the inability of people and buildings to cool themselves. I worry about their being dangerous heat in places where people and emergency rooms are not used to dangerous heat – not acclimated to heat – not looking for heat-related illness.

Let’s go back to the figure. Rain is suppressed in the middle of the high pressure system, but around the edge of the high pressure system it will rain; there will be storms. (see Figure 3 at the end) The air around the edge of high is warm and very wet. Wet air is energetic air, and it is reasonable to expect local severe storms. (See Severe Storm on Lake Michigan) And if the high pressure is persistent, stuck, then days of extreme weather are possible. If this pattern sets up, then there is increased likelihood of flooding. If I am that public health official, then I am alerted to the possibility of more extreme weather and the dangers thereof. But, again, can the increase of extreme weather be quantified? Do I need to quantify it before I decide on a plan of action?

Still with the figure - what about that region of extended drought and the heat from the high pressure system? Dehydration becomes a more important issue. As a public health official, I start to see the relation of the heat event to other aspects of the weather, the climate. I see the relation to drought. I see the flood, and it’s relation to the winter snow pack and spring rains.

So what I have presented here is to look at the local mechanisms of the weather – what are the basic underlying physics responsible for hot and cold, wet and dry – for moist air? If I stick to these basic physics, and let the climate model frame the more complex regional and global picture, what can I say about the future? Do I have to have a formal prediction to take action? Here in 2011, I see drought and flood and hot weather and warm oceans that interact together to make a period of sustained, dangerous heat. It does not have to “set a record” to convey the reality of the warming earth. It tells me the type of event that is likely to come more often, of longer duration, and of, perhaps, of greater intensity. If I am a public health planner, then I can know this with some certainty. The question becomes, how do I use that information in my planning?

r



Figure 3: Radar loop showing precipitation around the edge of the large high pressure system in the middle of the continent. July 19, 2011.

Previous Blogs on Heat Waves

Hot in Denver: Heat Waves (1)

Heat Waves (2): Heat and Humans

Heat Waves (3): Role of Global Warming




Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 318 - 268

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26Blog Index

Quoting cyclonebuster:


Gulfstream kinetic energy beats them all.


yupper, I like your style.
Member Since: Junio 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Green- how are we going to mine these toxic minerals without any pollution. Whether it be solar, wind, hydro or nuclear all come with pollution or other possible problems there is no way we can live the way we do with out polluting
Member Since: Julio 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting nymore:
You just changed the link the original link is not the same page now posted.

You got me. I am the editor of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and after realizing you were on to me, I logged on and made a quick change to cover my tracks.

Sigh...
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting PurpleDrank:
how about the southern hemisphere?




Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
You just changed the link the original link is not the same page now posted.
Member Since: Julio 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting RustyShackleford:


I ain't gonna lie I probably won't respond to everything on it but I'll try my best I might end up doing it.

So I won't talk about being world dictator because if you were is what we are talking about.

The tax is already to high on fuel ridiculous.

How would we get around?



zero runoff? More gubment agencies there meaning more money and more power.


Your tv isn't made in baltimore because of the gubment.

Cheaper to build it somewhere else



How's that plan working out so far?

What happens when we still warm even though we are on batteries? Where do the batteries go after they burn out? Rechargeable batteries still burn out.

What if you go somewhere were you can't charge your batter say hiking and you don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a spare just in case?



No sun?
No wind?
I can jump on nuclear
No waves?

You can't control that stuff.

More gubment isn't better for our health.



Small towns and communities are gone because of Walmart not gasoline.

Gasoline actually helps some as they travel to that area.

I don't know anything about the Norway thing.

Being debt free? I do that everyday. No credit cards!!!! Dumbest thing ever!

I don't want to bike from the Woodlands 20 miles to downtown to watch an Aeros game or Texans game (even further) or 80 miles to go saltwater fishing just doesn't seem like the smartest idea. How would I get my poles there?

How would I bring my date to a game on the back of my bike? Doesn't seem logical.


I really am indulging myself replying to you because I think you are an idiot. But, quickly:

The biking plan is fine so far. Hopefully more on that next summer.

Batteries are recycleable.

Zero runoff is correct. If your neighbor had runoff going into your yard, would you think you had the right to complain? We all live togather and the cost from preventing pollution in runoff would be passed on to the consumer. People have always complained about things like public education, sanitary laws, etc. but they are better than not having them. When ws the last time you are in a restaurant that was not inspected?

I thought you'd like Walmart. I lived in Kodiak when Walmart came and the standard of living went up for most of the community due to lower prices. Walmart is neutral to positive for small communities; if the community is really a community, it survives just fine.

As for the Astros game: 20 miles is pretty doable. 80 miles on an electric scooter isn't so much problem. Niether are poles and luaggage really. For dates, public transport, cabs or even bikes. That is the point of raising the taxes on gas so high: you can chose to spend it but for single person trips, take your electric bike.

By debt, I meant national debt.

I agree there are no easy solutions for trucks within the first few years but later on:

automated driverless low profile vehicles. they are fully capable of being electric. Electric busses exist and so the battery capability is there, etc., same thing with smaller container boats.

micro canals: closed tubes that act like those old bank teller pneumatic tubes only horizontal and using water.

Finally, for trucks, shipping only the parts that need to be shipped, i.e. raw materials. Everythign else can be done locally. that still leaves local transportation but that is a much eisier problem to solve.

Wind, water and solar all work. they will work better in coming years. I don't understand the self righteous/happiness tone from the frognews crowd stating they won't work.

Fortunatly, not all countries are as corrupt and bass-ackwards the US has become. Many are developing these technologies. Soon we ('we' because I am US till I die and proud of it even if I think the GOP is to politics what crotchless panties are to acting success), anyway, soon we will be like the high school hero who is too cool to bother to listen in class and then ends up working for the other kids.

Since you have, without obvious thought, derided all my solutions, what are yours? Remember the goal is to solve the problem.

Member Since: Junio 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting nymore:
Neapolitan- That sure is a nice opinion piece and I also liked how you added your own facts in there, for one it says wmd attack 20% in 10 years not 15 years and it says nothing about burning fossil fuels that you added for effect. The risks they are spending big cash on are immediate not 50 or 100 years away and I also like how they take the climate change part and talk about global effect while the others they just talk about effects to the USA. Should the US economy collapse the worlds will to and I see that killing or causing as much destruction as climate change

Did you not actually read the piece? Yes, it mentions "fossil fuels"; you can do a page search for it. And in case you haven't been keeping up, it's called "global warming"; the global part means it's effecting us all, not just here in the U.S.
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Quoting PurpleDrank:
healthy economy menas healthier population

If that's true, and if you believe it, then that's all the more reason to be concerned enough about warming to do something about it, don't you think? In many pieces--and not just the one to which I linked--scientists have expressed their worries; isn't it time to get on board?
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
#306

nice graphic Buster

Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Quoting nymore:
Neapolitan- That sure is a nice opinion piece and I also liked how you added your own facts in there, for one it says wmd attack 20% in 10 years not 15 years and it says nothing about burning fossil fuels that you added for effect. The risks they are spending big cash on are immediate not 50 or 100 years away and I also like how they take the climate change part and talk about global effect while the others they just talk about effects to the USA. Should the US economy collapse the worlds will to and I see that killing or causing as much destruction as climate change


agreed

healthy economy menas healthier population

compare human life expectancy from 1979-2011 worldwide to any other 32 year period in history.

FAILURE
PERIL
FEAR
Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Neapolitan- That sure is a nice opinion piece and I also liked how you added your own facts in there, for one it says wmd attack 20% in 10 years not 15 years and it says nothing about burning fossil fuels that you added for effect. The risks they are spending big cash on are immediate not 50 or 100 years away and I also like how they take the climate change part and talk about global effect while the others they just talk about effects to the USA. Should the US economy collapse the worlds will to and I see that killing or causing as much destruction as climate change
Member Since: Julio 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
how about the southern hemisphere?

Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Both passages nearly open.


Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
4 way tie for 21st place.


Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Nea you seem to enjoy publications by the org that created the Dooms Day Clock.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is a nontechnical online magazine that covers global security and public policy issues, especially related to the dangers posed by nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. It has been published continuously since 1945, when it was founded by former Manhattan Project physicists after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists of Chicago. The Bulletin's primary aim is to inform the public about nuclear policy debates while advocating for the international control of nuclear energy. It is currently published by SAGE Publications.

One of the driving forces behind the creation of the Bulletin was the amount of public interest surrounding atomic energy at the dawn of the atomic age. In 1945 the public interest in atomic warfare and weaponry inspired contributors to the Bulletin to attempt to inform those interested about the dangers and destruction that atomic war could bring about.[1] To convey the particular peril posed by nuclear weapons, the Bulletin devised the Doomsday Clock in 1947. The original setting was seven minutes to midnight. The minute hand of the Clock first moved closer to midnight in response to changing world events in 1949, following the first Soviet nuclear test. The Clock is now recognized as a universal symbol of the nuclear age. In the 1950s, the Bulletin was involved in the formation of Pugwash, an annual conference of scientists concerned about nuclear proliferation, and, more broadly, the role of science in modern society.

Throughout the history of the Bulletin there have been many different focuses of the contributors to the Bulletin. In the early years of the Bulletin it was separated into three distinct stages.[6] These stages, as defined by founder Eugene Rabinowitch in "The Atomic Age" were Failure, Peril, and Fear. The "Failure" stage surrounded the Bulletin's failed attempts to convince the American people that the best and most effective way to control them was to eliminate their use. In the "Peril" stage, the contributors focused on warning readers about the dangers of full scale atomic war. In the "Fear" stage, the unsuccessful attempts at deterring readers from supporting the disarmament of nuclear weapons led many, including the contributors to the Bulletin, to question the patriotism of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_of_the_Atom ic_Scientists

FAILURE, PERIL, FEAR...All of the ingredients for a successful 501 C corp publication.
Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main50.asp?filename= Ws190711Gift_packages.asp

"Offering perks to those opting for sterilisation surgery is not new. Reportedly in Madhya Pradesh in 2004, gun licenses were offered as compensation for vasectomy. The health department's argument-you may be losing your manhood but you will be even more of a man once you get a gun."


:lmao:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
There was an excellent article yesterday in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists about the United States' inadequate response to the major security threat posed by climate change. I suggest reading the entire piece, but here's the basic gist of it:

The Risk: WMD Proliferation 20% likelihood of an attack involving a nuke in the next 15 years.
The Response: Trillions on weapons, billions on non-proliferation

The Risk: International terrorism Although acts of terrorism are highly likely to occur, the targeted nature of the phenomenon usually limits the scale of destruction.
The Response: A trillion-dollar global "war on terror"

The Risk: Systemic economic crisis
The Response: Massive stimulus spending, increased financial regulation.

The Risk: Rapid climate change The IPCC places the likelihood that the global climate is warming because of human activities %u2014 chiefly the burning of fossil fuels that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere %u2014 at 90 percent or greater, an incredibly rare degree of certainty on any subject in the scientific world. There is also great certainty about the severe impacts those changes will have, should they go unaddressed.
The Response: Relative to the risk, feeble

Bottom line: "The US government has invested trillions of dollars in efforts to prevent and mitigate the risks of weapons of mass destruction, global terrorism and systemic economic crises, because the consequences of inaction are considered unacceptable. These investments were made despite significant uncertainty about the frequency with which these catastrophic events might occur. When it comes to climate change, the consequences of failing to appropriately manage risks are also unacceptable. Meanwhile, the scientific community is as close to certain as humanly possible about the prospects for global crisis. Without action, the overwhelming scientific consensus asserts, a climate catastrophe that threatens billions of lives will almost surely occur. Such a dire and certain security threat calls for an urgent and financially significant response from US policymakers. Simply put, climate change is a serious threat to the United States and the world. Military leaders understand it, the national security community understands it, and it's time our civilian leaders responded accordingly."
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
the more i dwell, the more confused i get.

the Earth's current climate scenario may be influenced by the progress of humans. but I'm not sure its CO2 that is the end-all-be-all reason behind such changes.

heat afterall is an engine of life. past history shows extinction events are influenced by radical drops in temperature within a timeframe.

the last great extinction event 65 million years ago is theorized now to be somewhat of a global double-whammy, large space impact combined with geological alterations caused by tectonic activity, producing a change to climate.

Every event plays a roll in the climate future.

whether by the hands of man or by nature, the Earth is constantly vulnerable to change.

there is just not enough time for man to understand all he sees and experiences. For every million things that effect one large thing, there are a trillion other things that effect the million things effecting that one large thing.

its deep, i know.
Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Quoting GiovannaDatoli:

It should come to no one's surprise that you can present them overwhelming scientific evidence to illustrate C02 is responsible for the rapid warming--and still--the denialist's will be whistling past the graveyard, completely oblivious to the extreme damage being inflicted upon our globe.


overwhelming?

1979-2011 may be rapid to a human, full aware of their mortality..thus the existence of graveyards, but may not be to a 4.6 billion year old space cookie.

through geological investigation, we can theorize Earth has seen its levels of CO2 rise and fall in its history. that to me points in the direction of cyclical nature dictated by random events of physics and chemistry. it seems odd to me that evidence of change in the past is today ignored because of agenda.

the AGW CO2 complex is theoretical. overwhelming only to a creature with moods and emotional motives, but not likely so overwhelming to just one of probably several billion trillion trillion planets, each unique, in the universe.
Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Where is your graph showing different data than NOAA?


well this presents a problem, at least in my mind.

where are the other private entities that blast weather satellites into space?

all of the observation data are from govt. funded and regulated agencies.

those with the authority to launch satellites have a clear advantage in holding data. if a private "denialist" entity wanted to put their own satellites in orbit, they would not be able to get off the ground due to the govt's grip on what goes into orbit.

this presents a bias.

Member Since: Agosto 17, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 730
Quoting GiovannaDatoli:

It should come to no one's surprise that you can present them overwhelming scientific evidence to illustrate C02 is responsible for the rapid warming--and still--the denialist's will be whistling past the graveyard, completely oblivious to the extreme damage being inflicted upon our globe.


Also,you can present them overwhelming scientific evidence from many universities supported by NOAA/NASA and the denialist's still are totally oblivious that the whole World around them is changing. They are no different than the frog in the pot of boiling water.

img src="">


Mathematically the equation looks like this.

Denialist = Frog

Or

FoxNews = FrogNews






Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting cyclonebuster:


You can still have cycles up and down even in a warming trend upward. Can you understand that? Perfect example here: Look at the Co2 trending upwards. It too has a cyclic up and down cycle but the over all trend is still upward.




It should come to no one's surprise that you can present them overwhelming scientific evidence to illustrate C02 is responsible for the rapid warming--and still--the denialist's will be whistling past the graveyard, completely oblivious to the extreme damage being inflicted upon our globe.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
cat5 - That would be vulcanism, not volcanism.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
293:

Gee Neo, you really convinced me. That particular piece is another fine example of why it is so hard for certain climatologists to get over the hump of believing that Earth has never had more C02 circulating around it's atmosphere in the past.

Thank you for that.

I guess I'll just stick to the facts and continue to endorse the notion that Earth has had exponentially larger amounts of C02 in the atmosphere numerous times in the past.

That sorta kinda inflates the AGW theory just a tinny whinny little bit, dontcha think?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Rusty, you devote probably 30% of your posts to saying that CO2 at just 0.039% of the atmosphere can't possibly have any effect on things. But the thing is, even most denialists themselves understand that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and what that means. They may disagree on how much there is and/or how much of an impact it's had and/or where it came from--but they do understand. Here's a great primer on climate science; I politely suggest that you read it to help get you over this one particular hump.

Cheers!


Revenue $90.4 million USD (2009)

Amazing!!!!!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


Well .039% is such a small cover it can't cause nearly enough warming.

Rusty, you devote probably 30% of your posts to saying that CO2 at just 0.039% of the atmosphere can't possibly have any effect on things. But the thing is, even most denialists themselves understand that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and what that means. They may disagree on how much there is and/or how much of an impact it's had and/or where it came from--but they do understand. Here's a great primer on climate science; I politely suggest that you read it to help get you over this one particular hump.

Cheers!
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13597
Seems we have a "PC"o2 footprint problem here :)

Never forget who and where you are folks !

We should spend more time on the + side of it .......



Member Since: Junio 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8186
Quoting cyclonebuster:


You think it can't but it does.
However,the same cover used in daytime would actually cool the pool by blocking the sunlight.


Well .039% is such a small cover it can't cause nearly enough warming.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


It can't. Just can't.

If you put something .039% of the width of your bed sheet it wouldn't trap the heat being brought upon it from the right model size if you put a heat rack the right distance away comparable to the sun.


You think it can't but it does.
However,the same cover used in daytime would actually cool the pool by blocking the sunlight.
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting cyclonebuster:




At night it prevents the heat from escaping to the atmosphere. It can weigh much less than the .039% of all the pool water but it still traps all that heat like a blanket. How can something that small and thin do that?


It can't. Just can't.

If you put something .039% of the width of your bed sheet it wouldn't trap the heat being brought upon it from the right model size if you put a heat rack the right distance away comparable to the sun.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting DARPAsockpuppet:


A state representative in Louisiana proposed something similar but LA was just not ready for it yet I guess, his idea was just a little too far ahead of it's time.http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/labruz zo_sterilization_plan_fi.html



Ok Darpa your making this blog a super depressing place to be.

But I guess its just part of the agenda.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


RIDICULOUS!

Where you at Mcbill?

They'll try to do this!!!!

You said none of my rights will be infringed!!

This reeks of huge agenda driven minds!!!!


A state representative in Louisiana proposed something similar but LA was just not ready for it yet I guess, his idea was just a little too far ahead of it's time.http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/labruz zo_sterilization_plan_fi.html

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


Haven't had either in my backyard so you tell me.

But you can only have the pool cover covering .039% of the pool.


Quoting RustyShackleford:


Haven't had either in my backyard so you tell me.

But you can only have the pool cover covering .039% of the pool.


At night it prevents the heat from escaping to the atmosphere. It can weigh much less than the .039% of all the pool water but it still traps all that heat like a blanket. How can something that small and thin do that?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting cyclonebuster:


How much warming does a pool cover create for a swimming pool?


Haven't had either in my backyard so you tell me.

But you can only have the pool cover covering .039% of the pool.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


Oh so now you can agree with me that .039% isn't enough to cause warming?


How much warming does a pool cover create for a swimming pool?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting cyclonebuster:


It is more than Co2 and Asphalt causing the warming.

Your point?



Oh so now you can agree with me that .039% isn't enough to cause warming?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:


That it isn't CO2 its asphalt.

But again your NEVER wrong

I love how you can't come up with something original you have to use something other people use.


It is more than Co2 and Asphalt causing the warming.

Your point?

Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Some of it is caused by asphalt. However not all of it is caused by asphalt.

Your point?

Could be more warming in NYC than Idaho.

Your point?


That it isn't CO2 its asphalt.

But again your NEVER wrong

I love how you can't come up with something original you have to use something other people use.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Price of Seafood is going up hence there is less of it.

Your point?

Houston is in a drought hence there is little rain.

Your point?


Funny.

Maybe people aren't selling there fish.

As in private fisherman not commercial

But w/e forgot your side it NEVER wrong.

nuff nuff
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:
Couldn't the warming be caused by asphalt?

Is there more warming in NYC than Idaho?


Some of it is caused by asphalt. However not all of it is caused by asphalt.

Your point?

Could be more warming in NYC than Idaho.

Your point?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting RustyShackleford:


The overall trend of fish being caught us upwards to as more people are fishing.

Your point?

The overall trend of rain in the Houston area is down for this year.

Your point?


Price of Seafood is going up hence there is less of it.

Your point?

Houston is in a drought hence there is little rain.

Your point?
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Couldn't the warming be caused by asphalt?

Is there more warming in NYC than Idaho?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Ok now tell me real world solutions unless your toxic batteries can power an 80,000 lb truck across the US or a ship across the ocean both hauling the foods from around you want to eat. The insulation idea is a good start. Also whether you drive a small car or not the road will still have to support large loads
Member Since: Julio 6, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2259
Quoting DARPAsockpuppet:
Quoting RustyShackleford:
260.

So when do we turn into China?


I heard Ted Turner has culled for a compulsory global one-child policy, I don't know if I'd take it that far -Margaret Sanger has taken care of the problem for most developed countries,Dr. Snip in India is on the right track for what can be done in the developing world. p.s Shame on David Beckham and Victoria "Posh Spice" Beckham for being terrible environmental role-models by having their 4th child. Disgraceful

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main50.asp?filename= Ws190711Gift_packages.asp


RIDICULOUS!

Where you at Mcbill?

They'll try to do this!!!!

You said none of my rights will be infringed!!

This reeks of huge agenda driven minds!!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting cyclonebuster:


You can still have cycles up and down even in a warming trend upward. Can you understand that? Perfect example here: Look at the Co2 trending upwards. It too has a cyclic up and down cycle but the over all trend is still upward.





The overall trend of fish being caught us upwards to as more people are fishing.

Your point?

The overall trend of rain in the Houston area is down for this year.

Your point?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RustyShackleford:
260.

So when do we turn into China?


I heard Ted Turner has culled for a compulsory global one-child policy, I don't know if I'd take it that far -Margaret Sanger has taken care of the problem for most developed countries,Dr. Snip in India is on the right track for what can be done in the developing world. p.s Shame on David Beckham and Victoria "Posh Spice" Beckham for being terrible environmental role-models by having their 4th child. Disgraceful

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main50.asp?filename= Ws190711Gift_packages.asp
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting greentortuloni:
well, if'n I could be world dictator... my off the top of my head ideas for the US of A:

1. Start with rationing fuel or simply raise the tax on fuel to around $3 per gallon with a 1$ per year increase after that. (Right off the bat I am not keeping the same standard of living but give me a transition period to get through and then return to our standard of living.) I'd do the same/equivilent thing with coal.


I ain't gonna lie I probably won't respond to everything on it but I'll try my best I might end up doing it.

So I won't talk about being world dictator because if you were is what we are talking about.

The tax is already to high on fuel ridiculous.

How would we get around?

Quoting greentortuloni:
2. Require all factories, farms, mines, etc to meet pollution standards of zero runoff.

3. Increase junk mail costs, packaging costs and transportation costs on everything except personal movement. It's not good that my new TV is made in over there somewhere. Why isn't it made in Baltimore?


zero runoff? More gubment agencies there meaning more money and more power.


Your tv isn't made in baltimore because of the gubment.

Cheaper to build it somewhere else

Quoting greentortuloni:
The goal of my little fantasy is:

1. Most transportation will done by electric bicycle, bicycle, skooter, eletric vehicle. Recharging for heavy vehicles is done by battery swap: i.e. join a battery club. If you need a battery, swap it out in a few minutes. Light vehicles can either recharge overnight/at work or have thier own private swap out system.


How's that plan working out so far?

What happens when we still warm even though we are on batteries? Where do the batteries go after they burn out? Rechargeable batteries still burn out.

What if you go somewhere were you can't charge your batter say hiking and you don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a spare just in case?

Quoting greentortuloni:
2. The charging power comes from mostly solar, wind, nuclear or wave power.

3. Note that the benefits of a light vehicle culture are far more than just the cost of oil. they include health benefits (no, really, look up the figures, it is amazing), less pollution, less infrastructure costs, and so on.


No sun?
No wind?
I can jump on nuclear
No waves?

You can't control that stuff.

More gubment isn't better for our health.

Quoting greentortuloni:
4. Insulation on buildings increases. For example, they have houses in Norway where breakfast cooking provides all the heat necessary for the entire day..in winter! Passive heating and cooling increases.

5. The US becomes locally self sufficient for most things. Things like maple syrup that are local can still be sent but are more expensive.

6. This still leaves manufacturing as an energy cost but I think it is a start.

The goal of my little fantasy is that we all are able to live the important parts of our lives the way we want. Those parts that are not important, like driving across town to buy a specific brand of ice cream (I just did this for someone) are lost.

I'd also like to see small towns and communities return and see telecommuting centers/internet community centers installed in them to provide local revenue required and provide that contact with the larger society that is required.

I know it is a fantasy but without writing novels, that is my best attempt at describing the transition method and the goal. Imagine waking up and breathing clean air, being debt free and being able to walk (bike) to a downtown of a community that you know and care about. I think it is worth fighting for.







Small towns and communities are gone because of Walmart not gasoline.

Gasoline actually helps some as they travel to that area.

I don't know anything about the Norway thing.

Being debt free? I do that everyday. No credit cards!!!! Dumbest thing ever!

I don't want to bike from the Woodlands 20 miles to downtown to watch an Aeros game or Texans game (even further) or 80 miles to go saltwater fishing just doesn't seem like the smartest idea. How would I get my poles there?

How would I bring my date to a game on the back of my bike? Doesn't seem logical.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting greentortuloni:
well, if'n I could be world dictator... my off the top of my head ideas for the US of A:

1. Start with rationing fuel or simply raise the tax on fuel to around $3 per gallon with a 1$ per year increase after that. (Right off the bat I am not keeping the same standard of living but give me a transition period to get through and then return to our standard of living.) I'd do the same/equivilent thing with coal.

2. Require all factories, farms, mines, etc to meet pollution standards of zero runoff.

3. Increase junk mail costs, packaging costs and transportation costs on everything except personal movement. It's not good that my new TV is made in over there somewhere. Why isn't it made in Baltimore?



The goal of my little fantasy is:

1. Most transportation will done by electric bicycle, bicycle, skooter, eletric vehicle. Recharging for heavy vehicles is done by battery swap: i.e. join a battery club. If you need a battery, swap it out in a few minutes. Light vehicles can either recharge overnight/at work or have thier own private swap out system.

2. The charging power comes from mostly solar, wind, nuclear or wave power.

3. Note that the benefits of a light vehicle culture are far more than just the cost of oil. they include health benefits (no, really, look up the figures, it is amazing), less pollution, less infrastructure costs, and so on.

4. Insulation on buildings increases. For example, they have houses in Norway where breakfast cooking provides all the heat necessary for the entire day..in winter! Passive heating and cooling increases.

5. The US becomes locally self sufficient for most things. Things like maple syrup that are local can still be sent but are more expensive.

6. This still leaves manufacturing as an energy cost but I think it is a start.

The goal of my little fantasy is that we all are able to live the important parts of our lives the way we want. Those parts that are not important, like driving across town to buy a specific brand of ice cream (I just did this for someone) are lost.

I'd also like to see small towns and communities return and see telecommuting centers/internet community centers installed in them to provide local revenue required and provide that contact with the larger society that is required.

I know it is a fantasy but without writing novels, that is my best attempt at describing the transition method and the goal. Imagine waking up and breathing clean air, being debt free and being able to walk (bike) to a downtown of a community that you know and care about. I think it is worth fighting for.







Gulfstream kinetic energy beats them all.
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
Quoting RustyShackleford:


But you still don't.

It warms it cools.

Cyclical.

Imagine that.

No agenda to it.

One word.

Cyclical


You can still have cycles up and down even in a warming trend upward. Can you understand that? Perfect example here: Look at the Co2 trending upwards. It too has a cyclic up and down cycle but the over all trend is still upward.



Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20402
well, if'n I could be world dictator... my off the top of my head ideas for the US of A:

1. Start with rationing fuel or simply raise the tax on fuel to around $3 per gallon with a 1$ per year increase after that. (Right off the bat I am not keeping the same standard of living but give me a transition period to get through and then return to our standard of living.) I'd do the same/equivilent thing with coal.

2. Require all factories, farms, mines, etc to meet pollution standards of zero runoff.

3. Increase junk mail costs, packaging costs and transportation costs on everything except personal movement. It's not good that my new TV is made in over there somewhere. Why isn't it made in Baltimore?



The goal of my little fantasy is:

1. Most transportation will done by electric bicycle, bicycle, skooter, eletric vehicle. Recharging for heavy vehicles is done by battery swap: i.e. join a battery club. If you need a battery, swap it out in a few minutes. Light vehicles can either recharge overnight/at work or have thier own private swap out system.

2. The charging power comes from mostly solar, wind, nuclear or wave power.

3. Note that the benefits of a light vehicle culture are far more than just the cost of oil. they include health benefits (no, really, look up the figures, it is amazing), less pollution, less infrastructure costs, and so on.

4. Insulation on buildings increases. For example, they have houses in Norway where breakfast cooking provides all the heat necessary for the entire day..in winter! Passive heating and cooling increases.

5. The US becomes locally self sufficient for most things. Things like maple syrup that are local can still be sent but are more expensive.

6. This still leaves manufacturing as an energy cost but I think it is a start.

The goal of my little fantasy is that we all are able to live the important parts of our lives the way we want. Those parts that are not important, like driving across town to buy a specific brand of ice cream (I just did this for someone) are lost.

I'd also like to see small towns and communities return and see telecommuting centers/internet community centers installed in them to provide local revenue required and provide that contact with the larger society that is required.

I know it is a fantasy but without writing novels, that is my best attempt at describing the transition method and the goal. Imagine waking up and breathing clean air, being debt free and being able to walk (bike) to a downtown of a community that you know and care about. I think it is worth fighting for.





Member Since: Junio 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220

Viewing: 318 - 268

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.

Local Weather

Scattered Clouds
52 ° F
Nubes dispersas