Comments on: Potential Climatic Variables Page

By: Jordansmith

Jordansmith — Thu, 17 Jun 2021 10:48:03 +0000

If greenhouse fuel concentrations maintain rising, climatic modifications are probable to result. Those modifications will probably have wide-ranging outcomes at the surroundings and socio-monetary and associated sectors, inclusive of health, agriculture, forests, water resources, coastal regions, and biodiversity. That impacts society very badly. So health insurance in Chula Vista is compulsory for the public especially those who have residency near industrial ares.

By: David K

David K — Wed, 16 Jun 2021 07:16:42 +0000

Being an electrical engineer I would like to add two more factors that is Sun and Tides. I read somewhere in the books of my engineering that anything which gives power to human beings, have potential to make energy just like sun. Solar panels are really great invention when it comes to climate. They are environmental friendly. It can be used anywhere and have ability to convert sun energy to electricity.

I got an opportunity to work under the home care Lincoln organization which was solely based on health care. Health is something we shouldn’t ignore it in 2021 and most of the time I went into rural areas they use solar panels for electricity, they are cheap and great for green environment. In the last decade, coal and nuclear electricity plants have damaged a lot to our climate and now we should focus on green energy.

I found a great resource on solar panels how they are good at environment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel

Tidal energy resource: https://www.ctc-n.org/technologies/tidal-energy#:~:text=Tidal%20stream%20devices%20directly%20contribute,turbines%20due%20to%20the%20broadly

By: jason smith

jason smith — Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:28:35 +0000

I have seen on many platforms that many climates specialist spokes on other topics but no highlighted betterment on water treatment system in third world countries.

By: Vaastu Classes in Dubai and UAE

Vaastu Classes in Dubai and UAE — Fri, 26 Apr 2019 11:54:18 +0000

An interesting discussion is worth comment. I do believe
that you ought to write more about this issue, it might not
be a taboo matter but usually folks don’t talk about such subjects.
To the next! Kind regards!!

By: harrytodd

harrytodd — Fri, 01 Sep 2017 12:38:51 +0000

Wandering magnetic poles affect the 21% oxygen which gets more and more paramagnetic as spirals poleward. Check out a new climate change theory at this dedicated website:
https://www.harrytodd.org

By: grandbux

grandbux — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:41:31 +0000

Good answers in return of this difficulty with solid arguments and describing the whole thing regarding
that.

By: Dahlquist

Dahlquist — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 19:55:35 +0000

You list #8 Atmospheric Composition. What about the Atmosphere itself. It has mass, layers (strata), etc. and I did not see much about these mentioned, although it was skimmed. It would be good to have the Atmosphere by itself given a number in this list. Also, Under #8 Atmospheric Composition I did not see any references to strata, mass, temperature decrease with elevation, boiling points at various pressures, etc.
Perhaps I am off target here, but thought I’d throw in my 2 cents.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 15:19:07 +0000

Dude, my model takes all this into account and the answer is: 2 degrees

By: Auto

Auto — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:59:19 +0000

Many thanks to all contributors.
A magnificent listing of things that may/do affect weather and climate – with good ‘uncertainties’.
I propose taking highlights from this for a client presentation soon.
Again thanks -and, yes, suitable acknowledgement will be made.
Auto

By: D.N Power diesel generator set

D.N Power diesel generator set — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:53:26 +0000

Everyone loves it when individuals come together and share opinions. Great website, keep it up!

By: justthefactswuwt

justthefactswuwt — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 02:23:52 +0000

polistra says: February 29, 2012 at 7:23 am
On Electricity, I’ve bumped into a hundred-year-old idea that seems to be relatively unexplored today.
http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2012/02/ideas-from-old-book.html
Conifers have pointy needles that seem designed for optimal ion exchange. (Think of the recent discoveries of nanowires on bacteria.) Conifers seem to enjoy being closer to the Arctic, where ionization is higher. Do they live more by electron exchange than photosynthesis? And do they help to form homeostasis in Northern latitudes? Something like an RC low-pass filter?
It is true that, “The electric field is strongly enhanced on the tips of leaves and on needles of plants.” however “the environmental effect of the electric mechanism of aerosol deposition is the redistribution of the deposit on the elements of biological structures. Knowledge of deposition geometry improves our understanding of air pollution damage to plants. In particular, electric deposition of aerosol particles should be considered when discussing enhanced pollution damage to the top branches of conifer trees.”
I find no evidence that Conifers proximity closer to the Arctic is associated with higher ionization, rather this seems to be associated with Conifers cold weather survivabilty, i.e.:
“Each year conifers also drop leaves, similar to broad-leafed trees, they just don’t shed them all. Most conifers retain needles for two to three years before shedding them. Although conifers require the resources to produce new needles each year, they gain a large measure of economy by using a set of needles for more than one year. The coniferous exception to this needle-retention strategy is the genus Larix, the tamarack and larches.
Conifer needles have a thick, waxy coating of cutin that significantly reduces water loss. Needles also have much tighter stomatal closure. Stomata are the pores that allow air and water to pass in and out of the needle. Lastly, tissues undergo an acclimation process, similar to other living tissues in trees.
Retaining needles allows trees to extend the length of the photosynthetic season. It also potentially allows trees to take advantage of winter thaws and, perhaps, even to permit slow rates of photosynthesis during cold weather. However, needle retention presents serious challenges in terms of water loss, water re-supply, and snow-loading.”
http://mff.dsisd.net/Environment/WinterTrees.htm
I find no evidence that a Conifer lives “more by electron exchange”.
I’ve added additional detail to section 12. Physics – Electricity:
There also appears that the “environmental effect of the electric mechanism of aerosol deposition is the redistribution of the deposit on the elements of biological structures. Knowledge of deposition geometry improves our understanding of air pollution damage to plants. In particular, electric deposition of aerosol particles should be considered when discussing enhanced pollution damage to the top branches of conifer trees.”
http://ael.physic.ut.ee/tammet/WWW/ElectricParticleDeposition.pdf
Thank you

By: justthefactswuwt

justthefactswuwt — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 01:49:57 +0000

Richard says: February 20, 2012 at 2:12 am
Something that may be worth adding
Salt.
The geographical and temporal distribution of salt (disolved and crystal/rock) horizontally and vertically.
This effects just about every part of the hydrological cycle, from evaporation to freezing and so will modulate climate (on short to very, very long periodicity).
Yep, added to section 11. Chemical:
“Sea Salt particles—a common ingredient of coastal and ocean air—undergo a previously unrecognized chemical reaction in daylight to release chlorine molecules, which can influence ozone levels in the lower atmosphere.” “sea salt particles may be a factor that needs to be taken into account in assessing levels of greenhouse gases and air pollutants such as ozone in the air.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/04/000414075355.htm
Thank you

By: justthefactswuwt

justthefactswuwt — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 01:34:28 +0000

higley7 says: February 19, 2012 at 6:35 pm There should be some mention that CO2 and water vapor are not alone in having absorption capability in the IR. It goes unmentioned, by virtually everybody, that O2 and N2 DO HAVE absorption bands in the IR. As only CO2 and water vapor are mentioned in the Wikipedia definition of greenhouse gases, everybody assumes that N2 and O2 are transparent to IR They are most definitely not. Someone should look these up and point out that the absorption spectra for the atmosphere clearly shows the presence of the bands for these two main components of the atmosphere. Thus, the idea that CO2 drives climate becomes stupid in the face of nitrogen, oxygen, and water vapor which ALL have more absorption bands than CO2. To be fair, Wikipedia's page on Greenhouse Gas accuratly states that; "A greenhouse gas (sometimes abbreviated GHG) is a gas in an atmosphere that absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect.[1] The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone." I've added the "Greenhouse Effect" to section 12. Physics: The Greenhouse Effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect "is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all directions. Since part of this re-radiation is back towards the surface and the lower atmosphere, it results in an elevation of the average surface temperature above what it would be in the absence of the gases." A Greenhouse Gas; " is a gas in an atmosphere that absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect. The primary greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas "Absorption spectra of main atmospheric gases (H2O, CO2, O3, CH4, N2O, CFCs)" can be found in section 4 of these lecture notes: http://www.heliosat3.de/e-learning/remote-sensing/Lec7.pdf Thank you

By: justthefactswuwt

justthefactswuwt — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 00:53:14 +0000

Phil says: February 19, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Style point – the 14 points are all in a common font and size except 9. Albedo.
Phil
Fixed, thank you

By: justthefactswuwt

justthefactswuwt — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 00:02:15 +0000

Donald Mitchell says: February 19, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Geothermal Energy:
I have seen only one source which acknowledged geothermal energy as a factor in ocean circulation. Here are two links which would lead me to believe that it could be very influential.
http://www.heatflow.und.edu/index2.html
http://smu.edu/geothermal/heatflow/heatflow.htm
While I have not delved deeply into the climate models, I have never seen an indication that they considered the spatial variances of the geothermal heat flow through the continental land masses.
I’ve added more detail on Heat Flows to section 5. Geothermal Energy:
“Geothermal Heat Flows;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient#Heat_flow
http://smu.edu/geothermal/heatflow/heatflow.htm
http://www.heatflow.und.edu/index2.html
“constantly from its sources within the Earth to the surface. Total heat loss from the earth is 44.2 TW (4.42 × 1013 watts).[12] Mean heat flow is 65 mW/m2 over continental crust and 101 mW/m2 over oceanic crust.[12] This is approximately 1/10 watt/square meter on average, (about 1/10,000 of solar irradiation,) but is much more concentrated in areas where thermal energy is transported toward the crust by convection such as along mid-ocean ridges and mantle plumes.[13] The Earth’s crust effectively acts as a thick insulating blanket which must be pierced by fluid conduits (of magma, water or other) in order to release the heat underneath. More of the heat in the Earth is lost through plate tectonics, by mantle upwelling associated with mid-ocean ridges. The final major mode of heat loss is by conduction through the lithosphere, the majority of which occurs in the oceans due to the crust there being much thinner and younger than under the continents.
The heat of the earth is replenished by radioactive decay at a rate of 30 TW.”
Geothermal Heat also flows through Hydrothermal Vents;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent
which can be a factor in Hydrothermal Circulations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_circulation
as well as Hot Springs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_springs
“Worldwide, about 10,715 megawatts (MW) of geothermal power is online in 24 countries. An additional 28 gigawatts of direct geothermal heating capacity is installed for district heating, space heating, spas, industrial processes, desalination and agricultural applications.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_heating”
Thank you

By: Beth Cooper

Beth Cooper — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:05:02 +0000

Always interactions. Thx for this study resource, Anthony. It’s always about the data.

By: polistra

polistra — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:23:16 +0000

On Electricity, I’ve bumped into a hundred-year-old idea that seems to be relatively unexplored today.
http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2012/02/ideas-from-old-book.html
Conifers have pointy needles that seem designed for optimal ion exchange. (Think of the recent discoveries of nanowires on bacteria.) Conifers seem to enjoy being closer to the Arctic, where ionization is higher. Do they live more by electron exchange than photosynthesis? And do they help to form homeostasis in Northern latitudes? Something like an RC low-pass filter?

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 10:12:21 +0000

Something that may be worth adding
Salt.
The geographical and temporal distribution of salt (disolved and crystal/rock) horizontally and vertically.
This effects just about every part of the hydrological cycle, from evaporation to freezing and so will modulate climate (on short to very, very long periodicity).

By: higley7

higley7 — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 02:35:12 +0000

There should be some mention that CO2 and water vapor are not alone in having absorption capability in the IR. It goes unmentioned, by virtually everybody, that O2 and N2 DO HAVE absorption bands in the IR. As only CO2 and water vapor are mentioned in the Wikipedia definition of greenhouse gases, everybody assumes that N2 and O2 are transparent to IR They are most definitely not.
Someone should look these up and point out that the absorption spectra for the atmosphere clearly shows the presence of the bands for these two main components of the atmosphere.
Thus, the idea that CO2 drives climate becomes stupid in the face of nitrogen, oxygen, and water vapor which ALL have more absorption bands than CO2.

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 01:38:28 +0000

Style point – the 14 points are all in a common font and size except 9. Albedo.
Phil