US Features
By Pat Reber Apr 6, 2007, 7:30 GMT
US investor drumbeat grows loud on global warming
And Also
Similar articles
- Pentagon examines use of solar unit in space
- US investors warm to clean technology in a big way
- Tree huggers transformed: Slammed doors now open
- Winter was world's warmest since 1880
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Four police officers slain in coffee shop "execution"
- 2. Struggles at home leave Obama hamstrung at Copenhagen (Feature)
- 3. Four US police officers shot dead near air force base (1st Lead)
- 4. Four US police officers shot dead near air force base
- 5. Tiger Woods' slightly injured in car mishap (Roundup)
Via BuzzFeed
Older Talkback
page: 1 2
Morning (at least it is here) Noharness.
The Kuwait cooling is because incoming ultra violet radiation was blocked by the smoke clouds and thus failed to heat the ground. But the ground was still warm enough to radiate heat as infra red and thus cool. The same happens when the sun's energy is cut off during a solar eclipse
The Apollo loss of heat was infra red RADIATING into space (no problem with radiation - ultra violet, infra red or whatever passing through a vacuum). Our earlier discusssion was about CONVECTION in the atmosphere, and convection doesn't work in a vacuum
I agree the Earth loses a prodigious amount of heat through radiation and it also receives a huge amount from the sun. Added to this is man made and natural heating from the Earth. The whole question of global warming revolves around the balance between incoming and outgoing. Measurements supporting the global warming scenary show that the difference between loss and gain is slightly (and increasingly) in favour of retained heat so the temperature of earth is rising
I've enjoyed our exchange of views, but I am about to leave for a couple of weeks holiday in South Africa, and then a fews days after returning I have another couple of weeks in Poland and Kaliningrad (Russian Baltic state), so I shall effectively be out of circulation for the next 5 weeks. (Don't worry - my carbon footprint will be offset by contributions to tree planting funds)
Regards
Have a safe trip, Bill. Good 'talking' to you.
Does anyone know of anything that can be mixed with water to make it boil faster?
You Iiots like Fred and the rest of the morons,
There is no point arguing with dead brain slik eyou. You will not believe in global warming anyway until unless Jesus comes and tells you about it.
Oh the bible does not say anything about global warming so it is must a left wing liberal conspiracy.
Have you ever realized that what a bunch of idiots you are!!
Is it normal to let someone like Sams out of the asylum at Easter ?
tinfoil hats my boy ...tinfoil hats
Dearest Sams,
I am an atheist. Perhaps that's why I have such a hard time worshiping at Al Gore's alters.
With that out of the way, I'll ask again. Anyone know of something that can be put in water to make boil faster? How about something to make it boil slower? No cheating, hot water and ice not allowed.
Now i'm no weather man or scientist, but i believe we, as humans, have a profound effect on this planet in everything we do. There's no doubt that the planet is in a warming cycle. But is it so hard to believe that humans help speed up the process? Sure, we may not see it at home. Sometimes it's hard to believe that with all the snow and ice i see (living in upstate NY, and I don't mean Albany), how could it be true? But when the surface temperature of one of Lake Michigan has risen nearly 5 degrees, in about 30 years, there's no doubt in my mind. Warmer waters means more snow. and, in my short life time, to see winters go from almost lasting 5 or 6 months (Oct. to March), to now about 3 or 4 (Dec. to March), also leaves no doubt in my mind that global warming is an issue. We may not be the root cause, but we certainly don't help the matter. If steps are not taken now to reduce this effect, what kind of world will there be for generations 100 years from now?
Lake Superior...my bad.
The heating of Lake Michigan is a new item to me, but I'm stunned by the figures - just imagine how much extra energy is required to heat a body of water that size. Global warming really is moving fast
Be advised, the atmosphere cannot heat the water. I'll ask again, what can you put into water to make it boil faster. There is only one thing I know of that will do that.
It is impossible for a single human brain to make out if global warming is a fact or a myth.There are just too many parameters involved in it.Even with supercomputers it takes a lot of time to predict your daily ceather .Those are derived from observation and application of the elementary laws of nature.THese are quantifiable and can be fed into computers .Howaver we have little experience with global warming so all the work is derived from less repetitive observations and calculations during a much larger timescale.Sometimes phenomena which seem not to fit the pattern occur and they can be hard to explain.But we do know the rate at which we are feeding the atmosphere with emissions of carbondioxide from burning fossil fuels .These figures are gigantic even on a yearly basis ,and they accumulate time after time .
As nobody can contain the knowledge to make decisions on these matters you will eventually have to rely on sources to make the decision for you.That is what politics are meant for .THere is this tendency in the US that the administration needs to meddle as little as possible with the lives of its citizens.That is part of what you commonly understand as freedom .
That is one of the reasons why some people refuse to act against global warming .To them I can only say that there is an urgent need to change your perspective as the human race is threatened in its very existence .
Find all the information you need to get the basic idea and choose in which hands you will lay your future . But you must educate yourself and not rely on opinions only.
Putting increased amounts of energy into water makes it boil faster. The inclusion of some minerals can also make a difference, but only a very marginal one. External factors can also have an effect - lower pressure, lowers the boiling point (the temperature) at which water boils
The atmosphere CAN heat water - energy can be transfered from one to the other by conduction (contact). Thus a warm wind will warm water. Conversely warm water can heat the atmosphere - if you don't believe this, look up the mechanism by which hurricanes are formed over the sea
Bingo! Will got it right on the head! However, I would hasten to point out that absent a heat source, the atmosphere on its own cannot heat water. In the case of the Earth, which really should be named 'the Sea', the only significant heat source heats both the water and the atmosphere at one and the same time.
Now, which retains heat longer, atmospheric gas, or water?
Water retains heat longer, but only in the sense that being more dense it has a greater heat capacity to lose
The statement about the incoming energy heating the atmosphere and water at the same rate is not accurate - the incoming radiation passes through the atmosphere fairly easily - moisture in clouds will pick up some of it, clouds will reflect some of it back into space - but the greater part of the energy continues through and hits the sea (or land) which being denser, stops and absorbs a lot of it. Some is reflected back by the ice at the poles and other snow/ice covered regions - but as this melts then more dark sea or land is revealed (primarily in the Arctic) and will increase the amount of energy absorbed
RE: 'Water retains heat longer, but only in the sense that being more dense it has a greater heat capacity to lose.'
Water just by God takes up more heat than any gas. In fact, it soaks up more heat than just about any other known substance prior to changing phases. It has little to do with the density of water and a lot to do with its inherent characteristics.
RE:'The statement about the incoming energy heating the atmosphere and water at the same rate is not accurate - the incoming radiation passes through the atmosphere fairly easily - moisture in clouds will pick up some of it, clouds will reflect some of it back into space - but the greater part of the energy continues through and hits the sea (or land) which being denser, stops and absorbs a lot of it. Some is reflected back by the ice at the poles and other snow/ice covered regions - but as this melts then more dark sea or land is revealed (primarily in the Arctic) and will increase the amount of energy absorbed.'
Hold on a minute! I didn't say that it would heat the water and the atmosphere at the same rate. I said that it heated the water and the atmosphere at the same time, which cannot be helped because the sunlight is passing through the atmosphere to get to the water.
In fact, it takes given rate of solar flux quite a bit longer to heat water to a given temperature than the same amount of atmospheric gas. Water soaks up far more calories of heat per degree rise in temperature than any gas. Contrariwise, water gives up that heat at a far slower rate than any gas, including the so-called greenhouse gases.
In short, the oceans have a hell of a lot more say in climatic conditions than all the greenhouse gases put together.
Sorry - but heat take-up/loss does have a lot to do with density: Specific heat is the energy required to change temperature of a substance by 1 degree, and Total Energy = Specific Heat x Mass x Temperature change
In this equation Mass = Density x Volume
Consequently the Specific Heat of water is a lot more than that of the air. Or put another way, a given mass of water will contain more energy (heat) than the same mass of air and this relates directly to density
Your comment about the energy involved in 'changing phases' does not apply unless the water is changing from water to ice or water to steam, and I don't think the oceans are yet at boiling point. The term for this energy is Latent Heat
Your final sentence is correct in the sense that oceans have far more contained heat than the atmosphere, but when the seas release energy as heat (Infra Red) in doesn't just radiate away and disappear, but goes into the atmosphere where it is absorbed particularly well by CO2. Thus the atmosphere gradually becomes hotter, ice melts, water is evaporated faster, drought becomes more prevalent in some areas, rainfall increases in others.
So although the atmosphere is not the prime container of energy, it is increasing its heat content from water (and land) and having the major impact on mankind. The seas also have effects - rising levels, melting of floating ice and so on
But gas, not even the 'greenhouse' gases are particularly good insulators. One thing I have learned is that heat is very hard to hang on to. It bleeds away in big hurry. Not even vacuum will contain it for very long.
The atmosphere does not heat the water. It's heated by the sun. As soon as the sun is blocked, the air temperature falls. Block the sun for more than twelve hours and the air temperature will drop to 50F or lower as the ground cools, even in a desert. The atmosphere doesn't hold enough heat to matter one bit. The oceans, however, do. Air over water stays warmer longer than air over land.
This greenhouse gas thing is boogie man. The primary things governing global climate are the oceans and the sun. Without the oceans our night time temperatures would be horribly cold and our daytime temperatures would be horribly high. When the sun's output falls, so do our temperatures. When the sun's output rises, so do our temperatures. It is as simple as that and there isn't a blessed thing we can do about it.
All very true, but I will leave you with something to ponder. It is claimed that CO2 (and by implication mankind) has very little effect in warming the Earth.
The proportions of the greenhouse effect due to Water Vapour = 60%, that of CO2 = 26% and other gases provide the rest
In other words the very small concentration (380 parts per million) of CO2 is responsible for a quarter of the greenhouse effect
The Earth's average surface temperature is around 14 degrees centigrade, but if there were no atmospheric warming the Earth's surface temperature would be about minus 18 degrees. (There are many references for this and it is calculated quite independently of whether the greenhouse effect is increasing or not)
So the Greenhouse effect produces a warming effect of 32 degrees, and CO2 is a quarter of this at 8 degrees.
All I ask is that you think about the relative scale of any change in CO2 - just a move from 380 to 400 is 5%. And although 5% of 8 degrees is less than half a degree, world temperatures moved only 0.74 degrees in the whole of the last century, yet look at the changes in weather patterns we've been having recently
If you want a general description of the mechanisms for heating, greenhouse effect etc in the atmosphere, try www.crystalinks.com/greenhouseffect.html
page: 1 2
Your Talkback on this Story