In other news.............................
Nut Zone Doug can break rocks with his thick skull!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's Climate Change I tell'ya!! IT'S CLIMATE CHANGE!!
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
In other news.............................
Nut Zone Doug can break rocks with his thick skull!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It would have done the same in Antarctica you'd think...
Ozone-depleting gases might have driven extreme Arctic warming
The far north is heating up twice as fast as the global average.
Gases that deplete the ozone layer could be responsible for up to half of the effects of climate change observed in the Arctic from 1955 to 2005.
The finding could help to explain the disproportionate toll of climate change on the region, which has long puzzled scientists. The Arctic is warming at more than twice the average rate of the rest of the globe — a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification — and it is losing sea ice at a staggering pace.
Ozone-depleting substances, including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), are known to warm the atmosphere thousands of times more efficiently than carbon dioxide. But most of the research on these chemicals has focused on their effects on the planet’s protective ozone layer — especially over the Southern Hemisphere, where they are responsible for the formation of the Antarctic ozone hole, says Mark England, a climate scientist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California. He co-authored the study, published on 20 January in Nature Climate Change1, which he says is “really reframing a lot of the discussion on a more global basis”.
England and his colleagues compared climate simulations both with and without the mass emission of CFCs that began in the 1950s. Without CFCs, the simulations showed an average Arctic warming of 0.82 °C. When the presence of ozone-depleting compounds was factored in, that number jumped to 1.59 °C. The researchers saw similarly dramatic changes in sea-ice coverage between the two sets of model simulations. By running the models with fixed CFC concentrations while varying the thickness of the ozone layer, the team was able to attribute the warming directly to the chemicals — rather than changes these substances caused in the ozone layer.
England’s team has “done a careful study in a single model”, says Marika Holland, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. “I think that it makes a lot of sense.” She says that the warming effect of ozone-depleting substances in the atmosphere is a well-documented phenomenon. However, she notes, the complexities of climate models make it hard to say for certain what the exact magnitude of the effect on the Arctic is.
Susan Strahan, an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, says that the work is “interesting and provocative”, but she is not yet convinced of its conclusions. A stronger argument could be made, she continues, if the team had been able to provide a clear physical explanation for the modelled amplification.
Both Strahan and Cecilia Bitz, a climate scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, say that replicating these results in multiple climate models will be crucial for improving estimates of just how much responsibility CFCs bear for heating the Arctic.
Global CFC concentrations have been on the decline since the turn of the millennium, following the 1989 adoption of the Montreal Protocol, which called for a phase-out of the substances. Although many other factors contribute to Arctic amplification, the result suggests that Arctic warming and sea-ice melt might be tempered in the future as ozone-depleting substances continue to leave the atmosphere, Bitz says. “It’s a very important paper because it has a little shred of optimism.”
Ozone-depleting gases might have driven extreme Arctic warming
The far north is heating up twice as fast as the global average.
Gases that deplete the ozone layer could be responsible for up to half of the effects of climate change observed in the Arctic from 1955 to 2005.
The finding could help to explain the disproportionate toll of climate change on the region, which has long puzzled scientists. The Arctic is warming at more than twice the average rate of the rest of the globe — a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification — and it is losing sea ice at a staggering pace.
Ozone-depleting substances, including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), are known to warm the atmosphere thousands of times more efficiently than carbon dioxide. But most of the research on these chemicals has focused on their effects on the planet’s protective ozone layer — especially over the Southern Hemisphere, where they are responsible for the formation of the Antarctic ozone hole, says Mark England, a climate scientist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California. He co-authored the study, published on 20 January in Nature Climate Change1, which he says is “really reframing a lot of the discussion on a more global basis”.
England and his colleagues compared climate simulations both with and without the mass emission of CFCs that began in the 1950s. Without CFCs, the simulations showed an average Arctic warming of 0.82 °C. When the presence of ozone-depleting compounds was factored in, that number jumped to 1.59 °C. The researchers saw similarly dramatic changes in sea-ice coverage between the two sets of model simulations. By running the models with fixed CFC concentrations while varying the thickness of the ozone layer, the team was able to attribute the warming directly to the chemicals — rather than changes these substances caused in the ozone layer.
England’s team has “done a careful study in a single model”, says Marika Holland, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. “I think that it makes a lot of sense.” She says that the warming effect of ozone-depleting substances in the atmosphere is a well-documented phenomenon. However, she notes, the complexities of climate models make it hard to say for certain what the exact magnitude of the effect on the Arctic is.
Susan Strahan, an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, says that the work is “interesting and provocative”, but she is not yet convinced of its conclusions. A stronger argument could be made, she continues, if the team had been able to provide a clear physical explanation for the modelled amplification.
Both Strahan and Cecilia Bitz, a climate scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, say that replicating these results in multiple climate models will be crucial for improving estimates of just how much responsibility CFCs bear for heating the Arctic.
Global CFC concentrations have been on the decline since the turn of the millennium, following the 1989 adoption of the Montreal Protocol, which called for a phase-out of the substances. Although many other factors contribute to Arctic amplification, the result suggests that Arctic warming and sea-ice melt might be tempered in the future as ozone-depleting substances continue to leave the atmosphere, Bitz says. “It’s a very important paper because it has a little shred of optimism.”
Last edited:
Climate Change® is no laughing matter.
Well maybe a little when the piled up snow rings the doorbell.
Reminds me of an ice/snow storm my hubby and I were in November of 1977 in Denver, Colorado - maintenance at the motel we were staying at had to chip ice & snow off our door so we could get out of our room. What a memorable trip that was!
Denver is worse than Calgary for bipolar weather.
Did you know they call a toasted scrambled egg and ham sammich a Western?
and now record cold....
POOR STUPID PETROS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He thinks that LIE-beral style solutions to anything will help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT A MAROON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Consider the RECENT INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF OZONE DEPLETING GASES BEING RELEASED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YES - AFTER SEVERAL DECADES OF REDUCED EMISSIONS OF OZONE EATING GASES IS NOW RISING AGAIN!!!!!!!!!
And much of the NEW RELEASE IS COMING FROM PLACES LIKE VIET NAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Which Our idiot Boy Justin happens to be PAYING TWO BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR!!!!!!!!!
OSTENSIBLY O BUY CARBON CREDITS - and all that CDN CASH is being put into the Viet Nam purchase of things
like air conditioners and refrigerators - all running on PREVIOUSLY BANNED FREON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our idiot Boy with his virtue signalling purchase of BULLSH+T CARBON CREDITS
IS ACTUALLY HARMING THE ENVIRONMENT HE CLAIMS TO BE SAVING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here are the details:::::
Here is an article illustrating just how ineffective deals like the wretched Paris Accord are for influencing the environment. With some comments of my own in brackets):
Banned ozone-eating chemical emissions somehow are rising, baffling scientists
From Associated Press. Published: May 16, 2018. Updated: May 16, 2018 1:47 PM EDT
Filed Under: Toronto SUN/ News/ Technology
WASHINGTON — Something strange is happening with a now-banned chemical that eats away at Earth’s protective ozone layer: Scientists say there’s more of it — not less — going into the atmosphere and they don’t know where it is coming from.
When a hole in the ozone formed over Antarctica, countries around the world in 1987 agreed to phase out several types of ozone-depleting chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Production was banned, emissions fell and the hole slowly shrank.
(Yeah- so much for that international agreement! This ozone deal is just as dead as the Paris Accord that was supposed to halt greenhouse gas emissions and has failed miserably- while LIE-berals stick to their carbon crap and trade scam!)
But starting in 2013, emissions of the second most common kind started rising, according to a study in Wednesday’s journal Nature. The chemical, called CFC11, was used for making foam, degreasing stains and for refrigeration.
“It’s the most surprising and unexpected observation I’ve made in my 27 years” of measurements, said study lead author Stephen Montzka, a research chemist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“Emissions today are about the same as it was nearly 20 years ago,” he said.
(WE already have evidence of the lengths business in places like China will go for the sake of profit- with lead and melamine and other toxic substances showing up in everything from jewellery to milk products so why should they not use banned flurocarbons as well? And shall we ask if the $2 billion dollars per year that Our idiot Boy Justin is sending to places like Vietnam to purchase carbon credits are actually fueling this flurocarbon as local industries with Cdn dollars now in their pockets supply banned but low cost products to poor peasant farmers?)
Countries have reported close to zero production of the chemical since 2006 but the study found about 14,300 tons (13,000 metric tons) a year has been released since 2013. Some seeps out of foam and buildings and machines, but scientists say what they’re seeing is much more than that.
(And of course Russia is an economic basket case so is it possible they are using those cheaper but more dangerous chemicals as well? And what of Iran with its large but poor population? Do Iranian Mullahs worry about the environment or do they use those cheaper chemicals so they can save pennies for their nuclear program? And we can say the same about North Korea where sanctions are hitting hard! Is the Rocket Boy an environmentalist as well as dictator for life?)
Measurements from a dozen monitors around the world suggest the emissions are coming from somewhere around China, Mongolia and the Koreas, according to the study. The chemical can be a byproduct in other chemical manufacturing, but it is supposed to be captured and recycled.
Either someone’s making the banned compound or it’s sloppy byproducts that haven’t been reported as required, Montzka said.
(A cynic like myself would say its both- use of banned substances in some poor countries because they are cheaper than safer alternatives; and sloppy by products that manufacturers either cannot or will not bother to recycle in places where inspectors are not available!)
An outside expert, Ross Salawitch, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Maryland, is less diplomatic. He calls it “rogue production,” adding that if it continues “the recovery of the ozone layer would be threatened.”
High in the atmosphere, ozone shields Earth from ultraviolet rays that cause skin cancer, crop damage and other problems.
Nature removes 2 per cent of the CFC11 out of the air each year, so concentrations of the chemical in the atmosphere are still falling, but at a slower rate because of the new emissions, Montzka said. The chemical stays in the air for about 50 years.
(LIE-berals are spreading a LOT of Fake News about their dedication to the environment with their dedication to buying those idiot carbon credits from third world countries that then use OUR money for environment damaging new industries! And govts in third world countries are too often driven solely by profit motive and do not look beyond their own front doors for problems!)
Hail.
Can see something like this taking several weeks to get back on line.
Someone is missing the life shattering impeachment trial now
Good thing they have clean, reliable coal backup.Hail.
Can see something like this taking several weeks to get back on line.
Hail.
Can see something like this taking several weeks to get back on line.
Weeks, more like months
SORRY DIXIE - you are mistaken on this one!!!!!!!!!
CFC`s WERE BANNED and Ozone damage was being repaired UNTIL RECENTLY!!!!!!!!!
The sad fact is that various third world countries HAVE RETURNED TO USING CFC`s for refrigerant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the amount of CFC`s being released has begun to increase dramatically!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HERE IS THE REPORT::::::
Here is an article illustrating just how ineffective deals like the wretched Paris Accord are for influencing the environment. With some comments of my own in brackets):
Banned ozone-eating chemical emissions somehow are rising, baffling scientists
From Associated Press. Published: May 16, 2018. Updated: May 16, 2018 1:47 PM EDT
Filed Under: Toronto SUN/ News/ Technology
WASHINGTON — Something strange is happening with a now-banned chemical that eats away at Earth’s protective ozone layer: Scientists say there’s more of it — not less — going into the atmosphere and they don’t know where it is coming from.
When a hole in the ozone formed over Antarctica, countries around the world in 1987 agreed to phase out several types of ozone-depleting chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Production was banned, emissions fell and the hole slowly shrank.
(Yeah- so much for that international agreement! This ozone deal is just as dead as the Paris Accord that was supposed to halt greenhouse gas emissions and has failed miserably- while LIE-berals stick to their carbon crap and trade scam!)
But starting in 2013, emissions of the second most common kind started rising, according to a study in Wednesday’s journal Nature. The chemical, called CFC11, was used for making foam, degreasing stains and for refrigeration.
“It’s the most surprising and unexpected observation I’ve made in my 27 years” of measurements, said study lead author Stephen Montzka, a research chemist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“Emissions today are about the same as it was nearly 20 years ago,” he said.
(WE already have evidence of the lengths business in places like China will go for the sake of profit- with lead and melamine and other toxic substances showing up in everything from jewellery to milk products so why should they not use banned flurocarbons as well? And shall we ask if the $2 billion dollars per year that Our idiot Boy Justin is sending to places like Vietnam to purchase carbon credits are actually fueling this flurocarbon as local industries with Cdn dollars now in their pockets supply banned but low cost products to poor peasant farmers?)
Countries have reported close to zero production of the chemical since 2006 but the study found about 14,300 tons (13,000 metric tons) a year has been released since 2013. Some seeps out of foam and buildings and machines, but scientists say what they’re seeing is much more than that.
(And of course Russia is an economic basket case so is it possible they are using those cheaper but more dangerous chemicals as well? And what of Iran with its large but poor population? Do Iranian Mullahs worry about the environment or do they use those cheaper chemicals so they can save pennies for their nuclear program? And we can say the same about North Korea where sanctions are hitting hard! Is the Rocket Boy an environmentalist as well as dictator for life?)
Measurements from a dozen monitors around the world suggest the emissions are coming from somewhere around China, Mongolia and the Koreas, according to the study. The chemical can be a byproduct in other chemical manufacturing, but it is supposed to be captured and recycled.
Either someone’s making the banned compound or it’s sloppy byproducts that haven’t been reported as required, Montzka said.
(A cynic like myself would say its both- use of banned substances in some poor countries because they are cheaper than safer alternatives; and sloppy by products that manufacturers either cannot or will not bother to recycle in places where inspectors are not available!)
An outside expert, Ross Salawitch, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Maryland, is less diplomatic. He calls it “rogue production,” adding that if it continues “the recovery of the ozone layer would be threatened.”
High in the atmosphere, ozone shields Earth from ultraviolet rays that cause skin cancer, crop damage and other problems.
Nature removes 2 per cent of the CFC11 out of the air each year, so concentrations of the chemical in the atmosphere are still falling, but at a slower rate because of the new emissions, Montzka said. The chemical stays in the air for about 50 years.
(LIE-berals are spreading a LOT of Fake News about their dedication to the environment with their dedication to buying those idiot carbon credits from third world countries that then use OUR money for environment damaging new industries! And govts in third world countries are too often driven solely by profit motive and do not look beyond their own front doors for problems!)
The Solomon Islands.
And I wonder after watching it what happens to the people? Everything they are is gone, so they have to go somewhere, but where?
This is a micro image of the macro problem that climate change brings and ignoring it or denying it just does not make sense to me.
Last edited:
Is that like the Maldives that vanished into the sea 20 years ago?
They just opened 5 new airports to combat climate change.
They just opened 5 new airports to combat climate change.
Climate change is natural. It is physically impossible for the sea level to rise faster in one place than another so more likely the island is sinking. But that wouldn't fit the truthers dogma would it?
TRUE DAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are two types of Pacific Ocean islands - those made by coral............................
and those made by volcanic action and BOTH are vulnerable to erosion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One has only to read of the history of the Swallow Breakers - the most famous Vigia in history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Vigia is a 19th century term to refer to an area of dangerous shoal water whose exact location was unknown.................
In the late 1800`s HMS Swallow - a British frigate was sent out to once and for all - locate the most often reported and erratic
of all Pacific Vigias- and as we now know - the Vigia that was named Swallow Breakers - after the British ship
was of course caused by volcanic action!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In some decades volcanic action RAISES the seabed in parts of the Pacific............................
and in other years - EROSION from huge Pacific storms ERODES that raised sea bed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That SAME SORT OF EROSION is hitting at ALL Pacific Islands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Islands like the Galapagos and Hawaiian chains are SIMULTANEOUSLY BEING BUILT UP BY VOLCANOES....................
AND BY CORAL REEF BUILDING - AND BEING TORN DOWN BY EROSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thus water lines MUST CHANGE from time to time due to various actions that have NOTHING to do with people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And of course the TVO documentary "Sand Wars" does a NICE JOB of describing the erosion that is occurring .............................
on MULTIPLE Pacific Islands as sand is dredged up for BUILDING PURPOSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In related news - the good old days Ontari-owe farmers supplemented their income by "Hooking stones"..........................
from Lake Ontari-owe shorelines - to be used for building purposes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That continued until govt ORDERED A HALT to any removal of sand or stones from any Ontari-owe beach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Due to the massive erosion of shorelines that was occurring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Such similar shoreline DESTRUCTION has been noted in many parts of the world including North Africa and India!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In other news - the Cape Hatteras light house- built in 1870 - HAS BEEN MOVED 2900 ft.................................
as a result of Continental Drift and resulting shoreline erosion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the Light House was first built - it was 1500 ft from the waters edge- yet between 1870 -1970 ..........................
the shoreline had altered SO MUCH that the Light House was now only 120 ft from waters edge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Even worse - storm surges were now washing RIGHT OVER the Light House site!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So the ancient marker was moved those 2900 ft inland to protect it from simple shoreline erosion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Such FACTS as these are routinely IGNORED by LIE-berals as they shamelessly promote....................................
their GRAVY GRABBING CLIMATE CHANGE LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LIE-berals stand exposed for what they ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the ONLY PEOPLE who will believe their CRAP are those GETTING PAID well enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'd rather believe the people actually living there and studying the issue than, you know, someone who isn't.
