effects of Global Warming

[Itoero]

Many effects of Global Warming might speed up Global Warming. But is their an effect that slows down the warming?

Edited December 5, 2018 by Itoero

[StringJunky]

Aerosol particulates (pollution) reflect solar energy back into space. The confounding irony of reducing particulate pollution, which is often tied in with green house gases, is it will negate some of the temperature reduction from reducing green house gas emissions.

Quote

Climate Impacts From a Removal of Anthropogenic Aerosol Emissions

Abstract
Limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2.0°C requires strong mitigation of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concurrently, emissions of anthropogenic aerosols will decline, due to coemission with GHG, and measures to improve air quality. However, the combined climate effect of GHG and aerosol emissions over the industrial era is poorly constrained. Here we show the climate impacts from removing present‐day anthropogenic aerosol emissions and compare them to the impacts from moderate GHG‐dominated global warming. Removing aerosols induces a global mean surface heating of 0.5–1.1°C, and precipitation increase of 2.0–4.6%. Extreme weather indices also increase. We find a higher sensitivity of extreme events to aerosol reductions, per degree of surface warming, in particular over the major aerosol emission regions. Under near‐term warming, we find that regional climate change will depend strongly on the balance between aerosol and GHG forcing.

Plain Language Summary
To keep within 1.5 or 2° of global warming, we need massive reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, aerosol emissions will be strongly reduced. We show how cleaning up aerosols, predominantly sulfate, may add an additional half a degree of global warming, with impacts that strengthen those from greenhouse gas warming. The northern hemisphere is found to be more sensitive to aerosol removal than greenhouse gas warming, because of where the aerosols are emitted today. This means that it does not only matter whether or not we reach international climate targets. It also matters how we get there.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017GL076079

 

Edited December 5, 2018 by StringJunky

[rangerx]

Carbon sequestration

[zapatos]

Increased deaths will result in fewer people adding greenhouse gasses.

[Sensei]

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

But is there an effect that slows down the warming?

Black surface is absorbing energy from photons. White surface is reflecting photons. So the more snow, the larger amount of energy that is reflected toward cosmic space.

Also white clouds are reflecting light.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo

"Albedo (/ælˈbiːdoʊ/) (Latin: albedo, meaning 'whiteness') is the measure of the diffuse reflection of solar radiation out of the total solar radiation received by an astronomical body (e.g. a planet like Earth). It is dimensionless and measured on a scale from 0 (corresponding to a black body that absorbs all incident radiation) to 1 (corresponding to a body that reflects all incident radiation)."

(check table on Wikipedia page with albedoes of ocean, ice, snow etc.)

 

This could be used to actively decrease Earth's temperature by placing large white-colored materials floating on e.g. oceans or barren lands.

 

Sooner or later, there will be required cosmic-scale remotely-controlled infrastructure with millions or billions of mirrors, placed between the Sun and the Earth, which will be reflecting light from star.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Sensei

[Carrock]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Increased deaths will result in fewer people adding greenhouse gasses.

Homo Sap., like e.g. rats and cockroaches are very good at surviving in impoverished environments.

Relying on Malthusian reduction to reduce pollution will result in a terrible environment.

 

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

Many effects of Global Warming might speed up Global Warming. But is their an effect that slows down the warming?

10 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Black surface is absorbing energy from photons. White surface is reflecting photons. So the more snow, the larger amount of energy that is reflected toward cosmic space.

Also white clouds are reflecting light....

 

Melting ice sheets and less snow cover will reduce albedo and increase warming.

[Itoero]

Melting ice sheets can also increase volcanic eruptions.https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2017/11/30/why-shrinking-glaciers-could-mean-more-volcanic-eruptions

They found 91volcanoes under the ice sheet in West-Antarctica. This the largest volcanic region on Earth. Volcanic eruptions may not reach the surface but could melt the ice from beneath and drastically destabilise it.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/12/scientists-discover-91-volcanos-antarctica

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subglacial_volcano

*************

Arctic methane release is the release of methane from seas and soils in permafrost regions of the Arctic. While a long-term natural process, it is exacerbated by global warming. This results in a positive feedback effect, as methane is itself a powerful greenhouse gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_emissions

************

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:33 AM, Sensei said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo

"Albedo (/ælˈbiːdoʊ/) (Latin: albedo, meaning 'whiteness') is the measure of the diffuse reflection of solar radiation out of the total solar radiation received by an astronomical body (e.g. a planet like Earth). It is dimensionless and measured on a scale from 0 (corresponding to a black body that absorbs all incident radiation) to 1 (corresponding to a body that reflects all incident radiation)."

(check table on Wikipedia page with albedoes of ocean, ice, snow etc.)

Very interesting.

The production of solar energy in cities is a way to diminish our dependency to fossil fuels, and is a good way to mitigate global warming by lowering the emission of greenhouse gases.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2014.00014/full

Edited December 7, 2018 by Itoero

[Sensei]

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

The production of solar energy in cities is a way to diminish our dependency to fossil fuels, (....)

..as long as there is no smog..

In e.g. Beijing it would not be possible (at the moment) due to extensive smog present in the city..

 

[Carrock]

13 minutes ago, Sensei said:

..as long as there is no smog..

In e.g. Beijing it would not be possible (at the moment) due to extensive smog present in the city..

 

A well known side effect of increased use of solar energy is less smog.

[zapatos]

17 minutes ago, Carrock said:

A well known side effect of increased use of solar energy is less smog.

Only if a decrease in fossil fuels accompanies the increased use of solar. Has the world seen less smog since we began using solar?

[Carrock]

48 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Only if a decrease in fossil fuels accompanies the increased use of solar. Has the world seen less smog since we began using solar?

I suppose I should really say that so far increasing the use of solar reduces the increase of non solar power.

[zapatos]

49 minutes ago, Carrock said:

I suppose I should really say that so far increasing the use of solar reduces the increase of non solar power.

Then back to Sensei's point, Beijing cannot join in.

[Carrock]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Then back to Sensei's point, Beijing cannot join in.

Smog varies with the weather and ~60% solar power on high smog days is better than none.

[Itoero]

Many towns have to much smog.

An anti-smog cannon has been trialled in Delhi. By spraying out water, it aims to combat the capital's toxic air.

Edited December 7, 2018 by Itoero

[zapatos]

43 minutes ago, Carrock said:

Smog varies with the weather and ~60% solar power on high smog days is better than none.

Is it? Is it cost effective at 60%? Why not build it elsewhere if that is all you are going to get? It's not as if China doesn't have land available.

[MigL]

Most systems tend towards equilibrium.
There are many feedback signals which regulate swings away from equilibrium.

Global warming makes the environment more favorable for plant based life and less favorable for animal based life.
Eventually the Earth will be more heavily covered in plant life, sequestering carbon and freeing oxygen, and have much less animal life producing CO2, and climate will swing back the other way.
Unfortunately humanity may not be around to see it.

[Itoero]

7 hours ago, MigL said:

Eventually the Earth will be more heavily covered in plant life

Like it used to be? It's a very slow process but humanity is learning how, to deal with global warming.

[iNow]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

Global warming makes the environment more favorable for plant based life and less favorable for animal based life.

Plants like CO2, but they don’t like droughts, floods, and high temperatures. It’s not so simple, depends on the location, and also on type of plant. 

[zapatos]

4 hours ago, Itoero said:

 It's a very slow process but humanity is learning how, to deal with global warming.

Are we? In what way? It looks to me as if we are simply dealing with issues as we've always done by putting power lines back up, burying the dead, moving, gutting your house and rebuilding, etc. Is there anything we are doing proactively, or that is unique to dealing with global warming?

[dimreepr]

11 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Are we? In what way? 

 

burying head in the sand...

[Itoero]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Are we? In what way? It looks to me as if we are simply dealing with issues as we've always done by putting power lines back up, burying the dead, moving, gutting your house and rebuilding, etc. Is there anything we are doing proactively, or that is unique to dealing with global warming?

In many countries electric cars and hybrids with low CO2-emission  are on the rise and there are many plans/goals to replace current vehicles.

The technology/knowledge  concerning solar power ( and other 'renewable energy') is improving. An anti-smog cannon has been trialled in Delhi. By spraying out water, it aims to combat the capital's toxic air.

The production of solar energy in cities is a way to diminish our dependency to fossil fuels, and is a good way to mitigate global warming by lowering the emission of greenhouse gases. The use of solar power will decrease the smog since people will need less fossil fuel. Solar cells are more lucrative with less smog. The dependacy on fossil fuel is in a sense a vicious circle people have to break trough.

The technology to purify ocean water used to be very expensive but the technology s now 'self-sufficient' and not so expensive by using blue energy. Global warming increases the necessity for fresh water.

Humanity will IMO learn how to severely slow down Global warming(or turn it in Global cooling ) or to live with it.

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

burying head in the sand…

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:33 AM, Sensei said:

his could be used to actively decrease Earth's temperature by placing large white-colored materials floating on e.g. oceans or barren lands.

In Swiss they covered a glacier with high tech white blankets to protect him from the sun.https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/swiss-town-glacier-blanket-180968451/

That's a start.

Edited December 8, 2018 by Itoero

[Essay]

On 12/5/2018 at 3:31 PM, Itoero said:

Many effects of Global Warming might speed up Global Warming. But is their an effect that slows down the warming?

As desertification spreads, albedo increases.  Planetary albedo is a major player in the climate equilibrium.  But I'm guessing that loss of (high albedo) ice fields, and less snow cover overall, will offset any increases from spreading deserts.

On the brighter side, they now seem to realize it's not just about cutting emissions, but about more properly managing the carbon cycle.

Put more carbon in soils to meet Paris climate pledges (Dec. 3, 2018)

Quote

"Take these eight steps to make soils more resilient to drought, produce more food and store emissions...."

Soils are crucial to managing climate change. They contain two to three times more carbon than the atmosphere. ....Increasing the carbon content of the world’s soils by just a few parts per thousand (0.4%) each year would remove an amount of CO2 from the atmosphere equivalent to the fossil-fuel emissions of the European Union (around 3–4 gigatonnes (Gt)). It would also boost soil health: in studies across Africa, Asia and Latin America, increasing soil carbon by 0.4% each year enhanced crop yields by 1.3%.

As we've been saying for years now!  There are ways to synergize solutions.

And, AND! That Nature article didn't even mention adding charcoal to the soil, which multiplies the soil's capacity to hold carbon, as a part of their eight-step plan.

Along with Foley's five-step plan, we can achieve those 17 sustainability goals. 

As the Nature article says, "...researchers, policymakers and land managers need to recognize that increasing soil carbon stocks and protecting carbon-rich soils is crucial for achieving the Paris climate targets and SDGs."

Reduce and reclaim deserts, and save the Arctic and high mountain albedo!

~

 

[Itoero]

Is it possible to create a molecule that binds with CO2 and blocks its greenhouse effect?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Itoero said:

Is it possible to create a molecule that binds with CO2 and blocks its greenhouse effect?

Smog.

[Itoero]

Just now, dimreepr said: