53 replies to this topic

[Weather Ship]

jethro, on 16 June 2010 - 14:42 , said:

Will more Ozone make us warmer or colder?

Tropospheric or stratospheric ozone?

[jethro]

Either and both.

[Weather Ship]

jethro, on 19 December 2010 - 23:07 , said:

Either and both.

Briefly regarding stratospheric ozone.

Stratospheric ozone absorbs significant amounts of both incoming ultraviolet radiation, harmful to life, and outgoing terrestrial long-wave reradiation, so that its overall thermal role is a complex one. Its net effect on earrh surface temperatures depends on the elevation at which the absorption occurs, being to some extent a trade-off between short-and long-wave absorption in that:

1 An increase of ozone above about 30 km absorbs relatively more incoming short-wave radiation, causing a net decrease of surface temperatures.

2 An increase of ozone below about 25 km absorbs relatively more outgoing long-wave radiation, causing a net increase of surface temperatures.

[Weather Ship]

Aerosols: Tiny Particles, Big Impact.
Take a deep breath. Even if the air looks clear, it’s nearly certain that you’ll inhale tens of millions of solid particles and liquid droplets. These ubiquitous specks of matter are known as aerosols, and they can be found in the air over oceans, deserts, mountains, forests, ice, and every ecosystem in between. They drift in Earth’s atmosphere from the stratosphere to the surface and range in size from a few nanometers—less than the width of the smallest viruses—to several several tens of micrometers—about the diameter of human hair. Despite their small size, they have major impacts on our climate and our health.
http://earthobservat...osols/page1.php

This map shows the global distribution of aerosols and the proportion of those aerosols that are large or small. Intense colors indicate a thick layer of aerosols. Yellow areas are predominantly coarse particles, like dust, and red areas are mainly fine aerosols, like smoke or pollution. Gray indicates areas with no data. (NASA map by Robert Simmon, based on MODIS data from NASA Earth Observations.)

Image NASA

[Timini Cricket]

Ozone has a short half life, especially in the presence of water and organic matter, a few minutes at ambient temperature, before it oxidises some reduced substance ( e.g. an incompletely oxidised hydrocarbon) or forms hydroxyl free radicals with water. Despite a continuous cycle of production from chemical sources, electrical ionisation and radiation, below 12 Km, ozone is so transient as to have negligible effects on the long wave radiation in the Troposphere, compared to the major component greenhouse gases.


In the Stratosphere, it's half-life is also quite short due to thermal decomposition, but measured in units of a few days near the Stratopause at 270K, up to months near the colder Tropopause at about 220K.

As well as screening the more active solar ultraviolet radiation wavelengths, the Ozone layer absorbs solar infrared too in the complex series of photo- and thermo-chemical reactions of the Chapman cycle, and little if any of this part of the longer wave solar spectrum directly reaches the troposphere. Atmospheric chemists usually like to discount the thermal part of the reaction by invoking an entity "M" which stands for "a molecule that carries off the excess heat", a sort of a non-specific catalyst. This is a peculiar kludge by chemists, who are usually as obsessive as accountants in making their books or equations balance.

edit to make quotation marks balance!

Edited by Timini Cricket, 21 December 2010 - 22:55 .

[Weather Ship]

In a study published December 20 in the Proceedings of the National Academy Sciences (PNAS), a team of researchers including University of New Hampshire scientists Wilfred Wollheim, William McDowell, and Jody Potter details findings that show emissions of the potent greenhouse gas nitrous oxide from global rivers and streams are three times previous estimates used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the leading international body for the assessment of climate change.

http://www.eurekaler...h-ush122110.php

[Gray-Wolf]

weather ship, on 22 December 2010 - 10:31 , said:

In a study published December 20 in the Proceedings of the National Academy Sciences (PNAS), a team of researchers including University of New Hampshire scientists Wilfred Wollheim, William McDowell, and Jody Potter details findings that show emissions of the potent greenhouse gas nitrous oxide from global rivers and streams are three times previous estimates used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the leading international body for the assessment of climate change.

http://www.eurekaler...h-ush122110.php

For those of us that see GHG's producing problems for the planet this is another worry (like CO2 levels running beyond the 'W.C.S.' of the TAR4 or the 'methane issues now coming into play) for those who do not see man's influence as a 'problem' 'so what?'

Edited by Gray-Wolf, 22 December 2010 - 12:03 .

[Village]

I personally think its a good thing to try to reduce our emissions relative to energy production. However, one must keep this in perspective.

The best estimates currently are that 97% of the total increase in CO2 can be attributed to natural processes. CO2 is not a polutant, its quite the opposite and the more there is available then the more life there is and this leads to greater diversity also.

Further, we must make sure that we dont restrict too much progress in doing so because ultimately its only progress which will ensure our future. If we do not progress we are most definitely doomed.

Edited by Village, 24 December 2010 - 11:26 .

[Gray-Wolf]

Village, on 24 December 2010 - 11:25 , said:

. If we do not progress we are most definitely doomed.

And if we progress as we have been doing we are most definately doomed.........

[Weather Ship]

Village, on 24 December 2010 - 11:25 , said:

The best estimates currently are that 97% of the total increase in CO2 can be attributed to natural processes. CO2 is not a polutant, its quite the opposite and the more there is available then the more life there is and this leads to greater diversity also.

CO2 levels are higher now than they have been for two million years. Were these natural processes lying dormant all this time?

http://news.national...on-dioxide.html

[Gray-Wolf]

weather ship, on 24 December 2010 - 13:47 , said:

CO2 levels are higher now than they have been for two million years. Were these natural processes lying dormant all this time?

http://news.national...on-dioxide.html

I get the idea someone has abandoned 'understanding' for the "We Use Wishful Thinking" (W.U.W.T.) school of climate study?

Edited by Gray-Wolf, 24 December 2010 - 13:52 .

[Weather Ship]

Clues to future climate may be found in the way an ordinary drinking glass shatters.

http://nsf.gov/news/...g=NSF&from=news

[jethro]

A new paper on "The Brewer-Dobson circulation and total ozone from seasonal to decadal time scales"

http://www.atmos-che...-13829-2011.pdf

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.scienceda...11020145106.htm

Well, hole not fixed yet?