Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: "Stupid" Questions :o  (Read 610681 times)

Glen Koehler

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 238
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 242
  • Likes Given: 381
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3050 on: February 09, 2020, 12:56:31 AM »
     In something like RCP8.5, where the 8.5 is watts per square meter IIRC, how do you translate that to equilibrium temperature change?
     In a 2012 article by James Hansen et al. using an energy balance perspective to describe global warming, they state that each 1 watt/m2 of extra energy translates into about 0.75C warming once temperature has reached equilibrium.  But reaching equilibrium takes a long time (more than decades, call it 200 years if you want a number). 

    RCP8.5 refers to 8.5 watts/m2 by 2100.  So based on that ratio the RCP8.5 scenario should lead to ca. 6C warming.  But charts by IPCC, Global Carbon project, etc. show the RCP8.5 scenario global average surface temperature anomaly over preindustrial (when CO2 was ca. 278ppm vs ca. 1200ppm at 2100 in RCP8.5) as 3.2 to 5.4C, with a median estimate of 4.3C.  That is less than 6 because of the lag.  Thus, if CO2e stayed at 1200ppm for a long time, the temperature would gradually approach the +6C level over time.

   At least that is how I understand it from a "not a climate scientist" perspective.  The immediate temperature response (TCR - transient climate response) is substantially less than the long term equilibrium temperature response (ECS - equilibrium climate sensitivity).

   Some things to note - there has been some interesting commentary within the last few weeks about overuse/misuse of the RCP8.5 high end emissions scenario.  Hausfather and Peters recently published a commentary, which led to more commentaries by Michael Mann etc.  Among other things, RCP8.5 is quite unrealistic with an assumption of rapidly increasing coal consumption out to 2100. 

   There is consensus that RCP8.5 is an unlikely scenario, and Hausfather and Peters make the point that scientists should not point to that as the basis for future projections.  An article last summer also pointed out that RCP8.5 was never intended for how is too often used, i.e. as a prediction of what will happen. 

    But while there is consensus that RCP8.5 is not a forecast of what will be, there is recognition that it is also still within the realm of plausible outcomes and shouldn't be completely disregarded, especially as new observations and research find reinforcing (aka "positive") feedback mechanisms that are either previously unknown, more vigorous than previously estimated, or not represented in the previous generation of climate models.  There is also consensus that reducing the attention given to RCP8.5 in no way argues against the immediacy or severity of the climate crisis. See Michael Mann's short commentary to hear from somebody who actually knows this stuff
http://redgreenandblue.org/2020/02/05/michael-mann-just-bad-climate-change-kept-business-usual/ 
    (note - the chart Mann uses shows upper emissions curve from SSP85 not RCP8.5, with 2100 temperature anomaly at a rounded off 5C instead of the RCP8.5 median temp. of 4.3).

    If you want to really freak out, read about the first versions of new batch of CMIP6 climate models generating an ECS much higher than the previous generation.  Only a small portion of the CMIP6 models have published output yet, so this is still a developing story.  And experts seem to think that it is more likely a bias in the first implementations of the CMIP6 models than a new discovery of much higher sensitivity of the climate system to our CO2 highjinks.  But it also suggests that our understanding and best estimate of ECS (as measured by a doubling of CO2 after rising 1% per year) is not likely to go down with the new models. 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2020, 09:40:20 PM by Glen Koehler »

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1223
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 341
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3051 on: February 09, 2020, 08:57:42 AM »
  If you want to really freak out, read about the first versions of new batch of CMIP6 climate models generating an ECS much higher than the previous generation.  Only a small portion of the CMIP6 models have published output yet, so this is still a developing story.

One at least of the reasons for the higher equilibrium of the new model runs is the inclusion of more robust data on cloud formation - by far the biggest unknown in the whole AGW saga. It turns out that rather than being neutral, cloud formation could well be a positive reinforcement in a warmer world.

An excellent overview is here, from a Yale Universtiy on-line publication.
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

karl dubhe2

  • New ice
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3052 on: February 09, 2020, 04:12:26 PM »
Karl, have you, by chance, changed the theme?

There are themes?    :o

No, I've not looked at the settings at all.   Maybe something in my own system has glitched.   I'll try to mess with them now, maybe it's something in there.   :)

On edit; that did the trick. thanks.  :)
« Last Edit: February 11, 2020, 02:32:44 PM by karl dubhe2 »

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3053 on: February 09, 2020, 06:23:04 PM »
If the Corona virus can survive for 9 days. And you order something on-line. And lets say that somebody sniezes on your stuff just before they ship it. It will be anywhere in half a day. Would it be able to survive the conditions in a airplaine ?

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1223
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 341
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3054 on: February 09, 2020, 06:28:24 PM »
If the Corona virus can survive for 9 days. And you order something on-line. And lets say that somebody sniezes on your stuff just before they ship it. It will be anywhere in half a day. Would it be able to survive the conditions in a airplaine ?

Well, I'd give it a try if you're really that curious. Order some used facemasks from the Wuhan hospital and breath through them while sleeping, and see what happens.
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3055 on: February 09, 2020, 06:37:44 PM »
It does likes cold conditions. And it's not warm in these transporters, something like 7 degree celcius.

nanning

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1885
  • 0Kg CO2, 35 KWh/wk,130L H2O/wk, No offspring
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 291
  • Likes Given: 14856
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3056 on: February 10, 2020, 08:44:23 AM »
In my understanding, the humidity during transport is also important. If it's drying out the virus will likely not 'survive'.
"It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly" - Bertrand Russell
"It is preoccupation with what other people from your groups think of you, that prevents you from living freely and nobly" - Nanning S. Poelsma
Prisons in your head!

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1223
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 341
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3057 on: February 10, 2020, 09:05:08 AM »
I wonder if there is any limit to the stupidity, I guess not. The Internet is simply bristling with information, here is what the World Health Organisation has to say about receiving packages from China:

Quote
Yes, it is safe. People receiving packages from China are not at risk of contracting the new coronavirus. From previous analysis, we know coronaviruses do not survive long on objects, such as letters or packages.
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3058 on: February 10, 2020, 01:10:21 PM »
Quote
Yes, it is safe. People receiving packages from China are not at risk of contracting the new coronavirus. From previous analysis, we know coronaviruses do not survive long on objects, such as letters or packages.

There was no way for the WHO to say that with any good scientific certainty before the 9 day study came out. The only reason to say such a thing would be that typically bugs do not survive longer than 24hrs without a host. Leaving it up after the many up revisions on the infectiveness of this bug is irresponsible.

If it can survive for 9 days, it may survive shipping.

I'm not saying it will survive it, but it is unscientific to declare packages safe given the evidence. The certainty used in that page  SCREAMS politics and unscientific thinking. True science speaks in terms of uncertainty.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

karl dubhe2

  • New ice
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3059 on: February 10, 2020, 02:23:56 PM »
Quote
Yes, it is safe. People receiving packages from China are not at risk of contracting the new coronavirus. From previous analysis, we know coronaviruses do not survive long on objects, such as letters or packages.



If it can survive for 9 days, it may survive shipping.

I'

Erm, I do believe that they said it might take up to two weeks before the symptoms start to show, that would mean the bug's inside a person during that time.  Not on a package that gets put on a plane, or in a ship, then transported overseas.   Different kettles of fish, man.   :)

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2847
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 536
  • Likes Given: 131
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3060 on: February 10, 2020, 02:24:27 PM »
Would microwaving anything sent from China (unless that would damage it) do any good to make extra sure it is safe?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1223
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 341
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3061 on: February 10, 2020, 02:30:48 PM »
Would microwaving anything sent from China (unless that would damage it) do any good to make extra sure it is safe?
And how on earth would we know? Is this forum suddenly authoritative on virus pandemics and microbiology? My totally uninformed guess is that microwaving would make no difference, unless you soaked the package in water first (microwaves only work on water molecules), probably a good idea to deep-freeze it afterwards in 100 proof Tennesse whiskey!
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

gandul

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3062 on: February 10, 2020, 02:34:04 PM »
Would microwaving anything sent from China (unless that would damage it) do any good to make extra sure it is safe?

This is a stupid question indeed.

I would recommend not to microwave anything sent from China unless you want to learn a posteriori if it was safe for the microwave and for the item in question. Chances are you are going to burn some stuff  to keep safe from viruses.

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3782
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1330
  • Likes Given: 2129
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3063 on: February 10, 2020, 02:34:42 PM »
And how on earth would we know?

Why would you answer if you don't know the answer, Binntho?
Unlearn things daily.

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3782
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1330
  • Likes Given: 2129
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3064 on: February 10, 2020, 02:36:58 PM »
This is a stupid question indeed.

If the question is so stupid, the answer is obvious, right?

Can you point me to a study giving this obvious answer?

Unlearn things daily.

gandul

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3065 on: February 10, 2020, 03:01:34 PM »
This is a stupid question indeed.

If the question is so stupid, the answer is obvious, right?

Can you point me to a study giving this obvious answer?

I gave my best answer to a question that really fits into this thread.

Don't microwave any mechandise, it is a lot of energy that either is going to heat up something containing water, or is going to create electrical arcs with metallic stuff, and burn paper and plastic around or nearby.

And while your kitchen happily burns perhaps the virus survives, who knows

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3782
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1330
  • Likes Given: 2129
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3066 on: February 10, 2020, 03:10:38 PM »
... who knows

So, you don't?

Tom included the 'unless that would damage it' part on purpose i guess.


Unlearn things daily.

dnem

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 117
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3067 on: February 10, 2020, 03:28:33 PM »
I would think that wearing gloves and wiping down the surfaces of the package with alcohol wipes as you opened it would be more effective, if you were concerned. Bag up the waste and wash up well after you are done.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3068 on: February 10, 2020, 03:48:53 PM »
Quote
Erm, I do believe that they said it might take up to two weeks before the symptoms start to show, that would mean the bug's inside a person during that time.

That's a different thing. In the human body, incubation can take up to 14 days. Outside of a warm and wet host, coronavirus can last 9 days.

Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and its inactivation with biocidal agents

https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/S0195-6701(20)30046-3/fulltext

Quote
currently, the emergence of a novel human coronavirus, temporary named 2019-nCoV, has become a global health concern causing severe respiratory tract infections in humans. Human-to-human transmissions have been described with incubation times between 2-10 days, facilitating its spread via droplets, contaminated hands or surfaces. We therefore reviewed the literature on all available information about the persistence of human and veterinary coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces as well as inactivation strategies with biocidal agents used for chemical disinfection, e.g. in healthcare facilities. The analysis of 22 studies reveals that human coronaviruses such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) coronavirus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) coronavirus or endemic human coronaviruses (HCoV) can persist on inanimate surfaces like metal, glass or plastic for up to 9 days, but can be efficiently inactivated by surface disinfection procedures with 62-71% ethanol, 0.5% hydrogen peroxide or 0.1% sodium hypochlorite within 1 minute. Other biocidal agents such as 0.05-0.2% benzalkonium chloride or 0.02% chlorhexidine digluconate are less effective. As no specific therapies are available for 2019-nCoV, early containment and prevention of further spread will be crucial to stop the ongoing outbreak and to control this novel infectious thread.

It is important to know that just a quick wipe is not enough. The effective chemicals may evaporate before the spot is sterile. The chance that a wipe misses its target is very high. There must be soaking for at least 30 seconds, a minute is better.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3069 on: February 10, 2020, 04:55:57 PM »
Tom - wipe it with alcohol, but please don't microwave it. Remember the chance of infection from a dry air-shippped package is quite low, so don't overworry yourself beyond exercising basic caution.
Hereabouts there is no problem - packages from China take a month or two (or three) to arrive. Yay.

nanning

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1885
  • 0Kg CO2, 35 KWh/wk,130L H2O/wk, No offspring
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 291
  • Likes Given: 14856
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3070 on: February 10, 2020, 05:39:25 PM »
Tom, have you googled it before you made another "what about this?" - post?

I personally find it a bit irritating that you post many of those kinds of questions and you don't seem to make an effort to find the information or think of some explanation yourself. Sorry if this comes as a surprise. I am not telling you how to post, just that i find it a bit irritating, that's all.
"It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly" - Bertrand Russell
"It is preoccupation with what other people from your groups think of you, that prevents you from living freely and nobly" - Nanning S. Poelsma
Prisons in your head!

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3071 on: February 10, 2020, 05:51:53 PM »
9 days of persistence on top of objects. That is the best data I've seen. This is not typical of influenza that can hardly last 24 hours without a proper environment. Given the probable persistence of  CoV, there is a very real chance that the virus reaches someone on a package that is soiled with fluid and it is shipped via air. That chance is real but it is also very, very low while the number of infected remain "low".

Probably not worth worrying about.

About Alcohol wipes.

1. They can only disinfect the places you reach. Any area you missed it is not disinfected.
2. Even if you reach an area, if the alcohol does not persist for at least a minute, disinfection may not happen.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3072 on: February 10, 2020, 06:51:52 PM »
I bought 2 t-shirts in China 3 weeks ago. I think i'm not going to collect them at the door. Than they go to the post office, and i have 2 weeks to pick them up. Just to be sure.

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1666
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 329
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3073 on: February 10, 2020, 07:19:01 PM »
I bought 2 t-shirts in China 3 weeks ago. I think i'm not going to collect them at the door. Than they go to the post office, and i have 2 weeks to pick them up. Just to be sure.

In two weeks, there might be somebody in line with you at the post office who is coughing virus.
Much easier to take the package as delivered, toss it into a closet, wash your hands, then open the package in a week.
 

be cause

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1150
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 445
  • Likes Given: 326
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3074 on: February 10, 2020, 07:29:49 PM »
piss on your package and leave outdoors for several weeks . Repeat the piss taking daily ..
2007 + 5 = 2012 + 4 = 2016 + 3 = 2019 + 2 = 2021 
 (phew)

kassy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1776
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 687
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3075 on: February 10, 2020, 07:35:29 PM »
Of course the safest thing to do is not to order crap from china. Local shirts might be uglier but well you can actually embroider or improve them if you want too.

Oh and i dont care about germs but why would you order something from across the world which you can buy in town?

This all wastes fossil fuels and it persistently erodes the local economy too.

Also i agree with nanning.

Second since this is in Arctic Sea Ice the long title of this thread should be read as Stupid questions about sea ice in a broad sense which does not actually include germs on crap you don´t need.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3076 on: February 10, 2020, 07:38:28 PM »
Than it's probably mutated, we have 4 cats walking around, squirls, hedghogs, rabbits, foxes....In summer there are plenty bats. I just leave it at the post office.

HapHazard

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 1605
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3077 on: February 10, 2020, 09:39:20 PM »
reading the last dozen posts here have left me vulnerable to being contaminated by the stupid virus lol

Stephan

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1149
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3078 on: February 10, 2020, 10:00:52 PM »
I haven't read them at all - I confess
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

PragmaticAntithesis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3079 on: February 16, 2020, 04:19:11 PM »
Now that we are near the end of freezing season, I've noticed there are huge swings in daily extent gains, and even losses. Why is the behaviour of sea ice extent so wildly inconsistent around this time of year?
A single seed in the right place can sprout an entire forest.

binntho

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1223
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 341
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3080 on: February 16, 2020, 06:05:42 PM »
Now that we are near the end of freezing season, I've noticed there are huge swings in daily extent gains, and even losses. Why is the behaviour of sea ice extent so wildly inconsistent around this time of year?

Why would you expect it to be stable? The ice can at this moment only expand into open ocean, where currents and contrary winds can and will cause large fluctuations. By far the biggest difference in extent from one day to another, and indeed from one year to another, during these winter months, is due to the vagaries of winds and have little or nothing to do with temperatures.
because a thing is eloquently expressed it should not be taken to be as necessarily true
St. Augustine, Confessions V, 6

PragmaticAntithesis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3081 on: February 16, 2020, 07:03:25 PM »
Now that we are near the end of freezing season, I've noticed there are huge swings in daily extent gains, and even losses. Why is the behaviour of sea ice extent so wildly inconsistent around this time of year?

Why would you expect it to be stable? The ice can at this moment only expand into open ocean, where currents and contrary winds can and will cause large fluctuations. By far the biggest difference in extent from one day to another, and indeed from one year to another, during these winter months, is due to the vagaries of winds and have little or nothing to do with temperatures.

So, would I be correct in saying that the wind is blowing the ice around, which affects sea ice dispersion (and therefore extent) while sea ice volume remains relatively stable?
A single seed in the right place can sprout an entire forest.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8065
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2796
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3082 on: February 16, 2020, 07:12:04 PM »
Now that we are near the end of freezing season, I've noticed there are huge swings in daily extent gains, and even losses. Why is the behaviour of sea ice extent so wildly inconsistent around this time of year?

Why would you expect it to be stable? The ice can at this moment only expand into open ocean, where currents and contrary winds can and will cause large fluctuations. By far the biggest difference in extent from one day to another, and indeed from one year to another, during these winter months, is due to the vagaries of winds and have little or nothing to do with temperatures.

So, would I be correct in saying that the wind is blowing the ice around, which affects sea ice dispersion (and therefore extent) while sea ice volume remains relatively stable?
Yes, in the peripheral seas, though above freezing temperatures are being brought into the Southern Barents and Kara sea on occasion. In the main Arctic Ocean, temperatures are still well below that necessary for further ice thickening. Hence volume will likely max out in April.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

PragmaticAntithesis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3083 on: March 04, 2020, 11:04:05 PM »
It's cold north of 80 latitude but warmer than average in the lower latitudes. Not a good pattern for the sea ice because the Fram export is high and the thick ice will leave anyway but the land snow is starting to melt more quickly

With the polar weather being quite cold, is it not possible for thick ice in the CAB to form quickly enough to outpace Fram export?
A single seed in the right place can sprout an entire forest.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3084 on: March 04, 2020, 11:09:19 PM »
Thick ice takes a long time to grow, even when the weather is cold. It is now too late in the season for 2 or 3 meter ice. So if enough thick ice is exported, you will get large areas of thinner ice as a replacement.

mdenis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3085 on: March 06, 2020, 02:13:30 PM »
Hello, i'm working on a project about arctic ice melting but I have a question.

I recently read on an article "For each tonne of carbon dioxide that a person emits anywhere on this planet, 3m2 (± 0.1m2) of Arctic summer sea ice disappears."
However, I don't understand why the number is given in square meters and not in cubic meters. 3m2 could be a huge volume if there is a lot of ice under that surface or a small volume if the ice is thin.
Can you please explain that to me or give me an average equivalent in cubic meters ?

kassy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1776
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 687
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3086 on: March 07, 2020, 01:58:05 PM »
Could you add the link of the article?
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

oren

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3087 on: March 07, 2020, 02:09:06 PM »
That number is derived by long term correlation and is not based on direct physical calculations.
Physical reality is much more complicated.

kassy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1776
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 687
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3088 on: March 08, 2020, 11:29:16 AM »
I was playing around with maps on:
https://www.wetterzentrale.de/nl/topkarten.php?map=2&model=gfs&var=53&time=0&run=6&lid=OP&h=0&mv=0&tr=3

It has 5 types of precipitation.
Regen is rain
Schnee is snow

Gefr. Regen is ? (freezing rain? sleet?)

Eiskorn is hail

Schauer is ?

Toggling the website to english does not help as it translates map options and not the 5 types displayed...
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

pleun

  • New ice
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3089 on: March 08, 2020, 11:35:13 AM »
schauer are showers  (buien)

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3782
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1330
  • Likes Given: 2129
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3090 on: March 08, 2020, 11:54:05 AM »
Gefr. Regen = rain that freezes either hitting the ground or before.

So yeah, sleet is the right translation i guess.
Unlearn things daily.

mdenis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 2

blumenkraft

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3782
  • Fans of Hans Ø Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1330
  • Likes Given: 2129
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3092 on: March 08, 2020, 12:57:03 PM »
Which is based on this paper:

Quote
Abstract
Arctic sea ice is retreating rapidly, raising prospects of a future ice-free Arctic Ocean during summer. Because climate-model simulations of the sea-ice loss differ substantially, we used a robust linear relationship between monthly-mean September sea-ice area and cumulative carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to infer the future evolution of Arctic summer sea ice directly from the observational record. The observed linear relationship implies a sustained loss of 3 ± 0.3 square meters of September sea-ice area per metric ton of CO2 emission. On the basis of this sensitivity, Arctic sea ice will be lost throughout September for an additional 1000 gigatons of CO2 emissions. Most models show a lower sensitivity, which is possibly linked to an underestimation of the modeled increase in incoming longwave radiation and of the modeled transient climate response
.

Link >> https://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6313/747
Unlearn things daily.

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 711
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3093 on: March 08, 2020, 01:24:08 PM »
Hello, i'm working on a project about arctic ice melting but I have a question.

I recently read on an article "For each tonne of carbon dioxide that a person emits anywhere on this planet, 3m2 (± 0.1m2) of Arctic summer sea ice disappears."
However, I don't understand why the number is given in square meters and not in cubic meters. 3m2 could be a huge volume if there is a lot of ice under that surface or a small volume if the ice is thin.
Can you please explain that to me or give me an average equivalent in cubic meters ?

Its about Watts, not Joules. Adding carbon dioxide affects the energy transfer (by changing how radiation is transmitted though the atmosphere). Same with sea ice area (by changing how radiation is emitted and absorbed at the surface). The energy transfers care far more about whether sea is covered by ice, than by how thick that ice is. 

Short term changes in response to short term energy imbalances are strongly affected by ice volume, but in long term averages its the factors that affect the energy transfers that change in response to one another.


mdenis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3094 on: March 08, 2020, 04:12:49 PM »
Oh I see, now it makes sense. Thanks for the answer. So if I understand correctly, it's better to think in terms of surface rather than volume because what really affects arctic sea ice melting is the albedo effect in which surface removal is more impactful then volume ?

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 711
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3095 on: March 08, 2020, 07:15:33 PM »
Oh I see, now it makes sense. Thanks for the answer. So if I understand correctly, it's better to think in terms of surface rather than volume because what really affects arctic sea ice melting is the albedo effect in which surface removal is more impactful then volume ?

Partly, but higher heat loss from ice free sea when the sun isn't shining is also relevant.

The timescale is also important. If you are thinking about whether a particular bit of ice will have melted out tomorrow, or next week, or survive till autumn, then volume is important. If you are thinking about how different the 365 day average is from one decade to the next, its area that is key.

Volume is an unnecessary complication in a simple model that looks at broad trends, but  complex ones that try to predict the day to day changes have to include it.

PragmaticAntithesis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3096 on: March 13, 2020, 08:32:03 PM »
a) Solar minimum has been reached, new max expected for 2024/25, that's not that far out hence the increase curve should be steep.

https://electroverse.net/the-sun-has-been-spotless-for-224-days-in-2019/

Speaking of this, might a solar minimum similar to that of the Maunder Minimum significantly counteract the effects of anthropocene climate change, or are we looking at something on a much smaller scale re: sunspots.
A single seed in the right place can sprout an entire forest.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2847
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 536
  • Likes Given: 131
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3097 on: March 13, 2020, 09:26:06 PM »
Maunder Minimum is second order at best, compared to aerosols and GHGs
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

PragmaticAntithesis

  • New ice
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3098 on: March 13, 2020, 09:43:15 PM »
And yet, it still caused mass crop failures. Yikes, our climate a rather sensitive, isn't it?

Edit: typo
« Last Edit: March 13, 2020, 09:53:40 PM by PragmaticAntithesis »
A single seed in the right place can sprout an entire forest.

KiwiGriff

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 645
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 100
Re: "Stupid" Questions :o
« Reply #3099 on: March 13, 2020, 09:55:36 PM »
A maunder minimum would drop temperatures by about 0.3C  15 years warming at our present rate of around 0.2C a decade.
Quote
it is certainly interesting to explore what effects such a minimum might have on 21st century climate if it did occur. This is precisely the question Stefan Rahmstorf and I investigated in a study published last year (see also our press release. (Earlier estimates for the size of this effect can be found here and here.) In our study we find that a new Maunder Minimum would lead to a cooling of 0.3°C in the year 2100 at most – relative to an expected anthropogenic warming of around 4°C. (The amount of warming in the 21st century depends on assumptions about future emissions, of course).
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/06/what-if-the-sun-went-into-a-new-grand-minimum/

Also of note ELECTROVERSE are a bunch of gibbering cranks. links to such a source do not belong on this forum.
There are data sources that do not encourage visiting such sites and raising their profile on search engines.