Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - oren

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
Antarctica / Re: PIG has calved
« on: February 20, 2020, 06:40:42 PM »
Amazing photos!

Great shot. How high are those ice cliffs?
Difficult to measure from a distance of about 500m, which is as near as we're going. However, in places we see the bottom of the ice face at about 400 m depth in water column sonar data. Based on a freeboard calculation this implies a cliff height of around 50 m.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 20, 2020, 05:42:55 AM »
South Korea outbreak centred on church in Daegu
South Korea has recorded 31 news cases today, taking its total to 82.

The country’s disease control centre said 30 of the new cases were in the city of Daegu and surrounding Gyeongbuk province south of Seoul.

Of those, 23 are linked with the Shincheonji Church of Jesus, The Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, where the a 61-year-old woman believed to be at the centre of the cluster was a worshipper. The woman is known as Patient 31 because she was the 31st person recorded with the virus in South Korea.

It is now believed that 37 out of the 82 cases are members of the church’s congregation.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 17, 2020, 10:21:11 AM »
We should not be worry about China .
We should be concerned with cases out side of China.
Even more concerning is regions  that are reporting statistically less cases than we should reasonable expect.
Yes. The Chinese are taking harsh measures, and they seem to be working to slow the spread. But other countries are not expected to follow suit.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 16, 2020, 01:43:46 PM »
How long will the Japanese maintain business as usual, and no Plan B for the Olympics? Considering that the Covid-19 appears to be freely circulating now in Japan, but in small numbers for now - will they take the Chinese way of trying to halt the spread with serious economic costs, or will they take the politician's way of kicking the can down the road buying a little bit of time but with a big risk later? This can is not going to be kicked very far, but I suspect they will still try to avoid taking painful steps that might affect the economy (and stock market). Good luck.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 14, 2020, 06:28:47 PM »
Similar outbreaks could easily happen around Carnival, the Hajj, Christmas, Oktoberfest, Semana, and a wide range of other holidays. They too would cause similar difficulty in identifying that a new agent had emerged, and about controlling its spread.
The SAME outbreak may yet happen around Carnival, which is around 2 weeks from today. Let's hope there is no infected carrier currently in Brazil or on its way there unknowingly.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 14, 2020, 01:01:28 PM »
Blumenkraft and Archimid, while I generally enjoy reading your posts, please take this off-topic and disruptive discussion to the off-topic off-topic thread. Or just avoid it altogether.
Sam's very insightful post mentioned the word race in passing, no offense meant, take a deep breath, let it pass.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavir
« on: February 14, 2020, 08:54:09 AM »
For a disease as rapidly spreading and highly fatal as this one, with a period of contagious transmission without obvious symptoms, it is frankly surprising that the Chinese government acted as well as they have to contain it. Had this started anywhere else in the world, it is safe to say that the disease would already have spread globally in massive numbers. I dare say that no other nation was ready to, or willing to take the kind of measures that China has.

Those measures haven’t been sufficient to the task. However, that they were as massively aggressive and as effective as they have been is truly surprising.
Very well said Sam, your whole post. Thanks for sharing.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 13, 2020, 03:09:08 PM »
The cruise ship alone has over 200 confirmed cases. But I think caution is warranted - the virus is probably brewing in half a dozen locations outside China right now. The next two weeks are crucial - if somehow no significant number of new cases are discovered both in and outside China, then maybe we are out of the woods. But the way it has  been popping up here and there, and already with some international clusters (France/UK, Singapore, Vietnam) is disturbing.
And the cruise ship in itself should be a warning sign about the contagiousness (is this a word?) of the virus. One infected person left the ship 3 weeks ago, 10 were discovered when the ship was quarantined, and still it grew to more than 200 including one of those persons in charge of the quarantine. This epidemic appears to be really tough to stop.

Edit: the latest number for the Diamond Princess is 219.

Policy and solutions / Re: A giant dam around the North Sea?
« on: February 13, 2020, 01:39:15 AM »
Sure. It is more a warning:
Thanks for the explanation. In that regard it makes sense - if you will not do the logical thing, this is what you will have to resort to.

Policy and solutions / Re: A giant dam around the North Sea?
« on: February 12, 2020, 10:23:08 PM »
Another stupid, unfeasible idea. Covering the globe with solar panels and batteries and interconnects is cheaper, requires less cooperation, and provides an actual solution rather than a temporary local band-aid. If that is not done yet, why does anyone think this useless, dangerous dam will be built?

The rest / Re: Good music
« on: February 12, 2020, 05:31:07 PM »
A 2015 cover of the classic California Dreamin' by the singer Sia, which I quite enjoy.
The action scenes are taken from the (not so good) movie San Andreas, to which the cover served as soundtrack.

Antarctica / Re: Antarctic images
« on: February 11, 2020, 05:46:59 PM »
Nobody needs a non-local holiday. Tourism didn't exist before 1900. 
Nanning - while I very much get your point about tourism causing environmental and social problems, please don't bend facts to serve opinions. It made me continue the OT streak.
Travel for leisure already existed in 1500BC. Large scale tourism in 1600 (Grand Tour of Europe), mass tourism with the railroads.
It's true though that tourism (and its damage) has been on a sharp growth curve in the last century. And that the rich have always been touring more than the poor.

The rest / Re: Good music
« on: February 11, 2020, 09:28:08 AM »
I thought to listen to Jim Croce this evening.  Thinking of our carbon predicament, I thought this song might be apropos.
Amazing Tor. I was just entering this thread to post a Jim Croce song... the lovely and bittersweet Operator.

Science / Re: Where are we now in CO2e , which pathway are we on?
« on: February 11, 2020, 08:15:24 AM »
Thanks for the calculation rboyd. (NH4 should be CH4).
I note it does not include a timeframe (integration period) so I will take it as the instantaneous value I was looking for, which I would expect to be higher than 100-yr and 20-yr values as those include an assumption of CH4 concentration decay.
What I find weird is that the value of 28 is close to the 100-yr value and much lower than the 20-yr value. Are you sure there isn't some error in the calculation?

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 11, 2020, 07:54:59 AM »
I think it's clear by now that the main danger of the epidemic is when it overwhelms the healthcare system, as happened in Wuhan. Then the death count soars (and surely actual related deaths are higher).
The first big question that has been on everyone's mind is will this become a glonal pandemic.  Looking at the details (long incubation period, highly contagious, asymptomatic transmission, survival on surfaces, very connected world) I really can't see how this can be avoided.
The second big question is will this spread slowly enough and will healthcare services be ready enough (now that more is known about the virus, testing, treatment, avoidance, and production of necessities is geared up) to avoid an overwhelming case rate that saturates the local system. I think the jury is still out on this one. If the pandemic can be managed under control the damage will be much lower. This is what I hope for, at least on a global basis.
Sadly if it starts spreading rapidly in a poor and densely populated country the result could be worse than Wuhan. My fear is that such local catastrophes cannot be avoided at this stage. Will hope against hope that this will not happen.

Walking the walk / Re: Gardening
« on: February 10, 2020, 11:40:56 PM »
Good to hear nanning. Enjoy your new endeavor.
I am glad the forum advice of seeking a communuty garden paid off.

The rest / Re: Economic Inequality
« on: February 10, 2020, 07:27:07 PM »
Found not guilty ? Still gotta pay for jail time
Seriously, the USA is Fucked UP Beyond All Recognition.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: February 10, 2020, 04:44:47 PM »
Sig, it's an easy one. When Tesla itself sells a car at an auction, it should make sure in advance that all software features are enabled or disabled accordingly. Tesla should not be doing audits AFTER the car was sold - that is just plain idiotic. And if Tesla sold a certain car to a dealer "as is" with some features enabled by mistake, it should suck it up and leave the features intact. Tesla might lose some little (potential) revenue, but it might avoid lengthy discussions about its weird/shady/idiotic business practices on its online boards.
I am quite sure Tesla will realize this error in judgement and will correct it.

Science / Re: Trends in atmospheric CH4
« on: February 08, 2020, 11:47:22 PM »
Thank you Stephan for these regular updates.
The trouble with CH4 is that it was supposed to shrink considerably in the last two decades thanks to its short atmospheric residency. That its level was maintained and on the rise in the last few years is a result of continued anthropogenic emissions.
With the othe GHGs, maintaining the level is a great outcome.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Latest PIOMAS update (February 2020)
« on: February 04, 2020, 10:07:36 PM »
I think the new color scheme is quite readable.
My color strategy includes assigning the more distinct colors (black is great) for the more interesting years (2012, 2016 etc.) and giving the less distinct shades to the "filler" years. I also use thicker lines where applicable.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 04, 2020, 06:41:40 PM »
Well said KiwiGriff. The Chinese are taking very drastic measures other countries would be shirking from. Blaming them serves nothing.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 04, 2020, 05:07:58 PM »
The MOH in Singapore has just reported a local transmission cluster associated with a Chinese health food shop that was popular with Chinese tourists. It includes a clear case of transmission from the first Singaporean infected to her Indonesian domestic worker. Worrying.
From the same article, there's this disturbing anecdote:
On Tuesday, Malaysian health authorities also confirmed the first citizen to be infected with the coronavirus, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the country to 10. They said the 41-year-old Malaysian had travelled to Singapore for a meeting last month with colleagues from China - including one from Wuhan. But he showed symptoms only on Jan 29, nearly a week after he returned to Malaysia.
I honestly can't see how this quite contagious virus can be stopped with this kind of incubation period.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 03, 2020, 10:31:17 PM »
Vox_mundi, thank you for frequently updating this thread with reliable and timely news. I find this to be my best source for CoV developments.

Tom - you may have realized this already but your "collapse" sources are uniformly biased. They will probably be right eventually (broken clocks etc ) but when every analysis is biased the value is greatly reduced.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 03, 2020, 01:36:52 PM »
sharing information here for everyone to make up his own mind and opinion.
I managed to read about half, and formed my opinion that it's anti-science nonsense.

Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: February 03, 2020, 12:31:58 PM »
What would building and driving 7.500.000.000 electric cars do to our biosphere?
The total number of fossil fuel powered cars driven on the road is 1.2B, IIRC. 80M are built and sold every year. What does that do to the biosphere? Are those cars "luxury" or not? Regardless, they are still driven. And built.
I can say with confidence that driving 1.2B EVs will harm the biosphere much less than driving these 1.2B ICE cars.
As for building them, I believe the harm to the environment is quite similar. Lithium is needed, but oil is not. Oil mining is very harmful (need I mention fracking?), also EVs last longer than ICE, so less need to be built. Ergo, better.
Note these are relative statements. EV is better than ICE. Not EV is perfect or EV solves all of humanity's problems.
As for affording e-bikes, I believe the state should supply those to anyone for free, and hope this will come to pass one day. But the damage done by these 1.2B ICE cars is too great to ignore, and speeches have failed to convince their owners to stop using cars. So.

Consequences / Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« on: February 02, 2020, 07:05:00 AM »
Wow. Sorry to hear. I hope it gets sorted somehow.  :'( 

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: February 02, 2020, 12:27:43 AM »
Sam, thank you for your many thoughtful insights on this thread.

Science / Re: Where are we now in CO2e , which pathway are we on?
« on: January 31, 2020, 10:58:32 PM »
The average annual change from 2010 to 2020 was projected as 2.28 ppm under RCP 2.6 and 2.65 ppm under RCP 8.5.  The actual average annual (using the global avg annual data from NOAA) change was (411.44 - 389.9)/10 = 2.15 ppm.
Silly me is having trouble understanding how the actual 2020 value was 411.44 if 2020 hasn't finished yet.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: January 31, 2020, 10:45:11 PM »
Some ideas: Either the virus is not as violent when transferred person to person as opposed to the initial contagion (implausible), or not enough time has passed to generate casualties, or the medical treatment was prompt, or the actual number of cases in Hubei was much higher than reported (with mild cases unreported).

Walking the walk / Re: When was the last flight you took?
« on: January 28, 2020, 10:15:22 PM »
I'm a godless person myself, but the current pope is my hero. (OT, sorry)

Regarding the cost of flights with synthetic fuel made with electricity - with an overbuild of solar and wind, intermittent electricity at peak production times could become extremely cheap if not truly zero. If/when that happens, with nearly free energy and readily harvestable raw materials (hydrogen, carbon) syntethic jet fuel could become cheap to make.
Be that as it may, current flights are only cheap because the pollution is free. Flights should cost much more, and/or banned outright (wishful thinking), until a clean solution is found.

Consequences / Re: Chinese coronavirus
« on: January 28, 2020, 12:50:55 PM »
- But there is an interesting epidemiological infographic:
- with a timeline of median symptom onset
Looking at the analysis of the family that visited Wuhan, it appears that (at least in their case) onset of symptoms was after about 3 days from exposure to infected people. So perhaps the week-long incubation period is not the typical case. (Hopefully).
Re-looking at it, I realized P6 (a child) did not show any symptoms at all until diagnosed in the hospital. This is the scary one.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2019/2020 freezing season
« on: January 28, 2020, 11:34:02 AM »
Jim -
     Both Thickness and Extent seem to be much less in 2020 than 2019 in those images.  But the December PIOMAS Volume data show Dec 31 2019 only about 3% below Dec 31 2018.,119.msg242997.html#msg242997

 The dramatic difference in Thickness and Extent in those maps look like a lot more than a 3% Volume decline. 

    Or is the January PIOMAS going to deliver a bombshell?  But that also seems unlikely given robust Extent gains in recent  weeks.  And there has only been 19 days between Dec 31, 2019 and the Jan. 19, 2020 graph. 

   CryoSat vs. PIOMAS difference doesn't explain it either, since both images are CryoSat.  Something is not lining up.   The only explanation I can think of is a re-calibration of CryoSat.  But I don't have any info pointing to that. 

   Bottom line:  the 2019 to 2020 difference in those maps is too huge to believe.  If it is real then it looks the Arctic is going to get blitzed in the 2020 melt season.

    Or am I missing/misinterpreting something?
The extra volume this year is in the Barents (and the Kara), as can be seen in Jim's image based on Cryosat/SMOS, as well as in Wipneus' diff map based on PIOMAS. The missing volume this year is next to the CAA, again seen both in Cryosat/SMOS data and in PIOMAS. These two sources are very different (one is mostly measured, one is mostly modeled), but are in general agreement. I do not expect a January bombshell, but the melting season could become interesting should there be an early meltout of the Barents.

Science / Re: Where are we now in CO2e , which pathway are we on?
« on: January 27, 2020, 05:03:48 PM »
Thing is, while we haven't doubled CO2 (yet) we have greatly increase methane concentration and are busy maintaining it in the face of atmospheric destruction processes. The big question in calculating CO2eq is and has always been the methane question. So a higher multiplier is in order, but what should the multiplier be?

Policy and solutions / Re: Ships and boats
« on: January 27, 2020, 04:56:27 AM »
Obviously, for a short route ferry it makes perfect sense to go battery-electric, for a 24-day cargo ship it makes zero sense.
Some ideas that have been thrown around in the past here - add solar panels to the ship (not enough energy, but nice idea and can add range), and use wind power with sails (has been used successfully for centuries, but would mean much slower journey even with battery backup). An electric rail line is a good idea, though not sure if feasible or economical.
Of course the best solution is to reduce global shipping of frivolities, and to place necessary production nearer to consumption, but these are systemic issues, easier said than done.

Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 27, 2020, 02:44:18 AM »
Thanks for the responses. Will happily await outcome.

Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 26, 2020, 10:17:25 PM »
A question to those familiar with EU politics: is there a possibility of the EU making its emissions mandate flexible? For example raising the initial threshold from 95 to 100 or 110, delaying implementation by a year or two, capping initial fines and so on? I am asking because at face value the political power of the European carmakers (with all the jobs they employ) must be quite significant. It's somewhat too good to be true that such a measure is implemented forcing them to switch to EVs or pay billions.

Science / Re: Where are we now in CO2e , which pathway are we on?
« on: January 26, 2020, 10:08:16 PM »
Carbon dioxide equivalency is a quantity that describes, for a given mixture and amount of greenhouse gas, the amount of CO
2 that would have the same global warming potential (GWP), when measured over a specified timescale (typically 100 years). Carbon dioxide equivalency thus reflects the time-integrated radiative forcing of a quantity of emissions or rate of greenhouse gas emission—a flow into the atmosphere—rather than the instantaneous value of the radiative forcing of the stock (concentration) of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere described by CO2e.
I normally don't question established science but I think this 100-yr approach is wrong. As we track GHG concentrations, none of them has been faliing. We are obviously on a path where new emissions (both anthropogenic and natural feedbacks) are sufficient to maintain and even increase concentrations, regardless of sinks and destructive processes in the atmosphere. Thus the proper calculation should be the "instantaneous value of the radiative forcing of the stock (concentration) of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere". Assume this level is maintained going forward, to understand our current situation.

Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 24, 2020, 11:52:03 PM »
Mnuchin said:
Is she the chief economist, or who is she? I’m confused. It’s a joke. After she goes and studies economics in college she can come back and explain that to us.
What a jerk. The idiocy stinks.

Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: January 23, 2020, 03:14:25 AM »
Not knowing much about capacitors (yeah, less than even that), I had this idea the moment after I heard that Tesla bought Maxwell - that one could load up a (future 1,000 km range) EV's capacitors really fast (like in 5 minutes - "megacharge"!), then get the car back on the road, and have the capacitors then, at near-optimum rates, charge up the battery.

Probably anybody who actually knows something about capacitors would know my idea is bunk.  Musk said in that long interview that he's hyper-rational - he compares his ideas with known physics before proceeding.  I just don't know the physics.
Ir's an impractical idea for several reasons.
The capacitors add weight and cost but as described do not add total charging capacity. They are just used as a buffer to pass the energy to the batteries. As the main limiting factor for EVs is the high weight and cost of batteries, this is not workable.
An alternative idea is to use capacitors instead of or in addition to the battery. so the charge in the capacitor is used in parallel to the charge in the battery, at times when it is useful to do so (e.g. during sharp acceleration, super-hard regen braking or during short charging).
The problem with using capacitors as a complement to a battery is the physics. A quick look in shows that
As of 2013 commercial specific energies range from around 0.5 to 15 Wh/kg. For comparison, an aluminum electrolytic capacitor stores typically 0.01 to 0.3 Wh/kg, while a conventional lead-acid battery stores typically 30 to 40 Wh/kg and modern lithium-ion batteries 100 to 265 Wh/kg. Supercapacitors can therefore store 10 to 100 times more energy than electrolytic capacitors, but only one tenth as much as batteries.
So for energy storage where weight is a consideration supercapacitors are not very useful. However in applications where a high power is desired and weight is less of an issue supercapacitors have the physical ability to be useful (not sure about cost).
For example, in it says:
Maxwell Technologies, an American supercapacitor-maker, claimed that more than 20,000 hybrid buses use the devices to increase acceleration, particularly in China. Guangzhou, In 2014 China began using trams powered with supercapacitors that are recharged in 30 seconds by a device positioned between the rails, storing power to run the tram for up to 4 km — more than enough to reach the next stop, where the cycle can be repeated.
For an E-Semi I don't think supercapacitors can be very useful, as the weight of the battery is a very important consideration (the limiting factor for increasing range). However for buses and trams that have short routes and require rapid charging, supercapacitors could be quite useful.

While writing the above it occurred to me that the original idea could have some use in an imaginary scenario where a car can be charged for a few seconds every few minutes (let's say every intersection in a city) by some wireless method or a flexible contact. The car would take the charge into its capacitors, charge the batteries to empty the capacitors, and be ready for the next rapid burst. However I cannot see this as workable in a real-life scenario.

Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: January 22, 2020, 02:40:09 AM »
So, bring it on!
For the record, I strongly disagree with your post.

Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: January 21, 2020, 06:57:18 PM »
Nicely written PA.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 21, 2020, 12:13:22 AM »
This energy storage solution is quite clever!

Energy Vault

Link >>
This solution (quite innovative) was posted on the forum in the past. The main worry which seems unaddressed is the risk of earthquakes. Otherwise, great idea. Once the blocks are up kinetic energy is preserved for a very long time.

Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: January 20, 2020, 10:13:06 AM »
Thanks for sharing sidd. The difference between theory and practice is often enlightening.

Policy and solutions / Re: If not Capitalism... then What? And, How?
« on: January 19, 2020, 08:53:34 PM »
I doubt there is anyone with enough power over the system to make a real difference even if they wanted to, which would be a miracle in itself.
I am highly pessimistic, and expect a civilizational collapse before any meaningful systemic change.

Science / Re: 2020 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: January 19, 2020, 08:43:31 PM »
Thank you for these regular updates Stephan.
Hefaistos I am astounded by your optimism, for which I find no basis in current reality. 10 years is a very short time to turn around the immense ship of the global fossil fuel economy. I estimate the turning time as at least 50 years, of which humanity has barely achieved maybe 10 net. Every year that passes with the wheel only partially turned means more time is lost. 2030 for peak CO2? No way.

Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 18, 2020, 09:44:17 PM »
I thought the test was actually good. I recognized many of my aspie-like characteristics and many of my non-aspie characteristics. Some few questions were a bit confusing and hard to answer properly but most were spot on. It was interesting to find out I am more neurotypical than I assumed, but I wonder what my score would have been at age 18.

Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but, China....
« on: January 18, 2020, 03:25:49 PM »
Finally some good news, and of course TPTB find it problematic. God forbid that there will ever be even a slight drop in population.

Consequences / Re: Places becoming more livable
« on: January 18, 2020, 03:02:20 PM »
Oh dear.

Consequences / Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« on: January 18, 2020, 10:54:05 AM »
Oren, what do you think of the definition of a BOE as the unit of time, during summer, when surface air temperature north of 80 shoots up beyond normal summer variability? I think that will be a climatically momentous occasion. There will be much less than 1 million km2 remaining when that happens, and it will likely happen in August. 
Yes, that is when the climatic shit his the fan IMHO. But when? Hard to guess.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17