By Harley Everett Wilcox, MBA
Senior Scientific Advisor
With recent
EU mandates on carbon emissions and the current discussions in the US, I find
interest in the science and conclusions of climate scientist and others.
Usually climate thoughts come to me in the middle of July or mid-February and
today it is 95F. I know this is complex
and often debated topic but I think there are several interesting facts that
may not be generally discussed. I often wonder, how is global temperature, CO2
levels measured, and what are all the greenhouse gases? Also, how does the bad
actor CO2 with levels of ~310ppm in 1950 to ~400 today use a 100ppm increase to
warm the atmosphere? How do plowed fields, asphalt roofs, and burning ~40
million barrels of oil a day figure? A quick read provided some interesting
positions and facts.
Confounding
arguments based on modeling such as ‘if we totally deforested the earth’ would
mean global temperature rise or decline”?
The first answer that comes to mind would be “an increase in
temperature” as we lost a carbon sink and may change Albedo. The response provided from one source
(disputed by other models) and based on Albedo, is that the mean temperature is
predicted to decrease as grass and desert have a higher albedo than a forest. Albedo is the reflectance from a planet of
external electromagnetic energy where the earth is roughly 0.35 and 1 would
represent total reflectance. Ice, snow, clouds, and vegetation type all affect
albedo. Air pollution, volcanic ash, also reduces radiation reaching the
surface and has a cooling effect. Artic
ice cap is shrinking since 1979 and Antarctica sea ice is increasing to near
record.
The number
one green-house gas by atmospheric quantity is water vapor and represents more
than 99% of potential green-house gases.
Some argue
that CO2 IR absorption is saturated in the first 10 miters of the atmosphere
based on the incoming wavelength and also for up radiation. Whilst, other
exclaim reflective radiation is trapped by CO2 from a change in IR wavelength
from surface emission. Or, water swamps
any reasonable IR absorption by CO2.
NOAH graphs depict a negative USA temperature
anomaly from ~1880 to 1930 and a positive anomaly to 2010 especially starting
in 1980. Is CO2 the primary entity
responsible for increase in global temperatures? I would probably need a degree in atmospheric
science to make that call. A simple correlation of increased temperature and
increased CO2 lacks definition as one can similarly correlate many other items
related to population growth. Clearly evaluation
of data from the next 10-20 years will be critical.
For more information, visit: www.abclabs.com
No comments:
Post a Comment