That global warming thingy

[Homer J Simpson]

Please don't make me want to thump you for cretinism !

It's a somewhat real suggestion. Enough CO2 would create an atmosphere,
warmth and protect the planet. Plants would convert the CO2 to O2, fixing
carbon.

Of course it's a long way to haul gas.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Utter bollocks. May I smack you round the head ?

Why do you think ice floats ? Is it magic ?

Utter bollocks. Start with a cylinder of water. Create a chunk of ice from
the water (not practical, but OK for a thought experiment). As the ice comes
up out of the water the water level will drop.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Nope. I take it that it wasn't a 'killer' then ?

Imagine trying to sleep with one throbbing foot on a packet of frozen peas
on the floor.



--
..

--
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

--

 

[Eeyore]

"Eeyore" wrote


Utter bollocks. Start with a cylinder of water. Create a chunk of ice from
the water (not practical, but OK for a thought experiment). As the ice comes
up out of the water the water level will drop.

It will ?

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"Eeyore" wrote


Imagine trying to sleep with one throbbing foot on a packet of frozen peas
on the floor.

I can actually. I once had my hand burnt by boiling hot soup in a camp setting.
I still have a scar from it.

And I have ZERO interest ever in going camping again (the above wasn't the only
disaster).

Graham

 

[Jeff L]

So you reduced your CO2 emissions !

Graham

Unlikely - the typical 2 or 3 tanks of gas (~ 20L) in the snowmobile that
I'd normally go through in a winter on several long trips, that could last
as long as a day, and a bunch of shorter trips, was likely replaced by some
other activities that possibly produced the same or more CO2.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

It will ?

How can it not. Substitute a jar held mouth down in the water and pull a
vacuum in it. The 'middle chunk' goes up and the outer level drops. The jar
represents another version of an ice chunk.

 

[Jeff L]

Not even a foot. ZERO !

Well, considering that the water is fresh water that is frozen, there will
be a change, and that the peak density of water is around 4 deg C

Ice that's originally floating that melts does not affect the level. It's basic
physics.

It will, but not a lot. It may even cause a slight decrease iuntil it heats
up.

Graham

Where it will matter is places like Greenland, and Antarctica, where the ice
is NOT floating. There is a LOT of ice there.

 

[Don Klipstein]

It's a somewhat real suggestion. Enough CO2 would create an atmosphere,
warmth and protect the planet. Plants would convert the CO2 to O2, fixing
carbon.

Of course it's a long way to haul gas.

Somehow I think Mars has a problem of insufficient gravity to hold onto
a good atmosphere.

Consider the situation in the upper fringes of Earth's atmosphere. As
in the region referred to as the thermosphere due to high temperature, or
the middle and upper part of what is referred to as the ionosphere due to
some of the air molecules being ionized.

At 150 km above the surface, the temperature is about 740 K according to
Wiki. Density there is only a couple billionths that at sea level, but I
think any air loss there will be a problem.

That high up, mean molecular weight is only 24, according to the "ICAO
Standard Atmosphere" stuff in the 43rd edition of the CRC Handbook. This
makes me think some of the oxygen there is monatomic - with a molecular
weight of 16. Let's see how well gravity keeps oxygen atoms from flying
away to outer space at 740 Kelvin.

Average translational kinetic energy of the molecules in a mole of a gas
is 1.5 times R (universal gas law constant) times temperature. R is 8.3
joules per degree-mole. For monatomic oxygen, a mole is 16 grams and the
oxygen atoms in such a quantity would have a kinetic energy of 9213
joules.

9213 joules of kinetic energy in .016 kilogram works out to 1073 meters
per second.

Come to think of it, how about at the altitude where the mean free path
of atmosphere molecules is 10 KM - about 280 km above sea level.
Based on
http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=standard-atmosphere1

I figure a temperature of 1421 K. Oxygen atoms there would have kinetic
energy translating to a speed of 1487 meters/second. I think some
significant fraction (around .01% or so?) of these would be flying at
speeds 2-2.5 times that, at 3-3.5 km/second. A smaller fraction will be
moving even faster.

Escape velocity is 11.119 km/sec for Earth and 5.03 km/sec for Mars, at
the surface, and a few percent less at atmosphere fringe altitudes. This
looks like no problem for Earth, but I wonder if an oxygen atmosphere's
years or millennia on Mars would be numbered?

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Don Klipstein]

That's not what I meant by 'arctic ice'. The ice at the North Pole is floating
on the sea and as such it won't affect sea level if it melts.

The same applies to a lot of the ice around Antartica too.

This is not most of the ice in either the arctic or the antarctic. Most
of the ice in each location is icecap on land - with much of that ice
being roughly 3 km thick. The floating ice is a lot thinner.
It appears that the icecaps will be slower to melt than the floating
ice.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Don Klipstein]

*inch* !

I thought that too, or at least a raise of under a foot - but the real
problem is not the ice melting, but the water expanding as it warms up. We
warm the massive amounts of water on the planet up a few degrees, and it
expands enough to raise the sea level to very bad levels. Considering the
deep sea oceans are 12 + km deep in most places, a small volumetric change
of a 1% expansion could roughly raise the levels: 12,000 m * 0.01 = 120m!

Most of the "deep sea" is at temperature only a few degrees C, close to
where water has maximum density, and a few degrees change in temperature
in either direction will cause very slight expansion - and nothing like
1%, probably less than .01%.

Heck, increase the temperature of water from 10 to 15 degrees C and it
expands by .06%. I think being only a little on the alarmist side on
thermal expansion basis is go from 7 to 10 degrees C - .02% expansion. So
I think it would be a erring on the alarmist side to predict that the sea
level would rise 2.4 meters unless there is significant icecap melting.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[MassiveProng]

but the real
problem is not the ice melting, but the water expanding as it warms up.

Bwahahahahahah!

Ice has a greater volume than when it is in liquid form, dufus!

 

[Don Klipstein]

Where ? I thought mainly 3 km for deep ocean.

Most deep ocean is more like 5 km deep.

So when I said in my other post 2.4 meter sea level rise from thermal
expansion being on the alarmist side, take that down to 1 meter to correct
from 12 km to 5 km average ocean depth.

Where did you get your 1% from ?

And it's not all 12km deep btw. In fact I know of nowhere that deep. A heck of a
lot of it is shallow. Plus it takes apparently ~ 10,000 years to make
significant changes in overall ocean temperatures.

I figured a century or two for thermal time constant of the ocean mass
with respect to a change in balance between incoming and outgoing
radiation. Maybe soon I will try again and see if I get something
different - but I still expect somewhere from several decades to a few
or at most several centuries.
If 1 century is correct, then 1980-2007 linearly warming from "normal"
to .6 degree C high would have warmed the ocean mass so far by roughly 27%
of .3 degree C, a bit less than .1 degree C. With most of the ocean mass
at temperature close to that of maximum density of water, I am not
surprised if from 1980 to 2007 the sea level rose an inch or a centimeter
or stayed the same. I expect pretty much the same story in terms of ocean
expansion for the next .1 degree C rise in temperature of the hydrosphere
(2019-2020 or so), and not getting much worse until mid-century. A
century or two from now we may or may not have the oceans expand enough to
raise sea level by a meter. The big problem is if things warm up enough
to melt down the Greenland and Antarctica icecaps.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[MassiveProng]

Not neccesarily. The 'floating parts' have in the past not broken up as early in
the year. It still makes no difference if they do.

Still massive percentages of them are land borne. I know a large
apron floats that is not breaking up, but that wasn't my point.

 

[MassiveProng]

Utter bollocks. May I smack you round the head ?

Why do you think ice floats ? Is it magic ?

Didn't we just have this ice/waterline discussion a couple months
back?

 

[Eeyore]

"Eeyore" wrote


How can it not.

Because !

Substitute a jar held mouth down in the water and pull a
vacuum in it. The 'middle chunk' goes up and the outer level drops. The jar
represents another version of an ice chunk.

No it doesn't. That involves applying an external force !

You really *are* wrong btw.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice

Graham

 

[MassiveProng]

It's a somewhat real suggestion. Enough CO2 would create an atmosphere,

You're fucking lost.

warmth and protect the planet. Plants would convert the CO2 to O2, fixing
carbon.

They do that now.

Of course it's a long way to haul gas.

Yours manages to make it into Usenet a lot, however.

 

[Eeyore]

Well, considering that the water is fresh water that is frozen, there will
be a change, and that the peak density of water is around 4 deg C

So what are the numbers ?

It will, but not a lot. It may even cause a slight decrease iuntil it heats
up.


Where it will matter is places like Greenland, and Antarctica, where the ice
is NOT floating. There is a LOT of ice there.

Ice that's on land is entirely another matter. It's not being warmed by the
oceans so it's not going to melt any time soon.

Temperatures in Antarctica are up to MINUS 90 DEGREES CELSIUS ! Some say the Ice
there is actually growing due to more water vapour in the atmosphere.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Or dump it [CO2}and water on Mars. Terraforming in action.

Please don't make me want to thump you for cretinism !

It's a somewhat real suggestion. Enough CO2 would create an atmosphere,
warmth and protect the planet. Plants would convert the CO2 to O2, fixing
carbon.

Of course it's a long way to haul gas.

Somehow I think Mars has a problem of insufficient gravity to hold onto
a good atmosphere.

Somehow I think that's not really going to be the salint issue.

Graham

 

[MassiveProng]

Utter bollocks. Start with a cylinder of water. Create a chunk of ice from
the water (not practical, but OK for a thought experiment). As the ice comes
up out of the water the water level will drop.

POOR EXAMPLE!

Start with a 4 inch deep PAN of water. Add ice chunks that do NOYT
touch the bottom. Level rises as the weight of the ice displaces SOME
water to equal the weight of the ice. Keeping an eye on the waterline
and noting that a LOT of ice is ABOVE said waterline, note that as the
ice melts, the waterline remains where it was when the ice was placed
in the pan.

NOW, take a HUGE chunk of ice that DOES touch the bottom of the pan,
and THAT ice WILL raise the water line as it melts, all the way up to
the point where it leaves contact with the bottom of the pan. At that
moment, the waterline is defined and remains steady for the remainder
of the melt.

Got clue?