To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: Global Warming Cinch
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > News discussions > Space & Earth Sciences News

MisterBelfry
From: Tellmeaboutit 6/09/2007 9:56:10 AM

Sub[a HREF=http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/newposts/3153/topic3153069.shtm]ject: Global warming post [/a]id: 3152156

how does heat escape into outer space?? How does global warming slow that process. what signifigance does the upper atmosphere and jet streams have?? The thing i dont get, is surely there are atmospheric conditions that are better for radiating heat into space. More so than the impact of solar radiation variance?? Cloudy nights are bad. clear nights are good..

From: Martin B ®
"IR radiation released from the surface, or the lower parts of the atmosphere rarely makes it all the way out to space, it is normally absorbed first. This means that the surface of the Earth gets warmed, but radiation only escapes to space from the outer parts of the atmosphere.

The top of the atmosphere is cooler, but down below there is 'extra' IR radiation bouncing around and so the surface and lower parts of the atmosphere are warmed realtive to what they would be if there was no atmosphere. This is the greenhouse effect."-6/09/2007 11:22 AM

From: bellfree campanile ® 7/09/2007
Subject: re: Global warming post id: 3153017
Cloudy nights are bad. clear nights are good..
<

Yes, the atmospheric window is what keeps us cool as the consensus to global warming is at night and the only solid evidence or consequence of warmer nights is in the Artic.
So, the strange conclusion, a paradigm shift really is that the clouds are at fault and the young theory is that they are built from cosmic rays which our Sun can influence.


The top of the atmosphere is cooler, but down below there is 'extra' IR radiation bouncing around and so the surface
<<
This downwelling infrared is gibberish as greenhouses in general don't work that way anyhow. That, there, is one of the best reasons to have a paradigm shift. Secondly, the laws of thermodynamics are not going to be that easily overthrown.


Here is how one poster on realclimate put it(from which I also grabbed a linked example)**:
As Rod’s (421) comment on 419(AEBanner) says “re 419. This is a BOMB that I trust is a DUD. The words blow a battleship sized hole into the absorption / re-emission process, don’t they?” Well it isn’t a dud and it isn’t the only hole in the GHG idea.

Another giant hole is the concept of “downwelling radiation”. It is quite impossible for a cold body to transfer energy by radiation to a hot body. The Earth’s surface is warmer than the atmosphere so the idea of 390W being radiated downwards from the atmosphere is basically nuts. What is even funnier, if you can find one of the radiative balance diagrams,** you will see that this downwelling stuff is miraculously absorbed 100% without any reflection by what must be a very black body indeed!


The whole concept of GHDs “blocking” or “trapping” radiation relies a process that, of itself, would produce a temperature gradient in the atmosphere over and above the adiabatic lapse rate due to gravitation, mathematically this would be a diffusion process. Diffusion processes are very slow, like conduction (a diffusion process), convection is

much, much quicker and more spectacular, (hurricanes are just a very enthusiastic convection process). In boring old thermodynamic terms, the probability of a convection process occurring is very much greater than a diffusion process. It interesting to note that the heat transfer in the radiation zone of the Sun is by radiative diffusion and it is very, very slow, above radiation zone is the convection zone, the two processes cannot take place together. What is the IPCC going to do when the rest of the world realises it is onto a loser?

** [a HREF=http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig1-2.htm]www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig1-2.htm[/a]



From: bellfree campanile ® 7/09/2007
Subject: re: Global warming post id: 3153066

So, the strange conclusion, a paradigm shift really is that the clouds are at fault<<

The cincher on this, in my opinion, was a show I saw this week on the _dimmer Sun_ due to the pollution associated with burning CO2 laden fuels. The producers or whoever tried to make the case for 'accelerated global warming' because with cleaner air from scrubbed powerplants and whatnot, CO2 could then become this almighty pollutant which is even more fanciful gibberish - or one mojo bold hypothesis.

Anyway, the part that should interest the "scientist" as compared to the Nazi type politicians who employ regime willing scientists as part of the International Panel on Climate Change, is one little experiment\study after 9/11. With contrails absent on a major part of an otherwise highly traveled continent for a few days, some dude got a spike downwards in temperature in both low and high for that time of year. The weather was clear and the spike returned up to where it was before 9\11.

The Artic at night is still scheduled to have ice and become impassable. If during the day, following the winter, and the ice melts some fifty or more years to the degree predicted ahead of schedule and assuming the insolate of water is a known factor that isn't goofed; then again the clouds should come into play. Carbon dioxide it could be surmised is a feeble factor for all capable models developed to-date & remember all sophisticated models end-up being wrong, otherwise one has a theory cogent enough to be falsifiable. Day or night, low or high flying clouds-do we really know clouds at all?
-----
If the show this week was a repeat, it should be available at this link right now...
[a HREF=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/]www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/[/a]

MisterBelfry
SubTopic link

Transcript link{PBS Airdate: April 18, 2006}

User posted image
Link
MisterBelfry
QUOTE
a spike downwards in temperature in both low and high for that time of year.

NARRATOR: [David]Travis was not looking just at temperature, which varies a lot from day to day. Instead he focused on something that normally changes quite slowly: the temperature range, the difference between the highest temperature during the day and the lowest at night. Had this changed at all during the three days of the grounding?

"So here we see, for the three-day period preceding September 11th, a slightly negative value of temperature range with lots of contrails, as normal. Then we have this sudden spike right here of the three-day period. This reflects lack of clouds, lack of contrails, warmer days cooler nights, exactly what we expected, but even larger than we expected."


QUOTE (->
QUOTE
a spike downwards in temperature in both low and high for that time of year.

NARRATOR: [David]Travis was not looking just at temperature, which varies a lot from day to day. Instead he focused on something that normally changes quite slowly: the temperature range, the difference between the highest temperature during the day and the lowest at night. Had this changed at all during the three days of the grounding?

"So here we see, for the three-day period preceding September 11th, a slightly negative value of temperature range with lots of contrails, as normal. Then we have this sudden spike right here of the three-day period. This reflects lack of clouds, lack of contrails, warmer days cooler nights, exactly what we expected, but even larger than we expected."



regime willing scientists as part of the International Panel on Climate Change,
I guess we are not that homogenized yet -Intergovernmental- Panel.

MrB.
Montec
Hello MisterBelfry, et al.

Have a look at this site http://physics.nist.gov/Divisions/Div844/f.../isam/isam.html

Have you ever wondered why temperature decreases with altitude (lower air pressure)? Until you get to the ozone layer and above that is.

Green house gases will emit more energy as IR radiation than they receive from energy through collisions as the air pressure decreases (more time between collisions).


smile.gif

AllanTugwellRoberts

I need Funding (beleve it or not) for the following project I have patent pending on, can you write me back or direct me to a forum I can post on. Here are ~my~ carbon dioxide recyclers project I have been patenting. If you think my multi-media is entertaining or you know of some one with funding for a project such as this please call or write me. And also, Very~Very cool web site it is the most important informative web site I have view in my life. Pretty soon, we will all be carbon dioxide recyclers thanks to you!!!! keep up the awesome work. Just print it out on paper and read the presentation while I explain it to you. you have to decompress the files first, they are WMA- windows media player

Patent Pending US11/806,097
Allan Tugwell Roberts

(703)980-7883

AllanRoberts32@msn.com

5104 Arrit Ct.

Burke, VA 22015 USA

Attn: To whom it may concern

Below is a 15 minute presentation on “Carbon Dioxide Recycler”. Here is a little bit about my self. I am a plumbing apprentice licensed in the state of Virginia. Just last year, I finished Plumbing 3 with the Adult Center for Education program. The main focus of the class taught me to study the “International Fuel & Gas Code 2006” book. I have been going to school in the USA from 5 years old and I am 27 years old now. I was born here in Fairfax Virginia in 1980. Next year I plan to finish Plumbing 4 and take the “Master’s Plumbing” test to become a plumbing engineer. I have been in commercial and residential construction for 10 years. When I was 17 I got my GED at Montgomery County Conservation Corps in Montgomery County Maryland. I have also gone to school at Northern Virginia Community college where I learned how to become a “Music Production Artist”. I have been a musician all my life and have been playing guitar for 13 years. I have been a professional music producer for 5 years and have made over 400 Logic Audio tracks. If you have any questions or requests, call me or email me, and I will be glad to help you with what ever you need.

Allan Tugwell Roberts

Track 1 Presentation 1

MAKING A CARBON DIOXIDE RECYCLER FOR OUR SOCIETY

Carbon Dioxide-

Carbon dioxide molecules consist of two oxygen atoms that are covalently joined to a central carbon atom. The three atoms lie in a line covalently in every quarter. The central carbon atom is a sphere drawn at the scale of the carbon covalent radius just touching two oxygen atoms drawn at the scale of their covalent radii.



The carbon dioxide emissions are considered a major threat to the Earth because of their capacity modify the climate by insulating the surface and so creating a green house effect. C02 and the greenhouse effect are representations of the burning of petroleum fuels which there is a major cause of increased atmospheric pollution. There is a major debate of how the future energy resources of the world will be distributed to the super-powers.









CREATING A CARBON DIOXIDE RECYCLER FOR OUR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES

What are carbon dioxides? Carbon dioxides, contrary to popular belief, are renewable resources and fuels and can be recycled and re-used in sequestering plants all over the United States. Unhealthy air pollution and heat-trapping emissions of carbon dioxides in the atmosphere should be curbed and are causing global warming. Construction of carbon dioxide recycling plants has been going on for years. Our government has been taking radical steps to reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.

One of the number one ways that carbon dioxide molecules are released into the atmosphere is from the burning of petroleum based fuels in Internal Combustion Engines. We have been burning petroleum fuels for years and they have been our society’s propellants of the industrial and computer age. Many people believe that CO2 (carbon-dioxide) is a harmful waste product and they are right. However many of us do not know that it can be recycled.

The first step in making a CO2 recycler is to compress the CO2 molecules in air borne exhaust emissions until they liquefy, at the same time removing the excess heat. The CO2 gas exhaust emissions will liquefy once they are pressurized to 870 pounds of pressure per square inch at room temperature. Next, the pressure of the liquid is reduced by sending it through an expansion valve into an empty chamber. Some of the liquid will turn into gas causing what is left over to cool. When the temperature drops to -109.3°F, the temperature of frozen C02, some of it will freeze creating snow. This dry ice snow is then compressed together under a press to form blocks or extruded into various sized pellets. Dry ice is heavier and weighs about double the weight of traditional ice. The left over excess of dry ice pellets or snow will be deposited in a removable container in the trunk or rear portion of the car next to the gas tank. This excess will be put in the recycling depository located at the gas station, then trucked away to CO2 recycling plants where it will be stored or used in sequestration processes.

Track 2 Presentation 2

How to turn 6 pounds (1 gallon) of gasoline into 20 pounds of dry ice:

One gallon of gas weighs about 6.25 pounds. The weight fluctuates with temperature and octane. Octane contains 8 carbon atoms and 18 hydrogen atoms. Carbon has a molecular weight of 12 and hydrogen has a molecular weight of 1, so octane has a total molecular weight of 114 (8 x 12 + 18 x 1). Oxygen has a molecular weight of 16, while CO2 has a total molecular weight of 44 (12 + 16 + 16). Every molecule of octane makes eight molecules of CO2, with a total molecular weight of 352 (44 x 8).

6.25 pounds x (352 / 114) = 19.3 pounds

In other words, say the average internal combustion engine uses 10 gallons of gas a week, multiply the numbers by 10(62.5 pounds x (3520 / 1140) = 193 pounds) and you have a internal combustion engine that produces 193 pounds of dry ice per tank a week.

The cost of dry ice per pound

On the internet, the cost of dry ice ranges any where from $.22 cents to $1 a pound in pellets, snow, nuggets or blocks. Assume the average internal combustion engine burns 10 gallons of gas a week and could produce $42.26 - $193 (193 pounds x $.22; 193 pounds $1) in extra revenue a week.

$42.26 - $193(193 pounds x $.22; 193 pounds $1)

If the average consumer spends $3.00 a gallon on gasoline and burns 10 gallons a week that’s $30.00 a week.

$42.26 - $193 a week/per tank VS $30.00 a week per tank

The average consumer is wasting a vast amount of this natural resource into the environment, and some one should inform them. Instead of an average consumer they could be an average natural resource recycler.

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is an amendment to the international treaty on climate change, assigning mandatory emission limitations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to the signatory nations. The objective of the protocol is the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” As of December 2006, a total of 168 countries and other governmental entities have ratified the agreement. Notable exceptions include the United States and Australia. Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement. There is some debate about the usefulness of the protocol, and there have been some cost-benefit studies performed.

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Cost Benefit Analysis is an economic tool to aid social decision-making, and is typically used by governments to evaluate the desirability of a given intervention in markets. The aim is to gauge the efficiency of the intervention relative to the status quo. The costs and benefits of the impacts of an intervention are evaluated in terms of the public's willingness to pay for them or willingness to pay to avoid them. Inputs are typically measured in terms of opportunity costs - the value in their best alternative use. The guiding principle is to list all of the parties affected by an intervention, and place a monetary value of the effect it has on their welfare as it would be valued by them.

The process involves monetary value of initial and ongoing expenses vs. expected return. Constructing plausible measures of the costs and benefits of specific actions is often very difficult. In practice analysts try to estimate costs and benefits either by using survey methods, or by drawing inferences from market behavior. For example, a product manager may compare manufacturing and marketing expenses to projected sales for a proposed product, and only decide to produce it if he expects the revenues to eventually recoup the costs. Cost-benefit analysis attempts to put all relevant costs and benefits on a common temporal footing. A discount rate is chosen, which is then used to compute all relevant future costs and benefits in present-value terms. Most commonly, the discount rate used for present-value calculations is an interest rate taken from financial markets. This can be very controversial - for example, a high discount rate implies a very low value on the welfare of future generations, which may have a huge impact on the desirability of interventions to help the environment. Cost-benefit calculations typically involve using time value of money formula. This is usually done by converting the future expected streams of costs and benefits to a present value amount.

Track 3 Presentation 3

PATENTING A CARBON DIOXDE RECYCLER

This invention relates to a method and apparatus for creating carbon dioxide exhaust recycling and recovery system for use with internal combustion engines. These engines will not only provide a high fuel efficiency reduced emissions power plant, but also complete the second half of the industrialization process; namely the cleaning up of industrial waste exhaust emissions produced when power is generated. These new engines exhaust systems will not only be used for reducing emissions and providing better fuel economy, but will also in turn boost world wide economic growth. They will be a combination of technological industrial and computer adaptations forming together to make the next generation of internal combustion engines. They will provide recyclable dry ice to the world’s petroleum starved economy. New developing technologies are on the rise that can capture energy from the sun, convert it to electrical energy, and split carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen using a gallium phosphide semi-conductor(US patent numbers 20010010375, 4228455). The number one pollutant in green house gases (carbon dioxide) would be turned back into its fuel form, carbon monoxide. Just imagine the benefit of being able to re-cycle gasoline by all three branches of the economic spectrum. Give more resources back to the consumer at a reduced rate, giving more availability to the big gas businesses to provide them, and governmental systems will have more economic growth based on them.

How to make a carbon dioxide recycler on an internal combustion engine:

As exhaust carbon dioxide, nitrogen and oxygen emissions are exiting from the catalytic converter on the high efficiency reduced emissions internal combustion engine(US patent number 6968678), before entering the muffler, an air-return vacuum will be installed.

The said exhaust will flow through the air-return vacuum into the muffler through the air pump into the compression tank, where will be compressed to 870 psi. Upon entering the compression tank, the exhaust carbon dioxide emissions will liquefy. The other lighter inert gasses nitrogen and oxygen, which are naturally occurring in our atmosphere, will be expelled through individual computerized flow rate control EGR valves at the top of the compression tank, and/or be routed to be expelled out a single directional emergency exhaust pipe into the atmosphere. Because the naturally occurring oxygen and nitrogen rise to the top of the compression chamber due to their lower atomic weights and boiling points (oxygen atomic weight 15.999, boiling point -297.2 °F, nitrogen atomic weight 14.007, boiling point -320.42 °F) than C02, (atomic weight 44, boiling point -108.4°F) they can either be re-cycled through the engine via the EGR valve and its devices, or expelled into the atmosphere. The specifications of the routing of the exhaust emissions are to be decided by the engines manufacturer.

After liquefaction of the carbon dioxide, a computerized flow rate control expansion valve would exhume the liquid C02 into the re-expansion chamber where 46% of it will flash solidify into dry ice. The remaining 54% will be recycled back through the bi-directional exhaust recirculation line similar to an exhaust pipe via the air-return vacuum.

Attached to the re-expansion chamber will be a one way (out only) exhaust pipe that will be used as an emergency exhaust line in case of failure of one of the systems devices (i.e. the air pump failure). In the case that one of the devices mentioned in the system fails, the air-return vacuum will automatically shut off, and the exhaust will automatically exit the system through the bi-directional exhaust re-circulation line, then the expansion chamber, then the one way tail pipe. In order to accomplish automatic shut-off of the air-return vacuum and air compression pump, a computerized warning system will have to be installed. The sole purpose will be to warn the operator of the status of the exhaust system upon occurrence of system failure.

Upon entering the re-expansion chamber the dry ice will be extruded into blocks similar to those in a conventional refrigerator ice tray, or formed under a press into cubes or rectangles. It can also be formed by similar devices into pellets or snow, depending on the design of the engines manufacturer.

When the engine is turned off, after normal operation, the immediate removal of the dry ice from the system for recycling purposes will be recommended. In the event that the left over dry ice in the re-expansion chamber has not been taken out immediately for recycling, the air-return vacuum and air compression pump will turn back on in case of sublimation (melting) of the dry ice back in to gaseous state. When (wheather) the air return vacuum and air compression pump turn back on after engine shutoff is to be determined by the engines manufacturer. However, the flow control rate expansion valve will remain off until restarting the engine. Dry ice has a 10% sublimation ratio which means it will lose 5-10 pounds from a 200 pound block in 24 hours. Sublimation emissions will also go out the single directional (out only) tail pipe into the atmosphere, but it will be recommended that the whole exhaust system maintain a pressure capability of 870 pounds or more psi so as not to lose any CO2 into the atmosphere. This would mean that the single directional tail pipe will have a pressure locking mechanism which activates upon shutting off the engine.

All of the said devices mentioned in the description above will have to be designed by the individual engine manufacturers to fit the size of their engines. For example a 10 gallon gas tank engine will have a 193 pound or larger volume compression tank depending on the amount of the exhaust gas sublimation emissions recycled after engine shutoff.


MisterBelfry
QUOTE
I need Funding (beleve it or not)
Don't we all!?

Here is something else from the weird and wacky category{To whom it may concern, you can adjust the name of the category as seems fitting to you.}



CIRCUMSTANCES OF MY PCI ARRANGEMENTS

Proceeds from my $25,000 insurance policy should be more than adequate to cover the cost of a PCI, which is estimated to be well under $5,000. In my Will I have requested a gravestone no less than two feet high. I would also request that the burial site be surveyed and the results of the survey stored in a safety deposit box of the Cryonics Society of Canada.

The PCI of the Spring of 1988 occurred in the city of Inuvik, which is near the southern edge of the Beaufort Sea in the Arctic Ocean. The burial occurred in the city's established graveyard. Although the funeral director in Inuvik is considering establishing a separate graveyard for those interested in PCI, I have doubts about this location

Scientists at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (based in Vienna, Austria) are predicting that the world climate, which currently has an average temperature of about 15 degrees Celcius, will warm by 1.5 degrees Celcius in the next 35 years and by 5.5 degrees Celcius in the next 100 years. Warming near the poles is expected to be double the global average. A location currently on the edge of the permafrost could easily be a non-permafrost location within a hundred years.

And yet, the greenhouse theory is not above dispute. Kenneth Watt, a professor at the University of California at Davis, criticizes the theory, pointing out that all but 270 of the 11,600 weather stations in the US are in cities or at airports. James Goodrich, formerly chief climatologist for the State of California, states that 90 percent of the temperature measurement data supporting the theory came from "urban heat environments". According to Reid Bryson, professor of meteorology at the University of Wisconsin, the worldwide climate has gotten colder, not warmer over the last 40 years. He gives evidence for previous increases in world carbon dioxide not being a cause of global warming.


I no longer have PCI [Permafrost Cryonic Interment] as my primary preservation arrangement (although it is still a back-up), since I have had cryonics arrangements since 1990. I have been accused of hypocrisy because of this, but to me there is no hypocrisy. There is still work to be done before PCI can really be considered a feasible preservation option.


My Will stipulates that I wish my remains to be preserved no matter how damaged or fragmented they may be. If I was in an airplane disaster and all that could be found of my remains was a finger that had been "rotting" for a month, I would still want that finger preserved as best as possible. This is in keeping with the fact that I do not place limits on the capacity of future technology...


Winter temperatures toward the poles would increase twice as much as the global average, but the increase would not be so great for summer temperatures, which is the most serious concern in PCI.

Other experts have disputed these claims for a greenhouse effect. Extremely accurate measurements of earth temperatures by satellites have shown no global warming in the past 10 years. Although human activities add 5 to 15 billion tons on carbon dioxide yearly to the atmosphere, the 1980 Mount St. Helen's volcano added 190 billion tons of carbon dioxide in what is considered a medium size eruption. There are an average of 100 volcanic eruptions on earth every year.

-by Ben Best

MisterBelfry
QUOTE
Have a look at this site http://physics.nist.gov/Divisions/Div844/f.../isam/isam.html

Have you ever wondered why temperature decreases with altitude (lower air pressure)? Until you get to the ozone layer and above that is.
I assume the "pauses" between all those "spheres" in the total atmosphere have meaning as in being less dynamic. I'm guessing at this point, as I am no expert. I'd rather look at this from the macro-scale of thermodynamics and not the left overs in quantum mechanics as important as that ultimately is!


If(In) this link works you'll notice that methane does not make the cut from table D1 to table D2. Clouds. it looks to me, took the place of global warming potential methane! The GWP as this website{pages} makes clear is not scientific in origin. But it was developed for politicians. Global warming has been helped immensely by lawyers in Washington, DC.


MrB.

PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.