Runaway feedback means running its course completely. It is feedback
specific.
A good example is the presumed water vapor feedback on Venus.
Apparently, earth and venus started with similar amount of h2o.
Because Venus started with much higher surface temperature, the evolution of
temperature and
Stuart,
Why bundle and stash terrestrial straw. Growing straw requires substantial fresh water and nutrients. You could bundle and stash algae instead. How about sargassum or kelp? A macro-algae can be bundled in large mesh "tea bags" with much of the water being squeezed out during the bund
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090128/full/457520b.html
Game Over - "Ocean iron fertilization is simply no longer to be taken as a
viable option for mitigation of the CO2 problem"
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go
Page # 71 of the book "Global warming: Understanding the forecast" by David
Archer has a nice description on runaway feedback.
BTW, I guess there is no such thing as runaway climate change
B
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote:
>
> I have been unable to find any citations in
Hello All,
"A government committee had as a witness a government-employed doctor.
When asked if his public speeches throughout the country presented
both sides of the discussion touching compulsory national health
insurance, this witness answered, "I don't know what you mean by both
sides."
"Thi
Dear Group,
To me a runaway greenhouse means the negative feedbacks have been
overwhelmed by accelerating positive forcing. In such a case only an
ice age could reverse the runaway effect, a few other checks could
contribute (CLAW hypothesis). If an ice age cannot cool the planet
and stop the p
Hi All
Oliver is being too pessimistic. If it seems as if we are overdoing the
cooling and emission reductions we rapidly switch off the cooling
systems and start releasing some of the sequestered CO2, perhaps even
persuading people to burn more coal.
Any control engineer will tell you that
Wow! Saying Oliver is being too pessimistic is kindly. Runaway greenhouse
does not mean negative feedback is being overwhelmed by positive forcing.
The climate system is controlled by by positive feedback and is unstable
until the feedback saturates, which occurs at about 24 C and 10 C. Those are
Few thoughts about different types of runaway climate change
1) Positive feebacks and anthropogenic releases in combinations move the
climate system to a state of increasing independency from its initial
anthropogenic GHG influence. Human inability, where a true inability to effect
GHG reduct
Hi,
I think that "runaway climate change" or "runaway global warming" are in such
good use that trying to do them away probably hurts more than benefits,
sometimes the public embrace things like words and concepts, as "global
warming" and "climate change" embrases everyone, the legitimate sta
>From "catastrophe" to "runaway" climate change/global warming; will
opportunism and hyperbole never end? I guess the question answers
itself. What started with responsible and serious geo-engineering
science by including Crutzen, Caldiera, Wigley, Keith, Schelling,
MacCracken, and has been serious
Per Chris - Here! Here!
dschnare
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Christopher Green, Prof. <
chris.gr...@mcgill.ca> wrote:
> From "catastrophe" to "runaway" climate change/global warming; will
> opportunism and hyperbole never end? I guess the question answers itself.
> What started with respons
The concept, as applied to climate change, was introduced to discuss loss of
ice shelves, an "irreversible" event over the short run, and one with large
consequences. Then, the concept was expanded to the speed of the event,
also as applied to the ice shelves. Then it was expanded to the "fat tai
[geo] Re: runaway climate changeNot enough CO2 in the atmosphere.
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Revkin
To: bala@gmail.com ; euggor...@comcast.net
Cc: j...@cloudworld.co.uk ; Tom Wigley ; Andrew Lockley ; geoengineering ;
Prof John Shepherd ; Tim Lenton ; David Lawrence
Isn't it more efficient to pyrolyse the waste first, recovering energy
and reducing transport carbon?
A
2009/2/2 David Schnare :
> Stuart:
>
> I've been studying notill agriculture that relies, in major part, on
> building soil carbon to hold nutrients in the soil (reducing application
> require
I am reading the biochar literature now and it is fascinating stuff. But first
glance reveals that pyrolysis schemes return 20-50% of the total carbon
originally in the biomass back to sequestration in the soil (ES&T Sept 1 2007,
p 5932). So already there is an efficiency problem compared to
In the train analogy there is an end of the line and train falls off the
tracks or collides with the stop. In runaway global warming the positive
feedback mechanism that drives the temperature up (or down depending on
which way it is headed) is self limiting. When the greenhous layer becomes a
blac
David,
You are wrong about the carbon that would be emitted during transportation of
residues to the sea. Our calculation of 92% carbon sequestration efficiency
for CROPS is based on truck transport to the upper Mississippi and barging to
deep water in the Gulf. If you want a reprint please a
I don't like "irreversible climate change". That would mean (if taken
at face value, in vernacular English) that we can't do anything to
reverse it, not just that it won't reverse itself spontaneously.
On Feb 2, 6:46 am, David Schnare wrote:
> The concept, as applied to climate change, was intr
I have been unable to find any citations in 'hard' climate science
literature. Is the term therefore ONLY a pop-science concept?
If anyone has any such citations, please can they send them to me?
A
2009/2/2 David Schnare :
> The concept, as applied to climate change, was introduced to discuss
I guess it is not going to end.
A runaway train meets only #2 and even that has to be qualified because the
train eventually runs out of (fossil?) fuel or track. Certainly climate has
run away a half dozen times in 540 million years but always hits a limit
which seems to be 24C except when an as
As I understand the science, I think it would be premature to
precisely estimate the gain factor without stating error bars. Can we
really be confident that we've got it nailed to the 25% error margin
we need, when we can't even agree to within a 50-year window when the
Arctic will melt?
I do ac
I think the nature headline is fairly rejected by the authors of the
paper, based on subsequent conversations as well as the guardian
article.
Clearly this is one data point, which is both at wide variance with
other island/seamount induced natural iron seedings (77 times lower
than the Kerguelen
By straw we are referring to the stalks of agricultural plants, wheat stalks
and corn stover. The water and nutrients were expended to grow the grain.
Straw has a low nutrient content (C/N = ca 50/1). Presently straw is wasted by
allowing it to decay on the soil surface (only 14% or less of t
This discussion is not really useful anymore. Runaway means uncontrolled and
nothing more. It does not mean to infinity or too fast, it simply means we
have not regained control. Techniques are in use for controlling trains out
of control but until they are used the train is in a runaway condition
Dear Tom,
The concept of "runaway" has certain connotations:
1. Significant in resultant effect
2. Uncontrollable
3. Exponential initial behaviour - characteristised by acceleration of
process
4. No obvious limit
5. Irreversible
6. Rapid.
These can all be applied to climate change:
1.
Stuart:
I've been studying notill agriculture that relies, in major part, on
building soil carbon to hold nutrients in the soil (reducing application
requirements and keeping it out of streams). While a 14% sequestration
(limited to only about 20 years before maxing out on sequestration
potential
I have an alternative theory as to why we don't see too many instances
of runaway climate change from the 'clathrate gun' effect, or from
permafrost.
Methane has a very short life in the atmosphere, but is a potent
greenhouse gas. If the rate of warming is low, a little methane is
released, whic
Who on this list knows why the Arctic warming ~ 8,000 years ago
(quite protracted and significantly warmer than today) did not lead
to "runaway" warming?
Presumably something kicked in the other direction?
I'm pursuing a clearer picture of lessons from the Holocene and the
Eemian (the previo
The real problem is not with the carbon dioxide emissions from the fuel. It's
with how much fuel has to be used and its cost. That is the argument for
starting with residue as close to deep water as possible, e.g. as previously
mentioned, eastern Japan and the Bay of Biscay off the west coast
Andrew
No one cares what the wiki people like.
David Schnare
Center for Environmental Stewardship
On Feb 2, 2009, at 6:50 PM, Andrew Lockley
wrote:
>
> I have an alternative theory as to why we don't see too many instances
> of runaway climate change from the 'clathrate gun' effect, or from
Well if 'runaway climate change' is to be the 'standard' term, then
why isn't it used in journals? This may seem like a minor squabble,
but if scientists are talking a different language to the public, how
can these vital concepts be communicated?
Remember all the nonsense about 'black holes' wh
Could someone please explain why you would want to throw fuel into the sea?
Surely it's better to:
a) Burn it, then use CCS
b) Pyrolise it to recover energy and to reduce mass/bulk and then
throw the char in the sea.
Just to question the 'safety factor' of terra preta as opposed to
ocean burial:
On the comments below:
All this isdiscussed in detail in our paper.
Gregory Benford
===
Could someone please explain why you would want to throw fuel into the
sea?
Surely it's better to:
a) Burn it, then use CCS
b) Pyrolise it to recover energy and to reduce mass/bulk and then
throw t
Because it's better for the atmosphere. If I hand you a lump of coal, which is
better for the atmosphere and global warming? For you to burn it or to throw it
into the sea?
You can burn it and sequester the liquid carbon dioxide in deep saline
aquifers, as we must do to continue to burn coal,
35 matches
Mail list logo
