Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[donsutherland1]

6 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

It’s not a gimmick. Once fusion becomes a reality. And with AI advancing at warp speed a solution to making fusion viable could occur significantly sooner then previously thought.

limitless clean energy makes carbon capture and sequestration real. And it just might save the planet. 
 

 

The promise of fusion is real. It will supplant much of conventional power, when realized. 

I'm referring solely to carbon capture. The actual CO2 captured is tiny. Moving to clean energy, including nuclear fusion, will make a much larger contribution than carbon capture will.

Investment should be focused on promising technologies such as nuclear fusion, not carbon capture. Climate projections should be based on realistic assumptions not fictional ones that assume carbon capture.

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

1 hour ago, donsutherland1 said:

The promise of fusion is real. It will supplant much of conventional power, when realized. 

I'm referring solely to carbon capture. The actual CO2 captured is tiny. Moving to clean energy, including nuclear fusion, will make a much larger contribution than carbon capture will.

Investment should be focused on promising technologies such as nuclear fusion, not carbon capture. Climate projections should be based on realistic assumptions not fictional ones that assume carbon capture.

I agree that fusion solves further increasing GHG levels. But that still leaves us at a level that corresponds to significantly more warming then has yet to be realized. My premise is that energy being essentially limitless allows for technology that was once too power hungry to be environmentally and economically feasible. Carbon capture may very well be feasible when removing the energy equation paradox. Desalination is another prime example. 

[chubbs]

This is a good news /bad news chart. The world is moving quickly to clean energy technology, but the US is lagging and policy support in the US is being removed. We will be left with an outmoded energy system.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

I think it possible, if not likely that, that the positive feed-backs a real and ubiquitous fusion future brings for humanity, are not being fully visualized. 

Example,  the CO2 sequestering is obviously physically possible.  But the problem isn't in the mathematics, it's in the engineering: 'How to do so by not requiring equal or more energy?'   Point for discussion ... it takes a lot of energy to crack apart the CO2 molecule.  If you're needing so much energy, particularly when the energy is coming from carbon combustion sources to do so ... you are not effectively lowering anything.  We know all this ... 

The solution up at the Orca facility in Iceland was to tap the region's effectively limitless geothermal energy source.  How that is a gimmick - or why... - is actually not really an engineering 'know-how' related matter.   I'll have to read exactly why they are on the wrong side of the results.  Gimmick doesn't add up for me, though, because there's no way that the secretive or dishonest mechanism for perpetuating some other cause ( in this case preserving combustion of carbon) would ever conceivable work or remain clandestine form people frankly noticing that - that seems too childish to believe.  ...Although as afterthought, shit ...we put one of Satan's colon polyps in the white house so anything's possible...

Back on fusion, it's an easy case to make that a fusion would be more than equal to that challenge.  The range estimates vary some based upon source ( MIT ...vs "AI" ...vs - ) but as many as 5 to 8 orders of magnitude more power is accessible over any present conventional means.  That's between 10, and some estimates as high 100 million times more.   The expression, "an embarrassment of riches" leaps to mind.  So... with essentially 0 on the negative side of the net equation, this problem of CO2 above the background correction capacity of the planetary systems becomes no problem at all. The remaining challenges, beyond the sociological assholeness of our species, are rendered to a trivial endeavor.

But, this kind of "Kardashev 1" level control at a planetary scale would really mean fixing, or having the ability to fix the problem, fast - precisely what is needed. Any limitations beyond that would be sociological - different discussion.   It wouldn't have to take centuries to correct the anthropomorphic CO2, back to state prior to the Industrial Revolution. ... Even if CO2 were suddenly halted, (not remotely realistic), a natural extinction rate of CO2 is too slow to stop the other usage of the term extinction; and toppling indirectly linked ecological systems exposes thresholds in multitudes - true dystopia is realized. The general biology science ambit argues that it's already beginning...etc.  It's a snow ball just starting to roll down hill.

Fusion would create a favorable synergy space for innovation in general - that's an intuitive no-brainer.  However the truly transformative extent of that is likely hard to visualize in terms of discrete applications.  If, and most like when, quantum computing is brought on-line,  power and intellect assist in both solution gathering and engineering applications ... staggering.  Huge, huge steps in the department of, "innovation got humanity into this crisis; innovation is required to save us"    

[Typhoon Tip]

It's CNN, so taken with caution ... but interesting nonetheless

https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/20/climate/ice-sheets-sea-level-rise

forward, the journal Communications Earth & Environment. Phys.org has a version too

https://phys.org/news/2025-05-15c-paris-climate-agreement-high.html

 

 

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It's CNN, so taken with caution ... but interesting nonetheless

https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/20/climate/ice-sheets-sea-level-rise

forward, the journal Communications Earth & Environment. Phys.org has a version too

https://phys.org/news/2025-05-15c-paris-climate-agreement-high.html

 

 

Good read. The lag effect between warming and melting is elephant in the room. So even if we stay at 1.5c it would take centuries to play out. It’s the feed back cycles that haven’t occurred yet that should raise the most concern. 

[GaWx]

From WxBell: Consider this chart of seismic activity:

 

In looking at that chart, Dr Viterito was asked this question:

: "How can you claim such a significant impact from so few events?"

 

"This graph is the Mid-Ocean Spreading Zone Seismic Activity (MOSZSA) from 1977 through 2024. In order to capture the total number accurately, we can only monitor the medium and large sized seismic events. For the catalogue that I use, these are events of magnitude 5.3 or higher. 

 

To answer your question, here is how this works: last year (2024) we saw a total of 93 mid-ocean seismic events magnitude 5.3 or higher. In fact, virtually all of them were 5.3-6.2. What every seismologist does know, however, is that the scale is logarithmic. So, for magnitudes 4.3 to 5.2, there were 10 times 93, or 930 seismic events. From 3.3 to 4.2, there were 9,300 events. From 2.3 to 3.2 there were 93,000 events. And from 1.3 to 2.2, there were 930,000 events! Add it all up and there were over 1,000,000 seismic events along the mid-ocean ridge system for 2024. Furthermore, it is estimated that roughly 98% of those events produce high temperature magmas. That means that, on average, high temperature magma was injected into the mid-ocean ridge system nearly 3,000 times every day! 

 

At its low point in 1977, there were only 22 mid ocean events of 5.3 or more, or roughly 200,000 total events. That's nearly 5 orders of magnitude less than the 2024 event total! This dynamic, highly energetic system is CLEARLY having an impact on the thermohaline circulation."

 

 

Any comments?

[chubbs]

8 hours ago, GaWx said:

From WxBell: Consider this chart of seismic activity:

 

In looking at that chart, Dr Viterito was asked this question:

: "How can you claim such a significant impact from so few events?"

 

"This graph is the Mid-Ocean Spreading Zone Seismic Activity (MOSZSA) from 1977 through 2024. In order to capture the total number accurately, we can only monitor the medium and large sized seismic events. For the catalogue that I use, these are events of magnitude 5.3 or higher. 

 

To answer your question, here is how this works: last year (2024) we saw a total of 93 mid-ocean seismic events magnitude 5.3 or higher. In fact, virtually all of them were 5.3-6.2. What every seismologist does know, however, is that the scale is logarithmic. So, for magnitudes 4.3 to 5.2, there were 10 times 93, or 930 seismic events. From 3.3 to 4.2, there were 9,300 events. From 2.3 to 3.2 there were 93,000 events. And from 1.3 to 2.2, there were 930,000 events! Add it all up and there were over 1,000,000 seismic events along the mid-ocean ridge system for 2024. Furthermore, it is estimated that roughly 98% of those events produce high temperature magmas. That means that, on average, high temperature magma was injected into the mid-ocean ridge system nearly 3,000 times every day! 

 

At its low point in 1977, there were only 22 mid ocean events of 5.3 or more, or roughly 200,000 total events. That's nearly 5 orders of magnitude less than the 2024 event total! This dynamic, highly energetic system is CLEARLY having an impact on the thermohaline circulation."

 

 

Any comments?

Shows the guy is in serious climate denial. When it comes to climate, the sun swamps the earth. Always has and always will. The big problem we have now is more energy coming in from the sun than is radiated away. A large and growing imbalance at the top of the atmosphere, roughly 0.5% of the suns energy, year after year after year. Crazy when you consider that the energy leaving the earth is rising rapidly as the world warms.

If seismic was warming the earth, the earth would be warming from the inside out not the outside in.

[wotan]

8 hours ago, GaWx said:

To answer your question, here is how this works: last year (2024) we saw a total of 93 mid-ocean seismic events magnitude 5.3 or higher. In fact, virtually all of them were 5.3-6.2. What every seismologist does know, however, is that the scale is logarithmic. So, for magnitudes 4.3 to 5.2, there were 10 times 93, or 930 seismic events. From 3.3 to 4.2, there were 9,300 events. From 2.3 to 3.2 there were 93,000 events. And from 1.3 to 2.2, there were 930,000 events! Add it all up and there were over 1,000,000 seismic events along the mid-ocean ridge system for 2024. Furthermore, it is estimated that roughly 98% of those events produce high temperature magmas. That means that, on average, high temperature magma was injected into the mid-ocean ridge system nearly 3,000 times every day! 

Maybe I'm not awake enough for this, but, that's not how this works.

I don't see which magnitude scale is being used, so I'll just speak in general terms.

An increase of one in a magnitude scale means the amplitude of the wave increased by 10. An increase of one means 32 times as much energy is released.  Dr. Viterito is smoking crack. You can't look at the number of earthquakes of a given magnitude and interpolate how many smaller ones there were.

[jbenedet]

On 5/20/2025 at 5:54 AM, chubbs said:

This is a good news /bad news chart. The world is moving quickly to clean energy technology, but the US is lagging and policy support in the US is being removed. We will be left with an outmoded energy system.

 

China is a major net importer of fossil fuels. Should consider that. Look at consumption.

China developing EV because they don’t have the oil/nat gas reserves to support their economy. Geology/geography; not altruism. 

[chubbs]

27 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

China is a major net importer of fossil fuels. Should consider that. Look at consumption.

China developing EV because they don’t have the oil/nat gas reserves to support their economy. Geology/geography; not altruism. 

Agree its not altruism. They've also flipped the competitive script in cars. China wasn't going to catch up quickly to other countries in engine technology, but have gained a big advantage by switching to EV. The EV/batteries spurring growth in Vietnam, Thailand, Brazil and Indonesia all come from China. 

[GaWx]

WxBell/JB continue to strongly push that underwater seismic activity has been an important factor in determining global SST anomalies and thus global air temps. JB asks AI (Grok) to assess 

I gave the charts below to Grok, 2024 SST, 2025 SST, the graphic of the mid ocean spreading zone and the recent drop off. Then I asked it this:

 

Look at the difference in SST between this year and last year, and look at the rapid drop off in Mid Ocean spreading zone activity. What do you conclude based on this

Grok Conclusion:The cooling of SST from 2024 to 2025, alongside the rapid drop-off in Mid-Ocean Spreading Zone Seismic Activity, indicates that the reduced tectonic activity is likely a key factor in the observed temperature change. The decrease in magma upwelling along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge has reduced the heat input into the ocean, leading to cooler SSTs in 2025 compared to 2024. Other factors like ocean circulation or climate variability may also contribute, but the timing of the MOSZSA drop aligns closely with the SST cooling, supporting a direct geological influence.

 

But keep in mind that Grok has in previous JB posts insisted that the number of hydrothermal vents needs to be like a billion+ to have a large enough influence like Dr. Viterito has been suggesting. There are only like a few thousand at most that have been discovered. Let’s say 10K max:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent

 Even if we up the # of vents to a million, that would still be far too small.

 

Dr. Spencer flat out doesn’t believe that undersea geothermal can possibly be a significant factor:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2024/01/how-much-ocean-heating-is-due-to-deep-sea-hydrothermal-vents/

[wotan]

It's really hard to take (publicly accessible) LLM "science" seriously.

Sure, there might be some specialized LLMs that the general public can't access that might be trustworthy. But Grok? No.

[bluewave]

Not sure how anyone could come to that conclusion since this is a top down ocean warming process.

https://www2.whoi.edu/site/argo/impacts/warming-ocean/