Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

General pollution discussion ?


Typhoon Tip
 Share

Recommended Posts

High everyone ... 

 ...I'm interesting in establishing an ongoing discussion, ranging from disciplined research to general aspects involving environment.  It could/would encompass the total manifold that exists under the general rubric of "anthropomorphic pollution" . 

This is a weather -based social media platform, so it may not be entirely appropriate in the strictest sense ...  However, merely starting the thread in Off-Topic lounge probably doesn't get noticed?  Aside, OT is really evolved to be purposed for other uses - to put in kindly ... There's not much purpose in attempting much there.

It is not entirely disconnected.  Atmospheric aerosols that contribute to soil acidification - as just one example ... - are also connected to climate due to atmospheric microphysics and radiation budgeting... etc.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I like the topic idea. I am enrolled in a course on atmospheric radiation currently, and it is interesting learning about how aerosols influence atmospheric conditions. I have heard it claimed that the May 20, 2019 severe weather outbreak was weakened due to dust aerosols from further west. But I'm not a huge expert on the topic.

I've also heard it said that switching from coal to natural gas may not be as beneficial in reducing climate change as people had hoped, because the aerosols from coal combustion help cool the climate and counteract some of the CO2 emissions from burning coal. But those aerosols still have negative direct effects on human health, so it is still better to switch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-deep-blue-seas-oceans-hue.html

...one fear of mine is that we'll go and have done something through all of this industrialization cleverness that pushes some key threshold of climate change and/or chemistry into the environment, over unknown thresholds - that were unknown ( perhaps because it is even an emergent negative property by the interaction of multiple aspects from pollution and temperature changes that are as yet unknown).  On the other side of that hypothetical boundary ... there is a mass and abrupt die-off of critical oceanic means to fix C02 out of the atmosphere.

The oceans have absorbed the vaster majority of the anthropogenic C02 forcing into the background state, since we started this take and take without any thought to ramification of 'species-method' for conquering over the natural order.  If we did not have this mechanism, largely owing to the biota in the top 100 meters of the ocean depths...

..we wouldn't be here having this discussion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 5/6/2023 at 7:16 PM, lookingnorth said:

I like the topic idea. I am enrolled in a course on atmospheric radiation currently, and it is interesting learning about how aerosols influence atmospheric conditions. I have heard it claimed that the May 20, 2019 severe weather outbreak was weakened due to dust aerosols from further west. But I'm not a huge expert on the topic.

I've also heard it said that switching from coal to natural gas may not be as beneficial in reducing climate change as people had hoped, because the aerosols from coal combustion help cool the climate and counteract some of the CO2 emissions from burning coal. But those aerosols still have negative direct effects on human health, so it is still better to switch.

No it's better to stop using methane too (I refuse to use the inaccurate term "natural gas")-- it's dirty methane, pure and simple. In Oklahoma you all have earthquakes because of fracking, it's a major reason why we banned fracking here.  Get to solar and wind and even nuclear and regardless of whatever side effects you have from dumping all fossil fuels, it needs to be done.  It's the long term solution worth short term pain.  Methane is a far more potent GHG than CO2 is-- regardless of how long it stays in the atmosphere

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/3/2023 at 11:41 AM, Typhoon Tip said:

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-deep-blue-seas-oceans-hue.html

...one fear of mine is that we'll go and have done something through all of this industrialization cleverness that pushes some key threshold of climate change and/or chemistry into the environment, over unknown thresholds - that were unknown ( perhaps because it is even an emergent negative property by the interaction of multiple aspects from pollution and temperature changes that are as yet unknown).  On the other side of that hypothetical boundary ... there is a mass and abrupt die-off of critical oceanic means to fix C02 out of the atmosphere.

The oceans have absorbed the vaster majority of the anthropogenic C02 forcing into the background state, since we started this take and take without any thought to ramification of 'species-method' for conquering over the natural order.  If we did not have this mechanism, largely owing to the biota in the top 100 meters of the ocean depths...

..we wouldn't be here having this discussion.

Air Pollution shortens life by 2 years on average, more than tobacco smoking does.  The one benefit of the pandemic was that the air and water became cleaner.  In urban areas air pollution shortens life by up to 10 years, causes genetic mutations and asthma.

 

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Air Pollution shortens life by 2 years on average, more than tobacco smoking does.  The one benefit of the pandemic was that the air and water became cleaner.  In urban areas air pollution shortens life by up to 10 years, causes genetic mutations and asthma.

 

Time is the crucible in which we burn - it's always been about the amount of time of exposure.   Pollution in urban areas is every breath in perpetuity.  Smoking is a Darwin Award looking for a celebration, but when you are not smoking ... you may not necessarily be breathing bad air otherwise. 

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Time is the crucible in which we burn - it's always been about the amount of time of exposure.   Pollution in urban areas is every breath in perpetuity.  Smoking is a Darwin Award looking for a celebration, but when you are not smoking ... you may not necessarily be breathing bad air otherwise. 

second hand smoke may be even more deadly, and then we have NO2 pollution that happens as a result of vehicle exhaust.  Diesel exhaust and fossil fuel exhaust from factories is particularly bad.  Are you familiar with Cancer Alley in Louisiana where cancer rates are 86X higher -- activists have recently successfully prevented yet another deadly factory from being built there.

 

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-world-stem-surge-polluting-trash.html

...while we are busy cutting the pie into slices of who-dun-what in the causality of the climate holocaust ... this above is just a problematic.

Man, despite all conceits ... the evidences continues to mount, human innovation as a weapon unto itself, appears to be its greatest achievement.

 

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...