General pollution discussion ?

[Typhoon Tip]

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.  

 

[lookingnorth]

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.

[Typhoon Tip]

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.

[LibertyBell]

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

[LibertyBell]

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.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

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. 

[LibertyBell]

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.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

In a word ... yuck!

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-plastic-pellets-blight-belgian-town.html

[Typhoon Tip]

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.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/04/climate/plastic-pollution-ocean-cnnphotos/

[LibertyBell]

On 2/28/2024 at 9:55 AM, Typhoon Tip said:

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.

 

Human population growth needs to be contained, end of story.

and especially the hot dog vendors out there, they need to be permanently sterilized.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/02/us/video/pfas-forever-chemicals-farmland-food-biosolids-digvid

 

... there are other things that'll kill you because of human ingenuity.  

The more time that goes by, decades and counting, the more so it appears there is no way off this road.   We've sold our futures to innovation and ingenuity, generations ago.  Separate discussion but ... human innovation may very well turn out to be the most destructive force this planet has ever known - the verdict is still out.

We are going to have to emerge equally as impressive measures and method to ameliorate. The reason why, these various systems appear to be set upon a momentum that is no longer capable of self-correction, a predicament that seems more and more so to require that same capacity to fix.

 "Silent thresholds."   Somewhat analogous to the event horizon of a black hole: the observer doesn't necessarily notice or sense anything unusual when crossing that boundary - only that they can never return to the previous paradigm.  The momentum carrying us into a CC realm cannot be countermanded merely by cutting C02 at this point - we've slipped through the proverbial horizon. 

PFAS and  BPAs etc...etc... these so-called "forever chemicals"   ( great idea, huh ), the 'momentum' of the damage they cause, the question should naturally arise, will that last forever, too?     -this is simple logic.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

On 4/28/2024 at 5:43 AM, LibertyBell said:

Human population growth needs to be contained, end of story.

and especially the hot dog vendors out there, they need to be permanently sterilized.

 

Something about the zeitgeist of modernism is doing a psycho-babble job on current breeding aged humanity and that is causing birthing rates to come down, anyway, but the following? 

It is, at minimum, an indirect implication of purely anthropomorphic pollution over the last 100 years, and is disturbing:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38745431/

Between the two of those, there's likely to be a population sink before the end of this century as time catches up with present heart beats while replacement long fell below 1::1.  The implications of which is probably modeled via super computer -reliant mathematical interpolations, or some other sci fi shit ... After all, starting with 8 billion souls, with non-equally distributed testicular numbing based on regional dispersion across the planet, it's not as straight forward.  Still, it's easy, given that publication, to imagine a dystopian frame-up where that is part of the cocktail of consequences lending to the Fermian "exit strategy"  (tongue in cheek )

It doesn't seem like it takes a complex study to just go ahead and assume at minimum, a population correction has to be the arithmetic fate if fucking isn't producing babies.  No need to really write that novel - the stories being written in every breath we takes and food we eat or drink, dumping exotic human innovation into reproductive physiology.  That's the "ball" game 

[LibertyBell]

14 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Something about the zeitgeist of modernism is doing a psycho-babble job on current breeding aged humanity and that is causing birthing rates to come down, anyway, but the following? 

It is a at minimum an indirect implication of purely anthropomorphic pollution over the last 100 years, and is disturbing:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38745431/

Between the two of those, there's likely to be a population sink before the end of this century as time catches up with present heart beats while replacement long fell below 1::1.  The implications of which is probably modeled via super computer -reliant mathematical interpolations, , or some other sci fi shit ... but it's easy, given that publication to, imagine a dystopian frame-up where that is part of the cocktail of consequences lending to the Fermian "exit strategy"  (tongue in cheek )

It doesn't seem like it takes a complex study to just go ahead and assume at minimum, a population correction has to be the arithmetic fate if fucking isn't producing babies.  No need to really write that novel - the stories being written in every breath we takes and food we eat or drink, dumping exotic human innovation into reproductive physiology.  That's the "ball" game 

Yes John and this is why the UN projects the population to stabilize before 2100.  At this rate it might happen far before then.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

Yes John and this is why the UN projects the population to stabilize before 2100.  At this rate it might happen far before then.

 

Stabilize? 

it's going to fall

[LibertyBell]

On 5/2/2024 at 8:06 AM, Typhoon Tip said:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/02/us/video/pfas-forever-chemicals-farmland-food-biosolids-digvid

 

... there are other things that'll kill you because of human ingenuity.  

The more time that goes by, decades and counting, the more so it appears there is no way off this road.   We've sold our futures to innovation and ingenuity, generations ago.  Separate discussion but ... human innovation may very well turn out to be the most destructive force this planet has ever known - the verdict is still out.

We are going to have to emerge equally as impressive measures and method to ameliorate. The reason why, these various systems appear to be set upon a momentum that is no longer capable of self-correction, a predicament that seems more and more so to require that same capacity to fix.

 "Silent thresholds."   Somewhat analogous to the event horizon of a black hole: the observer doesn't necessarily notice or sense anything unusual when crossing that boundary - only that they can never return to the previous paradigm.  The momentum carrying us into a CC realm cannot be countermanded merely by cutting C02 at this point - we've slipped through the proverbial horizon. 

PFAS and  BPAs etc...etc... these so-called "forever chemicals"   ( great idea, huh ), the 'momentum' of the damage they cause, the question should naturally arise, will that last forever, too?     -this is simple logic.

 

We have also now found these forever chemicals linked to the rising number of cases of diabetes (it's an epidemic now-- also because of an unhealthy highly processed food diet.)

 

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Stabilize? 

it's going to fall

It's still going up because of the developing world (mostly SubSaharan Africa) but the projections are that after 2050 it will start to fall there too.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

12 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

It's still going up because of the developing world (mostly SubSaharan Africa) but the projections are that after 2050 it will start to fall there too.

 

Yeah..I get it  ( I'm being partly sardonic in my phrase choices here.  Ha)

no but in all seriousness, there could be a time bomb threshold of toxicity that isn't known... All at once (say) there's a plague of male and female reproductive cancers, or something. 

Or, being that it's apparently capable of accessing the reproductive cellular exchange barrier... once in there,  can it get into one's genetics?   In that sense, it's not just potentially harmful to patient zero, maybe it forces a mutation that takes another generation or two to unilaterally manifest - suddenly, all our grand kids are born with half the gray-matter density.

With the rate in which recent science has been upending all the previous assumptions over the last 20 to 30 years, what makes any plausibility of foresight less possible?  That frequency increase should really inform us that just when we think we know, we only know we don't.

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Yeah..I get it  ( I'm being partly sardonic in my phrase choices here.  Ha)

no but in all seriousness, there could be a time bomb threshold of toxicity that isn't known... All at once (say) there's a plague of male and female reproductive cancers, or something. 

Or, being that it's apparently capable of accessing the reproductive cellular exchange barrier... once in there,  can it get into one's genetics?   In that sense, it's not just potentially harmful to patient zero, maybe it forces a mutation that takes another generation or two to unilaterally manifest - suddenly, all our grand kids are born with half the gray-matter density.

With the rate in which recent science has been upending all the previous assumptions over the last 20 to 30 years, what makes any plausibility of foresight less possible?  That frequency increase should really inform us that just when we think we know, we only know we don't.

There is karma going on too-- I want you to look this up because it's ironic in a way, there's research showing that fossil fuels might actually be driving down male fertility (sperm are quite sensitive to chemical toxins.)  

[LibertyBell]

6 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Yeah..I get it  ( I'm being partly sardonic in my phrase choices here.  Ha)

no but in all seriousness, there could be a time bomb threshold of toxicity that isn't known... All at once (say) there's a plague of male and female reproductive cancers, or something. 

Or, being that it's apparently capable of accessing the reproductive cellular exchange barrier... once in there,  can it get into one's genetics?   In that sense, it's not just potentially harmful to patient zero, maybe it forces a mutation that takes another generation or two to unilaterally manifest - suddenly, all our grand kids are born with half the gray-matter density.

With the rate in which recent science has been upending all the previous assumptions over the last 20 to 30 years, what makes any plausibility of foresight less possible?  That frequency increase should really inform us that just when we think we know, we only know we don't.

This occurred to me too-- air pollution actually does mutate genes.  It's right there on the CDC website, in addition to causing asthma it can also damage genes (makes sense since clean oxygen is needed for every bodily function.)

[Typhoon Tip]

5 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

There is karma going on too-- I want you to look this up because it's ironic in a way, there's research showing that fossil fuels might actually be driving down male fertility (sperm are quite sensitive to chemical toxins.)  

I'm not sure I need to?   It's not even in question.  We already know 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I'm not sure I need to?   It's not even in question.  We already know 

your favorite trash swamp thing doesn't think that air pollution can mutate genes, he is proof that it does.

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

This occurred to me too-- air pollution actually does mutate genes.  It's right there on the CDC website, in addition to causing asthma it can also damage genes (makes sense since clean oxygen is needed for every bodily function.)

your favorite trash swamp thing doesn't think that air pollution can mutate genes, he is proof that it does.