Global warming discussion IV

[macdoc]

Big claim ...huge reward...

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...r-into-car-parts-may-help-carbon-capture-pay/

 

[The Atheist]

Big claim ...huge reward...

Extraordinary claim; scant evidence.

“We calculate that with a physical area less than 10 per cent the size of the Sahara desert, our process could remove enough CO2 to decrease atmospheric levels to those of the pre-industrial revolution within 10 years,”

Only 360,000 square miles, an area three times larger than Colorado.

These people aren't related to Piggy Muldoon, are they?

 

[macdoc]

Why don't you read the science instead of making puerile comments worthy of a Grade 6 student?

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/STEP Technical 8-10-15.pdf

This is a sizeable team of scientists at work with 300 + peer reviewed patents and publications.
http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/Licht selected publications.pdf
I'm sure they would be very impressed with your cavalier dismissal of their work.

They are looking at a wide range of processes to reduce CO2 ( cement manufacturing notably ) and in this case actively reduce CO2 with a sound theoretical process borne out in experiment.

Licht Group Solar Energy Research

A new solar process has been introduced, the STEP process, which can efficiently remove carbon from the atmosphere and generates the staples needed by society, ranging from fuels, to metals, bleach and construction materials, at high solar efficiency and without carbon dioxide generation. STEP is a path to lower carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to pre-industrial concentration levels.

By using the full spectrum of sunlight, STEP captures more solar energy than the most efficient solar cell. STEP's use of concentrated sunlight and concentrated reactants drives high, industrial rate, of productions in new high temperature molten salt synthesis cells. Photoelectrochemistry is the study of light driven electrochemical processes. Highlights of the Licht Group photoelectrochemical studies include:

The STEP process to decrease atmospheric carbon dioxide: 2009 to present (see below), such as in: Licht, Cui, Baohui Wang, Li, Lau, Lui, "Ammonia synthesis by N2 and steam electrolysis in molten hydroxide suspensions of nanoscale Fe2O3," Science, Aug. 8 (2014), and in Ren, Li, Lau, Li, Gonzalez-Urbina, Licht "One-pot synthesis of carbon nanofibers from CO2," Nano Letters, 15, Aug. 3 (2015).
>> 100 photoelectrochemical studies, chapters & books are included in the Licht group select publications.
Demonstration of the dominance of solution speciation effects on photoelectrochemical charge transfer including the cesium enhancement of solar cell photovoltages, such as: Licht, "A Description of Energy Conversion in Photoelectrochemical Solar Cells," Nature, 330, 148 (cover article, 1987) and Licht, Peramunage, "Efficient photoelectrochemical solar cells," Nature, 345, 330 (1990).
High efficiency solar cells that works in the dark (illuminated semiconductor driven in-situ electrochemical charge storage), such as Licht, Hodes, Tenne, Manassen, "A Light Variation Insensitive High Effic. Solar Cell," Nature, 326, 863 (1987) and Licht, Wang, Soga, Umeno "Light Invariant, Efficient, … AlGaAs/Si/Metal Hydride Solar Cell" Applied Physics Letters, 74, 4055 (1999).
The theoretical & experimental development of multiple band-gap photoelectrochemistry, such as Licht, " Multiple Bandgap Semiconductor/Electrolyte Solar Energy Conversion " Journal of Physical Chemistry, B, Feature Article, 105, 6281 (2001).
Demonstration of fullerene photoelectrochemical solar cells, such as Licht, Halperin, Kalina, Zidman, Halperin, "Electrochemical Potential Tuned Solar Water Splitting" Chemical Communications, 3006 (2003).
Demonstration of highest solar efficiency of water splitting to generate hydrogen fuel, such as Licht, Halperin, Kalina, Zidman, Halperin, "Electrochemical Potential Tuned Solar Water Splitting" Chemical Communications, 3006 (2003).

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/Solar.html

What have you done that earns coverage in the wide range of publications noted below??

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/STEP solar Press reports 2014.pdf

Do you have some meaningful science based commentary to add to the discussion??

 

[Pixel42]

NOAA's state of the climate report for July.

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for July 2015 was the highest for July in the 136-year period of record, at 0.81°C (1.46°F) above the 20th century average of 15.8°C (60.4°F), surpassing the previous record set in 1998 by 0.08°C (0.14°F). As July is climatologically the warmest month of the year globally, this monthly global temperature of 16.61°C (61.86°F) was also the highest among all 1627 months in the record that began in January 1880.

The first seven months of 2015 comprised the warmest such period on record across the world's land and ocean surfaces, at 0.85°C (1.53°F) above the 20th century average, surpassing the previous record set in 2010 by 0.09°C (0.16°F).

 

[macdoc]

And El Nino has not yet blossomed fully.

 

[Dancing David]

Below is one of the comments to the quoted article. It hits the nail on the head. The problem in California isn't drought it's mad "environmentalism".





Environmentalists are killers. They've already sent millions of people to early deaths caused by privation due to artificially high food prices caused by the "bio-fuel" insanity. The UN says, and I agree, that governmental mandates of bio-fuels is a crime against humanity.

That has nothing to do with the archaic and open aqueduct system of water management in California, what point are you trying to make?

 

[The Atheist]

Why don't you read the science...

I did.

From your own link:

“I am extremely sceptical of these claims,” says Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California. Caldeira doubts that this kind of solar-to-chemical conversion is near being economically viable. “I would be highly surprised if these people have cracked this nut,” he says.

Nate Lewis of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena says one limiting factor in the large-scale deployment of Licht’s method might be that carbon dioxide would be depleted from the air where the equipment is set up.

 

[Fudbucker]

NOAA's state of the climate report for July.

This year has been scary hot. Most months have been record breakers. 2015 looks sure to go in the record books.

 

[Fudbucker]

both require conspiracy, one is active the other is tradition.

One is patently absurd, the other is absurd, but at least has a precedent.

 

[Trakar]

One is patently absurd, the other is absurd, but at least has a precedent.

(...,or so "they'd" lead you to believe!)

 

[CapelDodger]

OMG… Greenland’s ice sheets are melting fast
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ect-oceans-melting-greenland#comment-57186582

An urgent attempt to study the rate at which Greenland’s mighty ice sheets are melting has been launched by Nasa. The aim of the six-year project, called Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG), is to understand how fast the world’s warming seas are now eroding the edges of the island’s vast icecaps. Warming air temperatures are already causing considerable glacier loss there, but the factors involving the sea that laps the bases of its great ice masses, and which is also heating up, are less well understood.

Greenland contains vast reservoirs of ice which, if completely melted, would raise world sea levels by more than six metres. However, some influences on its current dramatic melting are poorly understood. Hence the decision to launch OMG, an acronym that the project leader, Joshua Willis, admits he “barely squeezed past the censors”.

More data will doubtless set all our minds at rest.

 

[Haig]

More data will doubtless set all our minds at rest.

Yeah, you should look at the data on climate change

The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie

"The biggest problem is not YES/NO on climate change. Or YES/NO on CO2. It is the fact that :
1. A lot of people who don't have a clue (on both sides) have strong opinions.
2. The largest influence on the debate is not the science, it is the media.
3. The media is controlled by the powerful industrial and elite ruling class interests.
4. The education system provides weak tools for critical thinking. So the opinions of the majority of the public is driven by emotion not reason.

What is clear to me is that the debate on climate change is a vehicle for driving policy. The policy is the same no matter what the evidence for climate change. The policy is de-industrialisation."

Observational data gives the opposite of what the warmist alarmist overblown models claim ...

 

[Trakar]

Yeah, you should look at the data on climate change
The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie

Again, quite simply, incorrect.

 

[CapelDodger]

Again, quite simply, incorrect.

And thoroughly mendacious.

 

[Trakar]

Climate Danger Of The ‘Hyper-Anthropocene’ Age

James Hansen Spells Out Climate Danger Of The ‘Hyper-Anthropocene’ Age - http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/27/3684564/james-hansen-climate-danger-hyper-anthropocene/

James Hansen and 16 leading climate experts have written a must-read discussion paper (http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/20059/2015/acpd-15-20059-2015.pdf ) on what humanity risks if it can’t keep total global warming below 2°C (3.6°F). The greatest risk they identify is “that multi-meter sea level rise would become practically unavoidable.”
This is warning everyone should heed — not just because Hansen’s co-authors include some of the world’s top sea-level rise experts, such as Eric Rignot and Isabella Velicogna, but also given Hansen’s prescience on climate change dating back more than three decades.

In 1981, Hansen led a team of NASA scientists in a seminal article in Science, “Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide.” (http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~davidc/ATMS211/articles_optional/Hansen81_CO2_Impact.pdf )

They warned: “Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage.”

Wow. A 35-year-old peer-reviewed climate warning that is 100 percent dead on. Is there anyone else on the planet who can has been right for so long about climate change?...

The fact that warming as high as 2°C should be avoided at all costs is not news to people who pay attention to climate science, though it may be news to people who only follow the popular media. Indeed, 70 leading climate experts made that point crystal clear in a May report (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/sb/eng/inf01.pdf ) to the world’s leading governments that received embarrassingly little coverage from the mainstream media.

As an important aside, Hansen and his 16 co-authors continue to be criticized for publicizing this paper prior to peer review. While I probably would have framed the paper’s launch somewhat differently — as an expert opinion and discussion piece coming from one or more major scientific institutions — I think this particular criticism is overblown…

The fact that 2°C total warming locks us in to sea level rise of 10 feet or more has been obvious for a while now. Heck, the National Science Foundation (NSF) issued a news release (http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=123545 ) back in March 2012 on paleoclimate research with the large-type headline, “Global Sea Level Likely to Rise as Much as 70 Feet in Future Generations.” The lead author of that study explained, “The natural state of the Earth with present carbon dioxide levels is one with sea levels about 70 feet higher than now.”

And a 2009 paper in Science showed that the last time CO2 levels were this high, it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher.
(http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5958/1394.abstract )

What has changed is our understanding of just how fast sea levels could rise. In 2014 and 2015, a number of major studies revealed that large parts of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets are unstable and headed toward irreversible collapse — and some parts may have already passed the point of no return. Another 2015 study found that global sea level rise since 1990 has been speeding up even faster than we knew…

Just to get back on topic a bit.

 

[Reality Check]

Yeah, you should look at the data on climate change

And then you do not look at the data, Haig !
Instead you link to a political YouTube video that goes on about a conspiracy to create AGW!
The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle is a polemical[1] documentary film that suggests that the scientific opinion on climate change is influenced by funding and political factors, and questions whether scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming exists.

Observational data gives the opposite of what the warmist alarmist overblown models claim ...

This looks like a lie, Haig.
Observational data shows that global warming has continued and the range of climate models includes the observational data. Idiotic random images do not change the science.

This looks like part of the "no global warming since X" lies you have parroted before from WUWT:

1. 11th May 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies by cherry picking the source and start date about "No global warming for 18 years and 3 months" as easily seen by anyone who looks at the data.
2. 7th August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog about "No global warming for 18 years and 7 months"
3. 14 August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about the BEST data showing global warming (it does!)
4. 20 August 2015 Haig: A rather deluded video from Corbyn speaking at a really deluded Electric Universe conference!

No sign yet that you understand
14 August 2015 Haig: Explaining how the water vapor greenhouse effect works
Or for that matter:
12 August 2015 Haig: 5 years of denial of science dating from 19th February 2010 (a new Maunder Minimum will only have a small effect on global warming).
12 August 2015 Haig: Your denial of the real world where the Sun's output has been constant for the last 35 years while global temperatures have increased continues.

 

[Megalodon]

Yeah, you should look at the data on climate change

The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie



Observational data gives the opposite of what the warmist alarmist overblown models claim ...
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_3823655c7ae0dd69d9.png[/qimg]

I remember those claims from previous incarnations... not really up to scrutiny (or data).

 

[macdoc]

Good to see you back.

 

[Haig]

I remember those claims from previous incarnations... not really up to scrutiny (or data).

Sure there is and more data is coming all the time, to back it up, as well as the empirical evidence

The Sunspots 2.0? Irrelevant. The Sun, still is.

What does it tell us? Given that long term variations in Earth's climate do correlate with long term solar activity (e.g., see the first part of this) and given that some solar activity indicators (presumably?) don't show an increase from the Maunder minimum, but some do, it means that climate is sensitivite to those aspects of the solar activity that increased (e.g., solar wind), but not those more directly associated with the number of sunspots (e.g., UV or total solar irradiance). Thus, this result on the sunspots maxima (again, if true), only strengthens the idea that the solar climate link is through something related to the open magnetic field lines, such as the strength of the solar wind or the cosmic ray flux which it modulates.

The second point I wanted to write about is a recently published analysis showing that the sun has a large effect on climate, and quantifying it. In an earlier work, I showed that you can use the oceans as a calorimeter to see that the solar radiative forcing over the solar cycle is very large, by looking at various oceanic data sets (heat content, sea surface temperature and tide gauges). How large? About 6-7 times large than one can naively expect from changes in the solar irradiance.

Study: German Scientists Conclude 20th Century Warming “Nothing Unusual” …Foresee “Global Cooling Until 2080″!

Compared to the maxima and minima of the past, the current minima and maxima show that there is nothing unusual happening today. The scientists say today’s temperature changes are within the normal range. The German authors write: “Especially the 20th century shows nothing out of the ordinary.”

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

All of these rogue "climatologists" blowing the lid off of the AGW conspiracy, and none of them are dead. Somebody's slacking...