CDZ avoiding climate catastrophe : paying attention to our methane output should be of bigger concern to us, i and quite a few others think

[Grumblenuts]

 

[App'z]

 

[App'z]

Its the only common sense way to renewable farm lands, timbers and grasses.

 

[Delldude]

If you take your hat off and walk around out there in that sun, maybe on a tractor or whatever for a couple of hours, in Mid June when its 105 degrees, you will most likely get a heat stroke and be grateful for some Ice water from my desalting plant ! + you will never want to go thru it again ! Lol
+ the Donals group is so screwed !

Hello, Stu......rookie....lol

 

[peacefan]

They actually can't. Every climate model that has ever been tested showed that no matter what numbers you plugged in to the program you always get warming.

They have an inherent bias in their programming and thus, they are worthless.

well, weather *has* become more erratic. snow and ice in Europe in the winter in the 1980s, then swealtering heat in summer and mild winters (no snow/ice) in the 2000s-2020, God knows what we're in for next.

can't hurt to be extra careful

and the fact is : we have more and more heat-trapping CO2 and methane going into the sky every year.
the permafrost in Russia and Greenland is also melting, releasing even more methane..

 

[peacefan]

Desalination plants are expensive. They are a hell of a good idea though. Especially in California.

Does DARPA have time for this? They got some smart ppl over there. NASA could help out two. Just a team of <10 engineers collaborating over the net could make all the difference here.

 

[App'z]

Thing with Desalting is it doesn't actually have to be on the Coast, there are millions of Acres of worthless land they can sit on just need salt water pumped there and the Brine pumped out. Just figure out the Land the USA owns that is basically worthless Arid ground and mountains. We have the equipment to level a mountain for use also.
Some have been leveled out in Tennessee and Kentucky for building construction etc. Heck the water could just be pumped into aquifers and then pumped out where irrigation needed exists many mile away from the plants. There are no limits to good ideas that will most likely make the world a better place for all species of life. Its not that hard to figure the control of Methane and CO2 using natural resources if we can do it is a fact of health and wellness. Heck water will cool all by itself.

 

[App'z]

As Water Scarcity Increases, Desalination Plants Are on the Rise

After decades of slow progress, desalination is increasingly being used to provide drinking water around the globe. Costs for processing salt water for drinking water have dropped, but it remains an expensive option and one that creates environmental problems that must be addressed.

e360.yale.edu

 

[flacaltenn]

statistical models (short-termed ones especially, dating back in the 10-year to 2-year range i suppose) still can tell us a lot about what's ahead in the near future, and what to prepare for, what adjustments would be wise to implement in our economies, stuff like that.

When you're having an INTERNATIONAL meltdown of govt looking to capitalize on a handy "crisis" -- just being able to look 2 to 10 years into the future is silly. You need to know the temperature anomaly in 2100 and BEYOND and the same with sea level rise.

The models since the 90s NEVER MADE IT accurately to 10 years out. You NEED to KNOW that. And I bet you don't even know what the "warming" rate is !!!!!

By satellite measurement -- the warming rate is just 0.14 DegC PER DECADE.. Judging by your avie -- I'd say the Earth has warmed less than 0.3DegC in your lifetime.

We shouldn't be doing global monetary redistribution or spending $10s of Trill of dollars on remediation efforts if the models are NOT ACCURATE out more then 10 years AND there are no VISIBLE SIGNS of "accelerated warming" or "trigger points" or some of the other sketchy adjunct GW theories.

 

[BackAgain]

The permafrost melting is gonna release enough methane to make cow farts of even less concern than they were already. Now the planet is farting.

 

[App'z]

MSN
Thats what is happening all over the World ! Southern Russia is going dry, northern Russia is warmer than ever, so is China. Pacific Islands, Saudia Arabia has the worlds most Desalting and Israel. 300,000,000 people wondering where they are gonna get their next bottle of water tomorrow. Maybe real facts about why Russia is willing to invade the Ukraine aren't so hard to get.

 

[App'z]

Russia in 2021: As Climate Crisis Rages, Scientists Fear the Worst is Yet to Come

Russia came under siege from climate change in 2020, and experts warn that Arctic heatwaves, fires and melting permafrost could be worse this year. The year began with the warmest winter in 140 years of recorded meteorological data, leaving Moscow — a city usually covered in snow for four...

www.themoscowtimes.com

Russian experts are reluctantly willing to say that with every passing 5 years Russia averages warmer temps Higher than the rest of the World. Maybe being big and far north is why !

 

[Grumblenuts]

By satellite measurement -- the warming rate is just 0.14 DegC PER DECADE.. Judging by your avie -- I'd say the Earth has warmed less than 0.3DegC in your lifetime.

Yes, you'd say. NASA would say:

Since satellites technically measure neither temperature nor the surface (where people live), it’s safe to say that ground thermometers are more accurate than satellite measurements.

Gee, who to believe?

 

[badbob85037]

Scientists say this invisible gas could seal our fate on climate change | CNN

Slashing carbon dioxide emissions is critical to ending the climate crisis. But, for the first time, scientists emphasized the need to control a more insidious culprit: methane.

edition.cnn.com

Scientists say this invisible gas could seal our fate on climate change​

By Rachel Ramirez, CNN
Updated 0208 GMT (1008 HKT) August 12, 2021

(CNN)Slashing carbon dioxide emissions is critical to ending the climate crisis. But, for the first time, the UN climate change report emphasized the need to control a more insidious culprit: methane, an invisible, odorless gas with more than 80 times more warming power in the near-term than carbon dioxide.
According to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the concentration of methane in the atmosphere is higher now than any time in at least 800,000 years.
With Earth rapidly approaching the 1.5-degree-Celsius threshold above preindustrial levels, scientists say methane emissions need to be reduced fast. Charles Koven, a lead author of the IPCC report, said this is due to methane's incredible warming power.

Earth is warming faster than previously thought, scientists say, and the window is closing to avoid catastrophic outcomes
"The fastest way that we might mitigate some of the climate change that we're seeing already in the short term is by reducing methane," Koven told CNN. "If we were to reduce methane emissions, it would act to offset one of these sources of warming."
If the world stopped emitting carbon dioxide tomorrow, Koven said, global temperatures wouldn't begin to cool for many years because of how long the gas stays in the atmosphere. Reducing methane is the easiest knob to turn to change the path of global temperature in the next 10 years, he said.
Methane, the main component of the natural gas we use to fuel our stoves and heat our homes, can be produced in nature by belching volcanoes and decomposing plant matter. But it is also pumped into the atmosphere in much larger amounts by landfills, livestock and the oil and gas industry.

Natural gas has been hailed as a "bridge fuel" that would transition the US to renewable energy because it is more efficient than coal and emits less carbon dioxide when burned. Importantly for industry, natural gas is in abundant supply around the world and is less costly to extract from the ground.


But proponents for this new "cleaner" gas missed a dangerous threat: that it could leak, unburned, into the atmosphere and cause significant warming.
Methane can leak from oil and natural gas wells, natural gas pipelines and the processing equipment itself. According to data from the US Energy Information Administration, the US has thousands of active wells for natural gas, millions of abandoned oil and gas wells, about two million miles of natural gas pipelines, and several refineries that process the gas.
One in three Americans lives in a county with oil and gas operations, posing climate and public health risks, according to a report by the Environmental Defense Fund.

Until recently, tracking the location and magnitude of methane leaks was difficult. Now, infrared cameras and advanced satellites can estimate methane emissions around the globe, giving scientists and regulators insight into what's being released from facilities.
Climatologists at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration previously told CNN that pernicious changes in the climate system will only intensify unless people stop using fuels that burn and leak greenhouse gases like methane.
"For carbon dioxide, we've always known about power plants and smokestacks and things like that; but with methane, until recent years, we didn't understand how much an influence a small number of large sources have really had," Robert Jackson, professor of environmental science at Stanford University, told CNN. "We didn't understand how long the tail was and how important the super-emitters were for reducing emissions."
The latest IPCC assessment highlights that scientists now have a better understanding of how much methane is being released by human activity like agriculture and the fossil fuel industry, and how much it contributes to the climate crisis.

Around the world, fossil fuels, agriculture and coal mining are skyrocketing methane emissions. Nonetheless, the production and sources vary by region. In the North America, a majority -- 14% of total methane emissions -- come from the oil and gas production followed by livestock at 10%. In China, coal mining is the biggest methane driver, contributing 24% to total emissions.
Though agriculture is a major source of methane, Jackson said the emissions from farming and food production would be harder to tackle.
"There are only certain things we can do with cattle," Jackson said. "We can either ask people to stop eating beef or we can try and give cattle feed additives to change the microbes in the chemistry of their guts. But that's not easy to do for billions of cattle around the world."
The International Energy Agency estimate that the oil and gas industry around the world can reduce methane by 75% using the technology already available. It also estimates that 40% of the emissions could be reduced without extra costs, since the natural gas captured could then be sold.

Flaring at a natural gas processing facility in North Dakota.
Climate activists like Lisa DeVille, a member of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation, are urging policymakers to make stringent methane reductions. The Bakken oil field in North Dakota surrounds the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, where DeVille lives, with nearly 1,000 oil and gas wells that scientists found in 2016 was leaking 275,000 tons of methane per year.
"This means the land that is part of my identity as an Indigenous woman has been turned into a pollution-filled industrial zone," DeVille said. "This is unacceptable."
As the co-founder of the grassroots group Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights, DeVille is tackling environmental regulations head-on. In 2018, the organization successfully sued the Trump administration's Bureau of Land Management for rolling back a critical methane waste prevention rule.
Global temperatures are now at 1.1 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, according to the report, and the planet is already seeing the impact in the form of extreme fire behavior, severe flooding, relentless drought and deadly heat waves.
The IPCC report makes clear that stopping methane emissions is key to slowing the planet from reaching 1.5 degrees. Scientists say world leaders need to act immediately in tackling all greenhouse gas emissions, and not just carbon dioxide.

Climate scientists have done their bit. Now the pressure is on leaders for COP26.
Rick Duke, senior director and White House liaison for John Kerry, President Biden's special climate envoy, told CNN in a press call that reducing methane, and methane leaks, is a top priority for the Biden administration.
"There's been incredible largely behind-the-scenes effort already to prepare to move faster and more comprehensively to cut methane domestically, at the same time that we're addressing this as a diplomatic imperative," Duke said.
Already, pressure is mounting. In June, DeVille discussed tribal issues, particularly slashing methane emissions and transitioning to clean energy quickly and equitably, with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan.
"What we do in the next few years will determine what kind of world we have, what kind of world we leave for our children," said DeVille, who is now seeking to meet with Interior Secretary Deb Haaland to discuss similar issues. "We must rapidly switch to clean energy, stop fossil fuel carbon pollution, and then methane leaks."
CNN's Drew Kann and John Keefe contributed to this report.

My question, especially to the Republican audience and leaders that frequent this forum, is this :
Would you allow Biden to curtail the US' methane output, and with that set an example for the rest of NATO and the world?
An example that by the way would increase world-wide goodwill for the USA.

At first it was we are getting colder then it was Global Warming. When that didn't pan out it was climate change, what us people not looking for something to worry about call Summer, Winter, Spring, and Fall. According to Algore we all should be dead by now or grown gills. I have lived in the Arizona desert for over 20 years and work construction. I can remember every day over 125 degrees and they have been random, about every 4 or 5 years. The sea levels have not risen. California is not under water but if it was I would be given the water front property I so much deserve. Now we are given another dooms day some will eat up. If you have to worry about a dooms day worry about crazy Joe starting World War Three.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes, you'd say. NASA would say:

Gee, who to believe?

Your link is busted. It goes nowhere. As far as NASA goes, the organization IRONICALLY CALLED>><

Goddard Institute for SPACE SCIENCES (NASA GISS) -- IRonically hates advanced technology on satellites. Go figure..

But if YOU THINK we wasted 100s of $Mills on a fleet of atmos study satellites that NASA REALLY DID NOT WANT -- go ahead and wine to Congress. THEY ARE more TEMPORLY and SPATIALLY accurate in that they do the SAME THING, the SAME WAY, EVERYWHERE, EVERY DAY on the face of the earth.

The good part is -- you'll probably understand that TREES, FOSSILS, ICE CORES and the ALL of the proxy tools that created the FICTION that earth's climate was better and more stable back in eons,

--------------------------------- Are ALSO NOT THERMOMETERS -- EY 'bro?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Your link is busted.

Thanks. Here:

Which measurement is more accurate: taking Earth’s surface temperature from the ground or from space?

Ground thermometers are considered more accurate than satellite measurements when it comes to tracking temperature, and here’s why: In summary, while satellites provide valuable information about Earth’s temperature, ground thermometers are considered more reliable because they directly measure...

climate.nasa.gov

Read it.

As far as NASA goes, the organization IRONICALLY CALLED>><

Goddard Institute for SPACE SCIENCES (NASA GISS) -- IRonically hates advanced technology on satellites. Go figure..

But if YOU THINK

No, I certainly don't. There's your usual mistake. Instead of responding to anything I actually said, you just invent some position you want to argue with. Your "irony" only follows from your extensive strawman. Nothing for me to "go figure." Just because you're obsessed with "surface temperature" doesn't mean NASA must be as well. They clearly don't "hate" any sort of technology. As they explain quite clearly, the satellites are great for measuring all kinds of useful data that we obviously couldn't get so easily otherwise. "If you think" signals a lazy, deceitful thinker preparing to talk only to themselves. Try "If I think" next time and kindly leave me the hell out of it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The good part is -- you'll probably understand that TREES, FOSSILS, ICE CORES and the ALL of the proxy tools that created the FICTION that earth's climate was better and more stable back in eons,

Same. "that earth's climate was better and more stable back in eons," appears to be your "fiction." Ain't got nothin' to do with me.

 

[flacaltenn]

Thanks. Here:

Which measurement is more accurate: taking Earth’s surface temperature from the ground or from space?

Ground thermometers are considered more accurate than satellite measurements when it comes to tracking temperature, and here’s why: In summary, while satellites provide valuable information about Earth’s temperature, ground thermometers are considered more reliable because they directly measure...

climate.nasa.gov

Read it.

No, I certainly don't. There's your usual mistake. Instead of responding to anything I actually said, you just invent some position you want to argue with. Your "irony" only follows from your extensive strawman. Nothing for me to "go figure." Just because you're obsessed with "surface temperature" doesn't mean NASA must be as well. They clearly don't "hate" any sort of technology. As they explain quite clearly, the satellites are great for measuring all kinds of useful data that we obviously couldn't get so easily otherwise. "If you think" signals a lazy, deceitful thinker preparing to talk only to themselves. Try "If I think" next time and kindly leave me the hell out of it.

You can get any position YOU WANT out of a govt science agency dude. Here's the cogent example ALSO FROM NASA.

Accurate "Thermometers" in Space | Science Mission Directorate

science.nasa.gov

An incredible amount of work has been done to make sure that the satellite data are the best quality possible. Recent claims to the contrary by Hurrell and Trenberth have been shown to be false for a number of reasons, and are laid to rest in the September 25th edition of Nature (page 342). The temperature measurements from space are verified by two direct and independent methods. The first involves actual in-situ measurements of the lower atmosphere made by balloon-borne observations around the world. The second uses intercalibration and comparison among identical experiments on different orbiting platforms. The result is that the satellite temperature measurements are accurate to within three one-hundredths of a degree Centigrade (0.03 C) when compared to ground-launched balloons taking measurements of the same region of the atmosphere at the same time.

SO G-nuts -- what's the difference between YOUR "NASA truth and MINE? It's SIMPLE MAN.,. Yours came from CLIMATE.NASA - and mine came from SCIENCE.NASA. The former was paid for out of Global Warming money targeted towards the non-scientific.
The latter includes hefty lifting of knowing who Trenberth and Hurrel are and how they failed badly to protect the 40,000 thermometers scattered randomly and not uniformly around the globe.

Also INCLUDES "jargon" about "calibration" and "verification" and the ACTUAL TEMPERATURE ACCURACY (0.03DegC) of converting microwave signatures from OXYGEN molecules that vary with temperature. YOUR "mindless citizen" version just talks about "brightness" -- which is a HORRIBLY UNSCIENTIFIC way of describing what the sats are DOING.

The HORRIBLY UNSCIENTIFIC link contains severe misdirection and mutilation of facts to make its case. To wit the opening misdirection/misrepresentation..

Since satellites technically measure neither temperature nor the surface (where people live), it’s safe to say that ground thermometers are more accurate than satellite measurements.

Global warming IS NOT -- "at the surface where life lives". It exists in the entire LOWER atmos. Both Troposphere/Stratosphere. TO REALLY STUDY IT you can't do that with a thermometer in your hand.

And the sats can SELECTIVELY PROCESS different layers INCLUDING the lower troposphere down to the SURFACE.

Then 2 CONFUSING "bad excuses" paragraphs talking about "getting a box full of puzzle pieces and ...."

WE KNOW EXACTLY where those puzzle pieces fit. And WHICH ONES to apply to measure air temps at the surface. IN FACT -- ALL THAT nonsense was sorted out BEFORE the sats were launched. They are SPATIALLY ACCURATE AND REPEATABLE to about the precision of your auto navigation system.

Now I ask YOU to imagine sorting out THESE puzzle pieces and how they are randomly SPEWED and distributed UNEVENLY around the surface of the Earth. This is the 30,000 piece "thermometer" puzzle that ADEQUATELY COVERS -- less than 40% of the globe.

Puzzle courtesy of ---

Data Dive: Five NOAA Databases That Are Worth Exploring

Every day, NOAA’s network of satellites and Earth-based observation system collect some 20 terabytes of environmental data…

www.nesdis.noaa.gov

 

[flacaltenn]

Same. "that earth's climate was better and more stable back in eons," appears to be your "fiction." Ain't got nothin' to do with me.

Did ya miss the blaring headlines over your many decades of how "the current warming is the FASTEST AND THE HIGHEST in 20,000 years? All from a few papers where the authors fed the media a bunch of crap about the ACCURACY of their Trees, fossils, ice cores that they used as "ancient thermometers"..

There's a well known meme in GW science that goes -- "I think that I will never see, a thermometer as bad as a tree"?? LOL.. Apologies to Grace Kilmer.

 

[flacaltenn]

well, weather *has* become more erratic. snow and ice in Europe in the winter in the 1980s, then swealtering heat in summer and mild winters (no snow/ice) in the 2000s-2020, God knows what we're in for next.

can't hurt to be extra careful

and the fact is : we have more and more heat-trapping CO2 and methane going into the sky every year.
the permafrost in Russia and Greenland is also melting, releasing even more methane..

Russian scientists are more worried about Siberia frozen methane getting released by seismic events.

THe AMOUNT of sequestered frozen methane REMAINING is FAR LESS than what was already released during the warming phases of the last 4 Ice Ages.