The climate change movement: July 28, 1995 to August 14, 2020 RIP

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If polar temperatures are increasing more than equatorial, that should reduce the number or severity of storms because it's that temperature differential that drives the air currents to converge.

A warmer polar climate would also increase moisture carrying capacity, which again should help to close the heat differential between equator and poles.

I'm pretty confident my hypothesis is flawed, but I haven't read the IPCC report yet on this subject.

* It's the Equatorial sea surface temperatures and evaporation which drive the rapid-intensification and total available energy for the cyclones. You may have seen where a tropical system turned north from the Yucatan Peninsula, and by the time it reached the Gulf Coast, had become a CAT-4, or on the verge of a CAT-5. The 'cold' you're thinking about is above the 'cap,' perhaps at 35,000-feet altitude, on up. It doesn't relay on polar 'cold.'
* In the Arctic, there's less snow and more rain. Powder snow insulates the ice below it, and has the highest index of solar reflectivity, further protecting the ice below it, which is actually much darker.
* When the snow goes, the darker ice melts faster.
* The ancient ice is going away.
* Ice 'extent' is confused with ice 'volume.'
* New ice is thin, it doesn't last.
* It doesn't matter how much 'extent' the new ice attains if it's all melted by September.
* Exposed water, aside from rock, has the worst albedo, as far as solar heating is concerned. Accelerating the warming, freshwater dilution, and thermal expansion of the seas / oceans.
* You could have water-skied the North Pole this year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The warming Arctic is affecting the polar vortex, which determines where the jet stream goes. This is where the hard freezes, blizzards, drought, wild fires, heat waves, atmospheric rivers, floods, hail, tornadoes, etc. come from.
* The Sierra Nevada might get a decent snowpack, only to lose it all in an early melt, shutting down the Colorado River, and Hoover Dam.
FUBAR!

[redpoint5]

I want to see solar and pumped hydro at Hoover implemented, even if it costs a fortune, because at least that would be an opportunity to learn.

[Piotrsko]

Originally Posted by aerohead

* The Sierra Nevada might get a decent snowpack, only to lose it all in an early melt, shutting down the Colorado River, and Hoover Dam.
FUBAR!

Arent they different systems or are you making the assertion that they are somehow interrelated by snowfall? Afaik, the sierra rivers generally go west the rockies generally go south or east

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Arent they different systems or are you making the assertion that they are somehow interrelated by snowfall? Afaik, the sierra rivers generally go west the rockies generally go south or east

I was trying to emphasize the regional variability and conditionality of climate effects.
California has been in a drought for 22-years now. The climate-related ocean evaporation-induced, record atmospheric river, which just swept through off the Pacific, might have provided some wildfire relief, agricultural relief, and some well-needed snowpack, as 'stored water' reservoir.
However, above-'normal' temperatures can jeopardize the amount of residence time the snowpack can survive in the mountains. If the heat melts it early, rivers may carry it to the sea before farmers can get any good out of it.
Aquifers are already stressed. There is no hydrological recharge. Those with wells have to go deeper to find the water level. The ground is subsiding as ground water is pumped out.
Hotter temps and higher winds accelerate reservoir evaporation rates.
There's now a black market for illegal water sales to, illegal marijuana farms, which if caught, face penalties which are just a fraction of the $-billions they make in profits.
The whole situation is just FUBAR.
So go ahead. Fly to Glasgow, Scotland. Burn 100,000-gallons of JET-A, while you attend your COP-( out ) 26, and promise how your going to go to net-zero carbon. FUBAR- squared!
Okay, I took my Lithium and Xanax, and am feeling much better now.

[freebeard]

....illegal marijuana farms....

You still have those in Texas?

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I want to see solar and pumped hydro at Hoover implemented, even if it costs a fortune, because at least that would be an opportunity to learn.

Since the 1970s, I've wanted to see an example of https://duckduckgo.com/?q=paolo+soleri+veladiga, a city built into the face of the dam.

The onsite use of power would reduce transmission losses, and the cellular infill would strengthen the dam far beyond necessity.

[Piotrsko]

We got 3 to 6 ft of what we call Sierra Cement on the upper parts of the local Sierras. pretty much an equivelant to solid ice and it hasnt been warm enough during the day to affect it significantly as the lakes and rivers have reduced flows again.

Btw: 100,000 gallons of jet fuel exceeds the weight carrying capacity of a 747 and commercial aircraft fuel is bought in pounds not gallons, at least when I was thinking of becoming a piss pumper at the airport couple of years back.

[freebeard]

commercial aircraft fuel is bought in pounds not gallons...

Always and everywhere, like pilots speaking English? I thought there was an aircraft lost when they confused kilograms and pounds.

[redpoint5]

Measured in weight because monitoring volume is more difficult? Expansion and contraction problems?

[Piotrsko]

Nope measured in weight because the max take off/ landing load of aircraft is measured that way, not in gallons. Odd since everything else like passenger weight and aicraft balance is a guesstimate and rule of thumb ( although commuter aircraft have a NOGO stick) .Should be some aircraft actually taking off over max and tail heavy, but it would be hard to prove.

I will ask next time I go to Europe, never thought about it because I'm 'Murican.

[redpoint5]

I believe some Airbus planes transfer fuel between port and starboard to balance. Probably nothing to balance fore and aft.

Recently I learned that part of modern aircraft design inefficiency is due to the horizontal stabilizer being angled to force the nose up slightly. This is to make the plane inherently stable, but increases drag.

Lack of an angled horizontal stabilizer is one of the ways a flying wing achieves greater efficiency. I hope to see the day when aircraft are fundamentally redesigned.