Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Anonymous,MyNameIsUrl,6Tricia,staffordian, for Donating to support the site

The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

Midsmartin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 484
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:18 am
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 280 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438499

Postby Midsmartin » August 30th, 2021, 8:42 pm

Nimrod, I'm no expert on sea level measurements, so I Googled the two places you mention. It appears that UK sea levels were rising at 1.4mm a year for a period when the global average was found to be 1.7mm per year.

Seems pretty much in agreement given that sea level may rise by different amounts in different parts of the world. And that variation means that wet should use global measurements, not just one or two locations.

https://www.ntslf.org/products/sea-level-trends

So I'm unsure what it is about the data that your referring to? Am I missing something?

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438506

Postby Nimrod103 » August 30th, 2021, 9:03 pm

Midsmartin wrote:Nimrod, I'm no expert on sea level measurements, so I Googled the two places you mention. It appears that UK sea levels were rising at 1.4mm a year for a period when the global average was found to be 1.7mm per year.

Seems pretty much in agreement given that sea level may rise by different amounts in different parts of the world. And that variation means that wet should use global measurements, not just one or two locations.

https://www.ntslf.org/products/sea-level-trends

So I'm unsure what it is about the data that your referring to? Am I missing something?


What you are missing is that the rate of increase should have clearly speeded up in recent decades, as the concentration of CO2 has risen. The rate of increase in sea level recorded at North Shields and Newlyn has not speeded up.

Midsmartin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 484
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:18 am
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 280 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438517

Postby Midsmartin » August 30th, 2021, 10:04 pm

I see. But we have established that sea level may behave differently in different parts of the world, and so picking just two datasets from nearby places doesn't prove much. You need surely to look at worldwide averages? Which do appear to show acceleration as far as I can tell.

Regardless, co2 is rising fast and we have known for more than 100 years that this increases temperatures. And temperatures do seem to be increasing. Claims that the whole man-made climate change thing is an error/scam/hoax are absurd to be honest.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438519

Postby Nimrod103 » August 30th, 2021, 10:15 pm

Midsmartin wrote:I see. But we have established that sea level may behave differently in different parts of the world, and so picking just two datasets from nearby places doesn't prove much. You need surely to look at worldwide averages? Which do appear to show acceleration as far as I can tell.


I regard that as special pleading. The UK sea level data is the best there is. If there is no accelerating rate in that data set, then as far as I am concerned the rate is not accelerating. There is no reason to suppose that the UK is somehow different from the rest of the World.

Sorcery
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1296
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:38 pm
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 99 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438520

Postby Sorcery » August 30th, 2021, 10:21 pm

XFool wrote:...All very well, however that buffer has not prevented the continued measured rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, has it?


And no of course not. Gases don't ionise as readily in the atmosphere as they do in water. Or in another sense C02 in water doesn't matter (so much) while C02 in the atmosphere does. If there are any Chemists (not the drugs variety) that want to chip in, then I would be very happy to concede my knowledge is limited. Is that you Xfool?

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7531
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 1005 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438521

Postby XFool » August 30th, 2021, 10:43 pm

Nimrod103 wrote:
Midsmartin wrote:I see. But we have established that sea level may behave differently in different parts of the world, and so picking just two datasets from nearby places doesn't prove much. You need surely to look at worldwide averages? Which do appear to show acceleration as far as I can tell.

I regard that as special pleading. The UK sea level data is the best there is. If there is no accelerating rate in that data set, then as far as I am concerned the rate is not accelerating. There is no reason to suppose that the UK is somehow different from the rest of the World.

A review of the trends observed in British Isles mean sea level data measured by tide gauges

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/136/3/651/651853

"Nevertheless, the small number of very long records can be studied effectively, and indicate that twentieth century secular trends in BI MSL are consistent with those obtained from NW Europe as a whole and with the bottom range of estimates for global average MSL change during the past 100 years."

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438523

Postby Nimrod103 » August 30th, 2021, 10:54 pm

XFool wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:
Midsmartin wrote:I see. But we have established that sea level may behave differently in different parts of the world, and so picking just two datasets from nearby places doesn't prove much. You need surely to look at worldwide averages? Which do appear to show acceleration as far as I can tell.

I regard that as special pleading. The UK sea level data is the best there is. If there is no accelerating rate in that data set, then as far as I am concerned the rate is not accelerating. There is no reason to suppose that the UK is somehow different from the rest of the World.

A review of the trends observed in British Isles mean sea level data measured by tide gauges

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/136/3/651/651853

"Nevertheless, the small number of very long records can be studied effectively, and indicate that twentieth century secular trends in BI MSL are consistent with those obtained from NW Europe as a whole and with the bottom range of estimates for global average MSL change during the past 100 years."


That paper is 23 years old. The North Shields data from 1895 to 2018 is available (https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltre ... id=170-053). You can stick a straight line through it. It shows no acceleration.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 6386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 650 times
Been thanked: 2656 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438524

Postby tjh290633 » August 30th, 2021, 11:05 pm

Sorcery wrote:
XFool wrote:...All very well, however that buffer has not prevented the continued measured rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, has it?


And no of course not. Gases don't ionise as readily in the atmosphere as they do in water. Or in another sense C02 in water doesn't matter (so much) while C02 in the atmosphere does. If there are any Chemists (not the drugs variety) that want to chip in, then I would be very happy to concede my knowledge is limited. Is that you Xfool?

I do keep chipping in, yet I keep getting the same snide responses from Xfool, who is obviously not a Chemist.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... on-dioxide tells me that in 2019 the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 409.8ppm. You can compare this with saturated air at 20°C, which contains water vapour at 23,000ppm (SWVP=17.5mmHg or 2.30%). Obviously water vapour is not always saturated, and is at a much lower partial pressure higher in the atmosphere, but its main effect is, as we know, in the Troposphere, and it often occurs as clouds formed of either water droplets or ice crystals. Clouds have a much greater effect that water vapour itself, which is why it is cooler on a cloudy day.

Increased temperature reduces the solubility of CO2 in water and increases humidity, so the question arises, does increased CO2 lead to increased temperature or vice versa? The obsession with CO2 is irrational.

TJH

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7531
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 1005 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438526

Postby XFool » August 30th, 2021, 11:15 pm

Nimrod103 wrote:
XFool wrote:A review of the trends observed in British Isles mean sea level data measured by tide gauges

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/136/3/651/651853

"Nevertheless, the small number of very long records can be studied effectively, and indicate that twentieth century secular trends in BI MSL are consistent with those obtained from NW Europe as a whole and with the bottom range of estimates for global average MSL change during the past 100 years."

That paper is 23 years old. The North Shields data from 1895 to 2018 is available (https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltre ... id=170-053). You can stick a straight line through it.

You can indeed: "The long-term linear trend is also shown, including its 95% confidenceinterval."

It's trending upwards. "The relative sea level trend is 1.9 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.13 mm/yr"

Nimrod103 wrote:It shows no acceleration.

Clutching at straws?

BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."

Like I said: "Clutching at straws"

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438536

Postby Nimrod103 » August 31st, 2021, 1:51 am

XFool wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:
XFool wrote:A review of the trends observed in British Isles mean sea level data measured by tide gauges

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/136/3/651/651853

"Nevertheless, the small number of very long records can be studied effectively, and indicate that twentieth century secular trends in BI MSL are consistent with those obtained from NW Europe as a whole and with the bottom range of estimates for global average MSL change during the past 100 years."

That paper is 23 years old. The North Shields data from 1895 to 2018 is available (https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltre ... id=170-053). You can stick a straight line through it.

You can indeed: "The long-term linear trend is also shown, including its 95% confidenceinterval."

It's trending upwards. "The relative sea level trend is 1.9 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.13 mm/yr"

Nimrod103 wrote:It shows no acceleration.

Clutching at straws?

BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."

Like I said: "Clutching at straws"

If sea level was rising because of global warming, the rate of increase should be accelerating. It is not. It is pretty straightforward. Same rate of increase since 1895.

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7531
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 1005 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438546

Postby XFool » August 31st, 2021, 7:51 am

Nimrod103 wrote:
XFool wrote:BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."

Like I said: "Clutching at straws"

If sea level was rising because of global warming, the rate of increase should be accelerating. It is not. It is pretty straightforward. Same rate of increase since 1895.

BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7531
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 1005 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438548

Postby XFool » August 31st, 2021, 8:02 am

'The Next Step' -

1. "No global warming - because sea level isn't rising"

Data shows sea level rising

2. "No global warming - because rate of sea level rise(!) is constant"

Data shows sea level rise accelerating

3. "No global warming - because rate of increase in sea level rise not high enough"?

And so it goes...

Anyway. Here's to this thread sweeping the board at the next Nobel Prizewinners' ceremony. :)
Last edited by XFool on August 31st, 2021, 8:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438549

Postby Nimrod103 » August 31st, 2021, 8:06 am

XFool wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:
XFool wrote:BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."

Like I said: "Clutching at straws"

If sea level was rising because of global warming, the rate of increase should be accelerating. It is not. It is pretty straightforward. Same rate of increase since 1895.

BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."


This is data masturbation. The North Shields and Newlyn data do not show that the sea level around the UK is rising more rapidly, and they are the longest and most reliable records.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4179
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 416 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438558

Postby Nimrod103 » August 31st, 2021, 8:30 am

Nimrod103 wrote:
XFool wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:If sea level was rising because of global warming, the rate of increase should be accelerating. It is not. It is pretty straightforward. Same rate of increase since 1895.

BTW. From that "23 years old" paper: "Century-timescale low-frequency ‘accelerations’ in MSL of the order of 0.4–0.8 mm yr−1 century−1 are obtained from the three longest records, which are also similar to estimates from mainland Europe."


This is data masturbation. The North Shields and Newlyn data do not show that the sea level around the UK is rising more rapidly, and they are the longest and most reliable records.


Edit to add. Having had a closer look at Table 2 and Figure 3 in the paper you quote. They selected the 5 locations around the UK with the longest records: Aberdeen, North Shields, Sheerness, Liverppol and Newlyn. Of which only Newlyn and North Shields are relatively complete, while the other 3 are very incomplete but take the record back to 1830. Table 2 shows no acceleration in sea level rise in the Newlyn and North Shields data, and the authors have excluded those two records from their analysis. They calculate an acceleration in the sea level rise for the other 3 incomplete records, which is where they get their 0.4-0.8mm/year from. But if you look at the actual records for these 3 locations, the steepening occurs at 1900 for Aberdeen, 1910 for Sheerness and 1930 for Liverpool. None of those inflexion points can be related to recent global warming.

NotSure
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 222
Joined: February 5th, 2021, 4:45 pm
Has thanked: 136 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438589

Postby NotSure » August 31st, 2021, 9:55 am

Nimrod103 wrote:If sea level was rising because of global warming, the rate of increase should be accelerating. It is not. It is pretty straightforward. Same rate of increase since 1895.


If the rise in sea level is linear, then the rise in the amount of seawater is accelerating? That is, the area of seawater increases as the level rises, so more is needed to add the next 1 mm as was needed to add the last 1 mm. Probably a meaningless point, but surely the amount of fresh water 'stored' in the air needs to be taken into account also - more heat, more evaporation, more clouds. the mean temperature of sea water will also have an effect, but a complicated one as the density of water in not linear with temperature. Good job too, else life on earth would not have been possible if very cold water did not rise - ice would form from the bottom, not the top. But either way, by the time we can see an acceleration in sea level, suspect it's a bit too late to avoid quite a few problems, and a 1 mm here or there at one or two sites hardly defines a global issue.

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7531
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 1005 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438595

Postby XFool » August 31st, 2021, 10:13 am

Sea level rise
"This article is about the current and projected rise in the world's average sea level associated with climate change. For sea level rise in general, see Marine transgression."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise

Tide gauge measurements show that the current global sea level rise began at the start of the 20th century. Between 1900 and 2017, the globally averaged sea level rose by 16–21 cm (6.3–8.3 in), or 1.4–1.8 mm (0.055–0.071 in) per year. More precise data gathered from satellite radar measurements reveal an accelerating rise of 7.5 cm (3.0 in) from 1993 to 2017, for an average rate of 31 mm (1.22 in) per decade.

The sea level will not rise uniformly everywhere on Earth, and it will even drop slightly in some locations, such as the Arctic. Local factors include tectonic effects and subsidence of the land, tides, currents and storms.

But I guess Newlyn trumps all that...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newlyn

A Century of Sea Level Measurements at Newlyn, Southwest England

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01490419.2015.1121175

Or... "If only it were simple!"

I reckon, for now, that's probably more than enough. ;)

NotSure
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 222
Joined: February 5th, 2021, 4:45 pm
Has thanked: 136 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438619

Postby NotSure » August 31st, 2021, 11:44 am

XFool wrote:The sea level will not rise uniformly everywhere on Earth, and it will even drop slightly in some locations, such as the Arctic. Local factors include tectonic effects and subsidence of the land, tides, currents and storms.


The North of GB is still rising up out of the mantle from the loss of ice cover since the last glacial period, whereas the south much less so.

But more than enough from me too......

88V8
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2734
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 903 times
Been thanked: 1009 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438620

Postby 88V8 » August 31st, 2021, 11:44 am

But to get back to the OP, I have read that China is planting trees as a net-zero offset, with the intention of reaching 24% forest cover by 2025 https://www.dominochinese.com/2021/03/1 ... reen-wall/

The UK govt also has tree targets, but I'm afraid on this I more so trust the Chinese.

And the problem with trees is their tendency to burn which makes them an unreliable long-term carbon store.

Long term the only way to cut emissions is as I have boringly commented before, to cut the population.
Either we do that ourselves or the planet will do it for us.
The annoying thing is that in developed countries it would not be difficult. Controversial but perfectly possible if the govt and media would get behind it, but on the whole most people currently believe deep down that climate change etc is a problem that will not really affect them, and those who do recognise the problem take aim at ridiculous targets like 'big oil' which really accomplishes nothing.

V8

Midsmartin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 484
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:18 am
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 280 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438669

Postby Midsmartin » August 31st, 2021, 2:23 pm

I note that the paper linked just above says "However, the observed rate of sea level change at Newlyn over 1993–2014 has been much larger at 3.8 mm/year"

Sorcery
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1296
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:38 pm
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 99 times

Re: The pipe dream of net zero carbon emissions

#438670

Postby Sorcery » August 31st, 2021, 2:25 pm

tjh290633 wrote:
Sorcery wrote:
XFool wrote:...All very well, however that buffer has not prevented the continued measured rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, has it?


And no of course not. Gases don't ionise as readily in the atmosphere as they do in water. Or in another sense C02 in water doesn't matter (so much) while C02 in the atmosphere does. If there are any Chemists (not the drugs variety) that want to chip in, then I would be very happy to concede my knowledge is limited. Is that you Xfool?

I do keep chipping in, yet I keep getting the same snide responses from Xfool, who is obviously not a Chemist.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... on-dioxide tells me that in 2019 the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 409.8ppm. You can compare this with saturated air at 20°C, which contains water vapour at 23,000ppm (SWVP=17.5mmHg or 2.30%). Obviously water vapour is not always saturated, and is at a much lower partial pressure higher in the atmosphere, but its main effect is, as we know, in the Troposphere, and it often occurs as clouds formed of either water droplets or ice crystals. Clouds have a much greater effect that water vapour itself, which is why it is cooler on a cloudy day.

Increased temperature reduces the solubility of CO2 in water and increases humidity, so the question arises, does increased CO2 lead to increased temperature or vice versa? The obsession with CO2 is irrational.

TJH


Well thanks for chipping in TJK. :-) Yes water vapour is the number one green-house gas but that's partly because it's so prevalent. I think CO2 is a more powerful green-house gas in the sense that 1ppm of CO2 has more of a greenhouse effect than 1ppm of water. The table in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas shows greenhouse effect contributions of various gases.

Yet more generally I agree the water cycle has a more powerful effect. Most climate scientists seem to think that clouds are a net warming contributor, a finding I am very suspicious of. Where clouds block sunlight they have a cooling effect yet they insulate at night more?. In the tropics storms have a huge cooling effect, In the open ocean (not the Australian Coral sea) Sea Surface Temperatures seem to be limited to approximately 32 degrees centigrade. If it goes higher a storm develops which cools the air and sea surface.

It seems as if the water cycle is capable of negative feedback to increased CO2 emissions and heat.


Return to “Oil & Gas & Energy (Sector & Companies)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests