Comments on: Black Carbon and Arctic Ice

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:34:55 +0000

I'm glad you made the following comment:

"It is a LOT easier and cheaper to mitigate black carbon from combustion (something we have mostly but not completely done in the US) than it is to mitigate CO2 (which is a fundamental combustion product)."

Most people fail to understand that CO2 is the fundamental end result of combustion. They see it as HC, CO, SO2, or other such impurities or other by-products.

By: Colin V

Colin V — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:18:29 +0000

It should be possible to measure the number of carbon particles in the surface ice and lower layers to determine the history of black carbon for an ice sheet. Does anyone know if this has this been done?

Also, is it possible to measure the albedo for an area of ice, perhaps using an artificial light source in different wavelengths, and measuring the amount of reflected light?

By: hunter

hunter — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:41:07 +0000

I think as wind patterns go, so goes soot and so goes glacial and ice cap melting.
Someone mentioned in another thread that the large melt of 2007 in effect permitted clean ice to form. I think this exactly explaining the rapid growth at the end of last year and the lingering of the ice this year and even more rapid re-freeze. That, combined with the data about ocean currents, would explain basically everything about the cyclical nature of sea ice.
What would be interesting would be to compare the years after large volcanic events with Arctic ice. IOW, the AGW induced panic over Arctic ice does tell us about the need to lower soot emissions, but tells us nothing about CO2.
I will bet that if AGW orthodoxy does not censor it, good research could be done to show a predictable relationship between dirtiness of ice and increasing melting. And I would not be surprised if a cyclical, multi-decade pattern emerged.

By: Nortius Maximus

Nortius Maximus — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:19:38 +0000

I think you might have dropped a word there. Did you mean "...but summer ice, after the last snowfalls, to melt more rapidly than in the past"?

By: davidcobb

davidcobb — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:23:37 +0000

David Y
Check out "green roof" and "urban forest" on the web. This is the kind of enviromentalism I could support.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:48:54 +0000

Imagine how different things would be if the mainstream media truly investigated AGW as Climate Skeptic does. We wouldn’t have a president elect promising to bankrupt the coal industry and implement draconian carbon regulation/taxation. Al Gore wouldn’t have won a Nobel Prize. James Hansen would’ve been fired. The Greens would have to go back to saving spotted owls. And science would be free to learn about how the Earth really works.

By: David Y.

David Y. — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:26:57 +0000

Gosh darn it Warren, there you go using that pesky old "logical thinking" thing again....

I have long argued that albedo influences are being ignored in every corner of this debate. Do you know if anyone has matched the northern hemisphere temperature anomaly against Asia-based coal-powered electrical generation, or even against China's GDP? I'm guessing there's a VERY close correlation.

One other point: While I have pulled nearly all my hair out arguing against the catastrophic CO2-caused AGW religious zealots, I have been quite dismayed that none of those folks seem to be arguing FOR localized controls on albedo to reduce UHI (and associated air quality problems and peak energy use). While to any scientist with ANY amount of healthy skepticism the CO2-argument is shoddy at best, the local UHI impact is measurable on quality of life and local economics--yet nobody seems to be taking a policy/political stand on this. Thoughts? Is it not a romantic enough subject for the delusional greenies? I'm NOT advocating government controls on local/private albedo, but maybe for some tax concessions for those who increase the albedo or foliage coverage on their properties.

Thanks for the great work!