During my time as a councillor I have been told more than once that pressure is being applied to council leaders and senior officers on councils to tow the line on climate change or you will be at the back of the queue when grant funding is given out to your council. Believe it or not signing up to declare a "climate emergency" is now considered a mainstream activity. No wonder that so many councils have signed up to this. It is not a real endorsement of actual belief in this, but simply a way of keeping their councils in a good financial position.
The same thing also applies to those trying to further their careers. There is no incentive to articulate any objection to the government's net zero policy, quite the opposite. There is no need for any overt threats, the (not so subtle) message is quite clear.
Hi Derek.
ReplyDeleteYou made some Comments on my site way back in 2017, and even referenced my site
Website: "Planet Earth Climate Topics"
on https://pjcarson2015.wordpress.com/.
Like everybody else, I was using IR arguments. However, I've woken up and now use the gold-standard, Thermodynamics; unequivocal and no mechanisms required. Below is my site’s Chapter 1C. You will find Chapter 1D (AGWgaffe.doc) informative … but it contains a couple of diagrams which can’t be printed here.
…………………………………………………
Earth’s surface temperature is that of the atmosphere within a few metres of the surface. A planet’s surface temperature is determined largely by its distance from the Sun, but is increased if it has an atmosphere.
The increase results from atmospheric gases holding heat. The balance between incoming and outgoing energy determines the temperature of a planet’s surface.
Earth’s atmosphere is air, a mixture of gases comprising the major constituents, representing about 99%, of nitrogen, oxygen, argon plus a variable amount, but approximately 1% world-wide, of water vapour – and many minor components led by carbon dioxide at 0•04%, but rising.
The atmosphere’s temperature varies widely with location and height. Despite this, at equilibrium one can consider that any particular parcel of air is the same temperature throughout – that of all its component gases.
[This is essentially the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics.]
• This is exactly true for each parcel if, as in differential calculus, one chooses sufficiently small parcels.
• The statement is approximately true even if not at equilibrium.
• Not all parcels are necessarily at the same temperature as each other.
As a parcel’s temperature is the same throughout, the heat held within the parcel is shared by all its component gases, approximately in proportion* to each component’s percentage.
* This proportionality becomes exact if the specific heat of each separate component gas is included. Gas specific heats are similar in size.
Therefore, the majority gases hold the majority of heat, and so produce the majority of the atmosphere’s temperature effect.
Conversely, minor gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, etc, contribute immeasurably tiny amounts to the atmosphere’s temperature.
Hi Peter that is an interesting idea, and as a sceptic of the current hypothesis of a climate emergency I would love to agree with you, but I cannot ignore the basic fact that some gases are able to react with infra-red energy that is given off from the surface of the earth and that this gives rise to the misleadingly named 'greenhouse effect'. I believe that to be credible I have to accept this, and then demonstrate that the evidence shows it to be much less important than the 'alarmists' make it out to be. You are right to say that water vapour is much more important than CO2.
ReplyDeleteDerek.
ReplyDelete1. I pointed you to my site’s Chapter 1D; there’s much else there.
2. IR absorbing gases such as CO2, H2O, CH4, etc, would be important if the non-IR gases did not absorb heat via other means. The IR gases are therefore not special in absorbing Earth’s heat, and so each gas’ importance in absorbing heat closely matches its concentration. Any parcel of molecules, gas in this case, share their energy with each other … to reach the same temperature. (That’s essentially the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics.)
I gave an example, Chapter 2A, with the 3 Rocky Planets, Venus, Earth and Mars; AGW cannot do this.
Earth’s warming is actually coming from tectonic boundaries (Chapter 2). It can’t be coming from IR as well.
Hi Peter,
ReplyDeleteCan you explain how the electromagnetic energy emitted by earth's surface is absorbed by N2 and O2 as they are unable to absorb infra red? I think your hypothesis about heat coming from beneath the earth's crust is an interesting one and should be looked at closely.
Derek.
ReplyDeleteI have previously tried to give IR arguments (Chapter 1 & 1A as you may have read), but it leads to arguments.
Thermodynamics gives the final answer, as I wrote earlier: Zeroth Law.
Thermodynamics gives definitive answers but usually no mechanisms … so there are no arguments.
However …
“Can you explain how the electromagnetic energy emitted by earth's surface is absorbed by N2 and O2 as they are unable to absorb infra red?”
• As I wrote previously, nitrogen, oxygen and argon do not absorb electromagnetic energy in the IR band, but like all gases – and Earth’s surface - they do absorb (Earth’s) heat energy.
• Earth’s surface emits IR matching that of Earth’s surface temperature, which also matches the energy transmitted (by conduction and convection) to the adjacent gases.
• The IR gases - H2O, CO2, CH4, etc - can also absorb IR directly, but like all substances, they re-transmit, at variable times especially when colliding, so that it’s largely irrelevant how they absorbed their energy in the first place.
• Energy is shared by all gases in any parcel - to reach the same temperature.
I hope this helps.
Somehow I became anonymous!
ReplyDeletePeter Carson (aka pjcarson2015)
Peter,
ReplyDeleteSorry about you becoming anonymous. That's what I get for having a cheap blog!
You raise important points. Have you tried putting them to people like Roy Spencer? He has gone into this subject on his blog quite a lot in the past. If you can get some well-known scientists to accept your ideas that would be very useful. Judith Curry also has a good blog discussing the science. The only way to get ideas accepted is to convince other experts in the field.
Best wishes,
Derek
Derek.
ReplyDeleteThanks. I may contact Spencer and Curry. I’m aware of them both.
I opened my site with “That most divisive climate issue, “Climate Change”, depends …”
That continues to be true and blogs on both sides attract the barking mad.
I’ll try – once again – to publish in a known journal; I’m still looking for one appropriate.
Cheers,
Peter