Global warming pause linked to sulfur in China
July 4, 2011 By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID , AP Science Writer
Scientists have come up with a possible explanation for why the rise in Earth's temperature paused for a bit during the 2000s, one of the hottest decades on record.
The answer seems counterintuitive. It's all that sulfur pollution in the air from China's massive coal-burning, according to a new study.
Sulfur particles in the air deflect the sun's rays and can temporarily cool things down a bit. That can happen even as coal-burning produces the carbon dioxide that contributes to global warming.
"People normally just focus on the warming effect of CO2 (carbon dioxide), but during the Chinese economic expansion there was a huge increase in sulfur emissions," which have a cooling effect, explained Robert K. Kaufmann of Boston University. He's the lead author of the study published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
But sulfur's cooling effect is only temporary, while the carbon dioxide from coal burning stays in Earth's atmosphere a long time.
Chinese coal consumption doubled between 2003 and 2007, and that caused a 26 percent increase in global coal consumption, Kaufmann said.
Now, Chinese leaders have recognized the effects of that pollution on their environment and their citizens' health and are installing equipment to scrub out the sulfur particles, Kaufmann said.
Sulfur quickly drops out of the air if it is not replenished, while carbon dioxide remains for a long time, so its warming effects are beginning to be visible again, he noted. The plateau in temperature growth disappeared in 2009 and 2010, when temperatures lurched upward.
Indeed, NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, have listed 2010 as tied for the warmest year on record, while the Hadley Center of the British Meteorological Office lists it as second warmest, after 1998.
Sulfur's ability to cool things down has led some to suggest using it in a geoengineering feat to cool the planet. The idea is that injecting sulfur compounds very high into the atmosphere might help ease global warming by increasing clouds and haze that would reflect sunlight. Some research has concluded that's a bad idea.
Using enough sulfur to reduce warming would wipe out the protective Arctic ozone layer and delay recovery of the Antarctic ozone hole by as much as 70 years, according to an analysis by Simone Tilmes of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. This is the ozone layer that is high above Earth and protects against harmful UV rays, not the ground level ozone that is a harmful pollutant.
"While climate change is a major threat, more research is required before society attempts global geoengineering solutions," said Tilmes.
Overall, global temperatures have been increasing for more than a century since the industrial revolution began adding gases like carbon dioxide to the air. But there have been similar plateaus, such as during the post-World War II era when industrial production boosted sulfur emissions in several parts of the world, Kaufmann explained.
Atmospheric scientists and environmentalists are concerned that continued rising temperatures could have serious impacts worldwide, ranging from drought in some areas, changes in storm patterns, spread of tropical diseases and rising sea levels.
More information: Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998-2008" by Robert Kaufmann et al. http://www.pnas.org
©2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
2 comments
-
Hypothetical desert earth
10 hours ago
-
More human population = greater mass?
May 25, 2012
-
Conversion from aircraft bearing to normal degrees
May 23, 2012
-
Interpretation/Analysis of the Lab results(HEPA filter)
May 22, 2012
-
Has anyone here attended the The Urbino Summer School in Paleoclimatology?
May 22, 2012
-
Earthquakes: Mag 6 N. Italy and Mag 5.6 W. Bulgaria
May 21, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - Earth
More news stories
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update)
SpaceX's Dragon cargo vessel smells like a new car, said astronauts at the International Space Station after opening the hatches Saturday following the spacecraft's landmark mission to the orbiting lab.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
23 hours ago |
4.5 / 5 (21) |
2
Australia hails surprise super-telescope decision
Australia has hailed a surprise decision giving it a role in a radio telescope project aimed at revolutionising astronomy, vowing to draw on its decades of experience in space science.
23 hours ago |
5 / 5 (4) |
3
Astronomers seize last chance in lifetime for Venus Transit
Astronomers are gearing for one the rarest events in the Solar System: an alignment of Earth, Venus and the Sun that will not be seen for another 105 years.
23 hours ago |
5 / 5 (3) |
2
Astronauts enter world's 1st private supply ship
(AP) -- Space station astronauts floated into the Dragon on Saturday, a day after its heralded arrival as the world's first commercial supply ship.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
23 hours ago |
5 / 5 (6) |
0
Sophisticated simulations predict future warming
The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
May 22, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (9) |
51
Nvidia trumpets Tegra 3 phone design wins for 2012
(Phys.org) -- Nvidias competitive war paint has a name, Tegra 3. On the heels of Nvidia announcements about lowering costs of its Tegra 3 processors and Nvidia-enabled tablets running Android Ice Cream ...
Browser wars flare in mobile space
The browser wars are heating up again, but this time the fight is for dominance of the mobile Internet.
Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history
(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.
Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice
(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
Thousands of shellfish found dead in Peru
Thousands of crustaceans were found dead off the coast of Lima following the mystery mass death of dolphins and pelicans, the Peruvian Navy said Friday.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 4.6 / 5 (9)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (15)
B.S. is always B.S.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 2.1 / 5 (15)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (12)
Your opinion sounds like a big pile of dung.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.2 / 5 (11)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (7)
http://wattsupwit...2467.pdf
My above explanation allows correlation of volcanic emissions with global temperature, because they both share the same origin - but the correlation isn't causation here.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.2 / 5 (9)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
All around us, I'd expect.
http://www.disclo...664.html
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (11)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (10)
Then to top it off, the second reference you use does not even address neutrinos. Instead it addresses "energetic neutral atoms (ENA)" If you do not know the difference between a neutrino and an ENA your predictions don't hold a lot of water. In fact, you must be a Troll because no one can be this confused.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (10)
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 1.7 / 5 (6)
Sulfur particles in the air deflect the sun's rays and can temporarily cool things down a bit - it's just a hypothesis. In addition, they probably meant sulfate particles, which are believed to behave so. But was the sulfate particles concentration measured?
Actually the only source of antropogenic sulphur documented in the study is the Stern's "Global sulfur emissions from 1850 to 2000", where it's extrapolated from coal emissions. How it can be falsified?Can you read? PhysOrg doesn't allow me to post thirty links, so I'm posting you the link to these links required by you and I wrote about it clearly.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (7)
http://en.wikiped...ay_rates
In that article please download reference 9
"Evidence against correlations between nuclear decay rates and EarthSun distance"
which debunks the annual cycle of radiation decay rate. Once you take a look at that we can address the rest of your spectacular claims.
As for the links in the article comments, those are yours I take it. You seem to be Trolling for feedback on your neutrino storm hypothesis. Well, my feedback is that you need to go back to school.
Jul 04, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (6)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (8)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (15)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (10)
Grow up!
Its called science.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (10)
As far as I am aware, there has never been a convincing rejection of the null hypothesis (i.e. its normal warming) in any real scientific sense, just post normal science guesstimation.
If you look at a chart of the last 6000 years temperature from the GISP icecore, the little bit of 20th century warming is nothing unusual.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
http://wattsupwit...2467.pdf
A good link, a good read. I'm just reiterating TD.
We are all in agreement here.
Acknowledgments shows openness to suggestions:
"We thank reviewers who suggested the use of
confidence intervals to evaluate model accuracy and many of the topics used to test the degree to which the results generated by the statistical model are
robust."
No need to comment on the 'other stuff' between Calli&TD, except maybe to say it is still the exception, rather the rule that no learning curve can be found in Physorg commentary.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (6)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.7 / 5 (7)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (6)
Even scientists can get it wrong. It's just that good ones admit they got it wrong and bad ones cook up data and re-jig their models to explain why they got it so wrong.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 4.4 / 5 (7)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (13)
The only thing in common here, is that scientists (and often political hacks posing as scientists) are saying humans are causing catastrophe via changes to the weather, apparently to ensure their government grant gravy train. The only thing I'm sure of is that I'm paying too much in taxes to support this kind of work.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.8 / 5 (9)
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (10)
Progressives leaders hypocrites every one!
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (6)
Ozone is created by sunlight, when there is sun there is stratospheric ozone, when there isn't, there isn't. No protection from UV is needed when it is dark, so there is no problem. The ozone layer continuously recreates itself, and the hypothesis that CFCs catalyze ozone depletion was never shown. What was shown is that the main producers of CFCs that had gone off-patent could disrupt their competition by getting government to mandate a switch to new, patented compounds and processes and new equipment that would spur demand for the new, less effective refrigerants.
Surface UV was never shown to have increased during the ozone hole scare.
A much better reason sulfur is bad is because it leads to acid rain.
Jul 05, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
http://www.bom.go...aq.shtml
"Observations suggest that, in southern mid-latitudes (which includes Sydney, Canberra, Adelaide, Melbourne and Hobart) the amount of depletion caused by ODSs during this time was about 5%. "
"..after the ozone hole has broken up parcels of ozone depleted air mixed with mid latitude air move northwards. These parcels can move over the southern part of Australia and cause a reduction in total ozone values."
http://www.cancer...ures.htm
"the rate of melanoma incidence in women has risen by an average of 0.7% a year between 1993 and 2003 a total increase of 6.8% over this decade. For men, the rate has risen by 1.7% a year, a total of 18.7% over the same period."
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Ozone Chicken Littles Are At It Again by Robert W. Pease (professor emeritus of physical climatology at the University of California, Riverside) From The Wall Street Journal, 23 March 1989, p. A24:3
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
There could easily be other explanations for the rise in melanomas, including changing standards of diagnosis for low-grade cancers, other carcinogens(perhaps in sunscreens?), differing outdoor activities, reliance on ineffective sunscreens, rise of use of tanning beds, increase in sunburns due to lack of gradually built-up melanin, and delayed effects of childhood sunburns from decades earlier.
To demonstrate increased UV, why not measure the UV directly?
NASA Ozone and Air Quality - go to Erythemal UV and check the same day of the year on different years. I see some variation, but no overall long-term changes.
"...there has been a decline in ozone levels, which is recovering."
A good set of images from multiple satellites' data of the Sept. antarctic ozone hole from 1995-2007 shows no trend. The hole is the same as in 1995.
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
Also at the top of that page is a quote from James Lovelock, the environmentalist who originated the Gaia hypothesis and invented the sensors that allowed detecting atmospheric pollutants at part-per-billion levels: "We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done."
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (4)
CFC's and other Ozone Depleting Substances are persistent; it will be a long time before they go away.
http://www.agu.or...32.shtml
Also check Wikipedia. It's a neat resource.
That title makes it look like an editorial. I'm gonna go ahead and say it's probably not a scientific article.
Jul 06, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
the rate of malignant cancers is of course reliant on many variables, i agree, notably smoking and genetic susceptibility, however the number of smokers in Australia is rapidly decreasing and dark-skinned people are forming a larger percentage population to pale-skinned people.
skin cancer's primary cause is exposure to UVB rads, which with sufficient ozone filters out, increased cancer rates logically should correspond to increased uvb.
In any case I would find NASA, the CSIRO, the Cancer council, the beureau of meteorology, wikipedia, the environmental protection agency, muchmuchmuchmuchmuchmuch more credible than the wall street journal, or a HYPOTHESIS quoted from a speculative book.
Jul 08, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
As for skin cancers proving Ozone is lower, I think that is not a good argument. Many doctors are now saying it is the increase use of sunscreen that maybe the cause of skin cancers. Their theory is that people now stay out longer and receive less vitamin D. This makes sense to me as people are made to be outdoors. I'm not concerned about myself or my kids being exposed to the sun without sunscreen. But we avoid getting sunburned.
Gilbert, let me get tanned enough, then I would take up your challenge. BTW, and FYI you can get burned on cloudy days :)
Also I'm not debating whether Ozone is depleted, I just wanted to know the source that EWH relys on so I can study them myself...My motto, prove all things, hold fast to that which is true
Jul 10, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jul 10, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
Could somebody quantify what "a long time" means; it implies that we don't know, so we say "a long time"? (I have seen figures ranging from 18 months on up to decades for the persistence of CO2.) This would seem to be a critical point.
FWIW, the planet is cooling, not warming; a new solar minimum is shaping up that will result in cooling for perhaps the next 30-50 years. (Siting Stevenson screens, which measure temperature, at airports and other convenient but warm locations is responsible for most of the apparent "global warming" effect, according to an analysis of box placement.
And of course Mann's hockey stick, we now know, was an artifact of data manipulation.
It appears the alarmists were right, like a stopped clock, back in the '70s when they warned against the coming ice age.
Jul 10, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
http://www.nation...r-capita
http://www.nation...r-capita&b_map=1
Jul 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)