Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 11:38am PT
|
Wow. You responded in less than 60 seconds. Is this what you do every day of your life? Log on to this thread and make thirty posts per day?
You are a pitiful and mean person. Truly.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 11:38am PT
|
I see Base is not only generous in the Christmas spirit, but is in good humor with holiday cheer.
|
|
cliffhanger
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 12:47pm PT
|
Here's an article about how bad it could get:
Are We Falling Off the Climate Precipice? Scientists Consider Extinction
http://truth-out.org/news/item/20686-are-we-falling-off-the-climate-precipice-scientists-consider-extinction
excerpt: "climate change -- and just how bad it might be came home to me in the summer of 2010. I was climbing Mount Rainier in Washington State, taking the same route I had used in a 1994 ascent. Instead of experiencing the metal tips of the crampons attached to my boots crunching into the ice of a glacier, I was aware that, at high altitudes, they were still scraping against exposed volcanic rock. In the pre-dawn night, sparks shot from my steps.
The route had changed dramatically enough to stun me. I paused at one point to glance down the steep cliffs at a glacier bathed in soft moonlight 100 meters below. It took my breath away when I realized that I was looking at what was left of the enormous glacier I’d climbed in 1994, the one that -- right at this spot -- had left those crampons crunching on ice. I stopped in my tracks, breathing the rarefied air of such altitudes, my mind working hard to grasp the climate-change-induced drama that had unfolded since I was last at that spot.
I haven’t returned to Mount Rainier to see just how much further that glacier has receded in the last few years, but recently I went on a search to find out just how bad it might turn out to be. I discovered a set of perfectly serious scientists -- not the majority of all climate scientists by any means, but thoughtful outliers -- who suggest that it isn’t just really, really bad; it’s catastrophic. Some of them even think that, if the record ongoing releases of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, thanks to the burning of fossil fuels, are aided and abetted by massive releases of methane, an even more powerful greenhouse gas, life as we humans have known it might be at an end on this planet. They fear that we may be at -- and over -- a climate change precipice hair-raisingly quickly."
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 01:33pm PT
|
It all comes down to our uneducated public being rightfully distrustful of our government and other authoritative groups. How can the normal Joe possibly know who's right? With politics marring this entire topic, it's normal for people to be skeptical.
It's like evolution vs. creationism, how can someone who never took a genetics or evolution class at the college level possibly grasp evolution?
Bottom line though, BASE's suggestions for the Chuff are spot on! LOL!
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 02:55pm PT
|
You are something Chef,there has to be 100 million hypocrites in this country alone.
Good thing you are retired ,you will have time to tell them all the same thing as above.
How does a little guy get up on that soapbox anyway?
Aid?
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:09pm PT
|
So I have two papers that should get written over the next month, if I can find time. The first is a straightforward though very unusual piece on sea ice prediction. The second involves surveys of public science beliefs and knowledge. The problem with that survey paper is I've got too much data, really enough for 3 or 4 papers, but no time to write that many.
So ... I've got a bunch of spare parts I don't yet know what to do with, one example below. This breaks down public opinion on 4 questions: trust in scientists; belief that humans evolved over millions of years (vs. created in the past 10,000 years by God); belief that climate change is happening now, caused mainly by human activities (vs. not changing, or changing mainly for natural reasons); and belief that CO2 concentration in Earth's atmosphere has been increasing in recent decades (vs. decreasing or staying the same). The bars show percentages, and notes in each chart tell how many interviews they are based on. The four colors are self-identified Democrats, Independents, and Republicans who either do not or do support the tea party.
For the numerically inclined: approximate 95% confidence intervals (in popular press, "margins of error") for such percentages can be calculated as plus or minus 100/sqrt(n), where n is the number of observations.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:16pm PT
|
There is no point engaging "it" in any sort of logical debate, Mimi. Perhaps you should post your doctorate diploma to enrage "it."
If there is anything that I can contribute to the climate debate it is this: sedimentary geologists, and petroleum geologists in particular, are the source of most knowledge about the past climate of the planet. We look at the entire rock section throughout geologic time, and understanding the conditions, or depositional environment of sedimentary rocks, is of huge economic importance.
Because of this, we know a hell of a lot about the history and conditions of the planet throughout geologic time.
It was recognized that paleo-climate is cyclic very early on. The planet has historically seen hot and cold periods, and they occur in a rhythmic pattern, almost like a pulse. These are important because climate has a big effect on where and how rocks were deposited, including both source and reservoir rocks of hydrocarbon accumulation.
The main driver of climate is thought to be cycles in the Earth's orbit, also known as "Milankovitch Cycles." You would do well to read this simple page on Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_stratigraphy
Other drivers of climate involve vulcanism, which directly increases CO2 levels. During the breakup of Pangea in the Mesozoic, high sea level can be directly correlated to high CO2 concentrations. There was a hot house event in the late Mesozoic which is well known and studied. This is the classic case of a CO2 driven hot house event. Fortunately, that event is richly recorded in the rock record. It is even possible to quantitatively reconstruct atmospheric CO2 concentrations from examination of fossil flora. Google "Stomata density in Gingko Balboa" to find the right direction there.
I need to look up the exact CO2 levels during the Cretaceous event, but we have basically gotten about halfway to that catastrophic event since we began burning fossil fuels.
There is much more to the story. The organic rich shales that are now being drilled horizontally and fracked the snot out of, are kind of unique. Shale composes about 90% of the sedimentary record, and typically it has very little organic carbon. In a typical oxygen rich depositional environment, bacteria chow down on the carbon that is constantly raining down in most ocean environments. The carbon rich shales are the exception to this, and all oil and gas is sourced from a few discrete shales. In Oklahoma, for example, the Devonian Woodford Shale, which varies from 50 to several hundred feet in thickness, sourced billions of barrels of oil accumulations in the mid-continent. Whenever you drilled through this shale you would get a huge gas show on the chromatograph, but since shale is so impermeable, it was never considered to be a target until technology made it possible to frack the snot out of it to produce oil and gas.
It is known that these organic rich shales were deposited in an anoxic environment caused by ocean acidification. Several of these anoxic events were global, and can be correlated around the planet. Oddly enough, these anoxic oceanic events were caused by periods of high temperature greenhouse events in the planet's past. There was a Devonian/early Mississippian event, which includes the Woodford, Barnett, Fayetteville, and the fantastic Bakken Shale in North Dakota, which is presently in the temperature/pressure "oil window" and is generating oil as we speak.
The other event is the Jurassic/Cretaceous hot house event, and the organic rich shales from that event sourced the middle eastern oil accumulations (Hanifa Formatin) as well as the onshore U.S. shales such as the Niobrara and the Eagleford.
Oddly enough, the strongest theory of the cause of these important ocean acidification events is that they were caused during high atmospheric CO2 hothouse events.
Methane is a more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, and there are a couple of episodes in the rock record which suggest a rapid "burp" of unstable methane hydrates in ocean bottoms releasing high amounts of methane into the atmosphere. The only good thing about methane is that it is unstable in the atmosphere and will break down over time.
The largest greenhouse gas by far is water vapor. I am friends with an atmospheric physicist, and we've discussed climate change many times. What will happen with water vapor is a big question. The way I recall is that if the water vapor makes it into the upper atmosphere and creates high clouds, those will reflect more thermal energy out into space. This could cause cooling. If it is in the lower atmosphere as either a gas or liquid (cloud), it would behave like a greenhouse gas and increase global temperature.
I think that I have mentioned enough main points that anyone can, with a little curiosity, an open mind, and a little googling, will be able to understand these past events as well as the current anthropogenic atmosphere and its possible consequences.
This is a pure science question. The answer is not related to any belief or agenda. Since it has massive economic implications, it has become a football, with more of a religious/political zeal than any other modern topic. I'm damn glad that I don't work in this field.
My conclusion is this:
1) It has happened before, and we know the CO2 concentrations from that late Mesozoic event. It is foolish to dismiss global warming without a thorough understanding of the history of the planet and its mechanisms.
2) It is hard to ignore things such as melting glaciers and polar ice area. We know from ice cores that the current CO2 concentration is higher than at any time over the past 800,000 years, and probably higher than at any time since the end of the Cretaceous. These are things that you can directly measure.
In areas where there is systemic uncertainty regarding measurements, the range of uncertainty is known.
I am not saying that all debate is over. All I am saying that if you dogmatically refuse to consider climate change due to political or non-science reasons, you are not being honest.
Geez. Over half the planet believes that the Earth is only 6000 years old. that is lunacy.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:20pm PT
|
Geez. Over half the planet believes that the Earth is only 6000 years old. that is lunacy.
The research question is, who believes that?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:36pm PT
|
Where do you do your surveys Larry? Surely it must be in primate research centers and animal sanctuaries since the general public, with the exception of left and right coast major population centers and denizens of certain mid american far left fantasy lands like Boulder, don't believe in the ignorance you are trying to showcase nor would they be idiotic enough to waste their time with your foolish survey material . That aside, if you have too much material send it over, I would be glad to do a proper write up and put your silly name on it. The arrogance of you folks is at times astounding. Mimi , I'll give you a pass while assuming your naivete is innocent.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:41pm PT
|
All of the Abrahamic religions believe that. I am amazed at how purposely ignorant some of my friends are over a silly and easy answer as to the rough age of the planet.
Everything agrees: Geology, Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology. It is a no-brainer, but go over to the politics vs. religion thread to see this young age idea alive and well.
As for Mimi......she is one of the sharpest people who I have ever met. When I last saw her she was leaving a stint climbing in the ditch to go finish a PhD in population genetics or something along those lines.
We don't always agree on things, but her intelligence is one thing that I will never question. She is f'ing smart.
Too bad that this thread is dominated by a bully.
I don't make my money from "Big Oil." I work with small companies and invest my own money in my prospects. It is pretty cool to create wealth out of an idea. That is something that The Chief will never understand. In the Zen sense of it, his "Cup is full."
I did do a one year contract with a large company a couple of years back. Other than that, I am a one man shop.
In the oil business, particularly among the older crowd, global warming is dismissed. I don't see how you can be intellectually honest and not at least consider it as a possibility, much less a likelihood.
I have some maps to crank out by tomorrow morning. Hopefully I contributed.
|
|
anita514
Gym climber
Great White North
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 04:42pm PT
|
Chief is just jealous of DMT's fly pimp-mobile
HATER
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 05:28pm PT
|
Base,they do not care about en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology ,but thanks for trying to hammer it home.
EDIT:6FT,175 LBS,since 78.You are so easy to incite.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 06:43pm PT
|
Holy crap, I've found a connection to make with Chuffie! It's Christmas, there's hope! More on that later.
Bruce, the irrational comes from fear due to ignorance absolutely through no fault of their own. Where's your empathy?
Chuff, the ONLY reason so many of us tout technology is because many of us are counting on tech saving our asses because we've screwed everything up so bad. You can gripe about underground injection but it's a useful technology as is incineration for some nasty wastes that are very difficult to get rid of. Nevermind, the point is, is we need to stop or reduce producing such waste in the first place. So, in summary, I'm really counting on alien intervention because all we've got is tech and that's scary. But we're still trying.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 06:46pm PT
|
Utopian!
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 06:50pm PT
|
No, dumbass, it's all we have. Industrial activity got us in this mess. Now, what else do we have available to fix it? Solutions provided through technological advances. Duh!
|
|
anita514
Gym climber
Great White North
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 06:50pm PT
|
Got it.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 07:12pm PT
|
Whoa, okay Bruce. I'm with you. No quarter for boneheadedness.
Chumphly, you're beyond hope. Have fun inhaling motorhead fumes while you continue on your dimwitted path. Something has made you very close-minded.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 07:20pm PT
|
But a smart Utopian indeed.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2013 - 07:24pm PT
|
wilbeer, I am rather partial to Rundgren.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!