Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Jump to new
Chongqing/Chunking 0.4% incidence design condition : 36.4 Cdb/25.8 Cwb.
Brisbane: 31.1 Cdb, 22.5Cwb
Cairns: 32.9 Cdb, 25.3 Cwb
Tokyo : 33.1 Cdb, 25.1 Cwb
Delhi : 42 Cdb, 22.1 Cwb
Port Hedland:40.1 Cdb, 21.5 Cwb


getting a picture here yet?
 
basilio said:
How about


When referring to my original story.

And if you can recall I gave you a nudge and suggested you might want to recheck your facts and just said you "knew your oats" and proceeded to say



And by the way if you hadn't made it absolutely clear that you believed we needed an extra 12C temperature to see these problems why did Smurf respond with a detailed analysis of how a 12C increase in temperatures would impact our cities ? What was he reading ?
Click to expand...


Smurf did not write a detailed analysis and it's impudent to infer he did and put him in the cross hairs. He wrote what he considered a scenario which is well written and subjective, as it should be.

I have given you hard scientific/engineering fact and you patently do not have the tools to evaluate them instead trying to poke holes in hard science.
 
It is really simple Tisme. You said repeatedly that the world average temperature needed to increase by 12C to cause the widespread heat stress problems outlined in the China study I referred to.

In fact these heat stresses will happen way before world temperatures rise by 12C. They will be part of the ever increasing extreme weather events we are seeing.

Black is not White.
 
basilio said:
It is really simple Tisme. You said repeatedly that the world average temperature needed to increase by 12C to cause the widespread heat stress problems outlined in the China study I referred to.

In fact these heat stresses will happen way before world temperatures rise by 12C. They will be part of the ever increasing extreme weather events we are seeing.

Black is not White.
Click to expand...

Give it up mate, you're shifting goal posts all over the place to defend a flawed article that has obviously been written for suckers.
 
Tisme said:
Give it up mate, you're shifting goal posts all over the place to defend a flawed article that has obviously been written for suckers.
Click to expand...
And your simply incapable of recognising when you lie through your teeth - even when it on record for all to see.

Good bye Tisme.
 
diurnalqld.png


Wot rise?
 
Unsurvivable heatwaves could strike heart of China by end of century
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...area-could-be-uninhabitable-by-end-of-century

Tisme said:
A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario.
Click to expand...

Noting that there seems to be some significant contention I wish to clarify that my post concerning the effects on cities and infrastructure was in response to the above, in particular the comment regarding the requirement for a 12 degree rise made by Tisme at 3:00pm yesterday.

Regarding the specific impacts I mention, I wish to emphasise that I am referring to present day infrastructure, lifestyles and systems and not to what could theoretically be built. That is, I am referring to things such as present day roads, rail transport, electricity supply, motor vehicles, air-conditioning systems and social arrangements such as typical "office hours" daytime working arrangements, the typical times which schools and shops operate and the like.

In simple terms, in theory yes we could design and install air-conditioning that works at 60 degrees, buses that can be driven safely and reliably at 70 degrees and so on but I am referring to what is actually in existence today. Not one rail line, road, train, bus, car, power station, transmission or distribution line, air-conditioner or building in use today in Australia was designed with any serious thought that outside air temperatures measured in accordance with proper meteorological standards would reach the high 50's.

The house I've just bought and am about to move in to is presumably wired with cable having a rated limit of 75 degrees for the insulation. Allowing for solar radiation increasing the roof space temperature above ambient plus heat generated by current flow through the wiring (all electrical cables do that, it's unavoidable in practice) it would in practice have a woefully inadequate capacity with an ambient temperature of 59 degrees. Yes the house could be wired differently but that ain't cheap. I haven't investigated it, I'm not living in the place yet, but that's what I'd expect to find.

The typical consumer grade air-conditioner won't be working at that temperature either. I'm not sure exactly at what point it would fail but anything above the low 40's the risk arises. Past extreme heat in Vic and SA is known to have created issues for some systems.

The car I've got now wouldn't have been designed for that. It might survive cruising or going downhill but should I find myself stuck in traffic going nowhere in full sun and with negligible wind then I'd be expecting trouble. If my car doesn't overheat then many others will so either way the road becomes useless as a means of transport and we're all stuck.

That's without even mentioning the human effects or those on wildlife, plants etc. I've spent full days outside previously in SA with maximum temperatures of 44 - 45, I've experienced about 46 in the US and I've experienced low 40's in the Middle East. Considering that, and the differences compared with temperatures approximately 13 degrees lower (ie low 30's), I will simply say that it is a vast difference and I have serious doubts as to the practicality of humans functioning in the high 50's. Even if it's survivable it would be incredibly unproductive doing any manual sort of work that's for sure.
 
Smurf1976 said:
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...area-could-be-uninhabitable-by-end-of-century



Noting that there seems to be some significant contention I wish to clarify that my post concerning the effects on cities and infrastructure was in response to the above, in particular the comment regarding the requirement for a 12 degree rise made by Tisme at 3:00pm yesterday.

Regarding the specific impacts I mention, I wish to emphasise that I am referring to present day infrastructure, lifestyles and systems and not to what could theoretically be built. That is, I am referring to things such as present day roads, rail transport, electricity supply, motor vehicles, air-conditioning systems and social arrangements such as typical "office hours" daytime working arrangements, the typical times which schools and shops operate and the like.

In simple terms, in theory yes we could design and install air-conditioning that works at 60 degrees, buses that can be driven safely and reliably at 70 degrees and so on but I am referring to what is actually in existence today. Not one rail line, road, train, bus, car, power station, transmission or distribution line, air-conditioner or building in use today in Australia was designed with any serious thought that outside air temperatures measured in accordance with proper meteorological standards would reach the high 50's.

The house I've just bought and am about to move in to is presumably wired with cable having a rated limit of 75 degrees for the insulation. Allowing for solar radiation increasing the roof space temperature above ambient plus heat generated by current flow through the wiring (all electrical cables do that, it's unavoidable in practice) it would in practice have a woefully inadequate capacity with an ambient temperature of 59 degrees. Yes the house could be wired differently but that ain't cheap. I haven't investigated it, I'm not living in the place yet, but that's what I'd expect to find.

The typical consumer grade air-conditioner won't be working at that temperature either. I'm not sure exactly at what point it would fail but anything above the low 40's the risk arises. Past extreme heat in Vic and SA is known to have created issues for some systems.

The car I've got now wouldn't have been designed for that. It might survive cruising or going downhill but should I find myself stuck in traffic going nowhere in full sun and with negligible wind then I'd be expecting trouble. If my car doesn't overheat then many others will so either way the road becomes useless as a means of transport and we're all stuck.

That's without even mentioning the human effects or those on wildlife, plants etc. I've spent full days outside previously in SA with maximum temperatures of 44 - 45, I've experienced about 46 in the US and I've experienced low 40's in the Middle East. Considering that, and the differences compared with temperatures approximately 13 degrees lower (ie low 30's), I will simply say that it is a vast difference and I have serious doubts as to the practicality of humans functioning in the high 50's. Even if it's survivable it would be incredibly unproductive doing any manual sort of work that's for sure.
Click to expand...

12 degree global rise isn't ever going to be witnessed by humans.

Insofar as current design fatigues, well that's a give.

Simple psychrometric eqtns dictate a 12 Cdb rise to elevate to 35 Cwb ... that's the fact that is being disputed
 
Tisme said:
12 degree global rise isn't ever going to be witnessed by humans.

Insofar as current design fatigues, well that's a give.

Simple psychrometric eqtns dictate a 12 Cdb rise to elevate to 35 Cwb ... that's the fact that is being disputed
Click to expand...

Those goal posts have moved a fair bit haven't they "12C" Tisme ?

Whatever gooblegook you cook up the simple, clear facts are :

1) You immediately dismissed the paper discussing the risks of serious overheating in China by saying "
"A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario."

2) When you were questioned about such a scenario you doubled down and insisted on producing your graphs to "prove" that :
Tisme said:
You have to realise that the Chinese desert is no enclosed in dome. You can't keep pushing the xyz global temp rise on one hand then dispel it on the other when it doesn't suit the argument.

12 degrees cobber....ask around the academic circles if you refuse my smarts.
Click to expand...

The on the ground reality in 2018 is that many areas around the world are getting closer and closer to reaching 32-35C 100% humidity temperatures that will kill people very quickly. In fact this has already happened.

So it doesn't take any difficulty to realise that only a "small" further increase in global temperatures will be sufficient to tip whole areas into a dangerous situation in the event of heat waves where temperatures break records seemingly every year.

It turns out that Chinas Northern Plain is particularly vulnerable because it also uses a lot of water for irrigation which in turn increases water vapour in the air, increases local warming (water vapour traps more heat) and increases humidity - which of course makes it even harder for mammals to cool off.

The fact is we only need a relatively small increase in global temperatures to reach critical levels. All of your graphs and "smarts" are mis-direction on a mammoth scale. And attempting to then say that you never actually said

"A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario."

that is pure Trump talk.
 
basilio said:
Those goal posts have moved a fair bit haven't they "12C" Tisme ?

Whatever gooblegook you cook up the simple, clear facts are :

1) You immediately dismissed the paper discussing the risks of serious overheating in China by saying "
"A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario."

2) When you were questioned about such a scenario you doubled down and insisted on producing your graphs to "prove" that :


The on the ground reality in 2018 is that many areas around the world are getting closer and closer to reaching 32-35C 100% humidity temperatures that will kill people very quickly. In fact this has already happened.

So it doesn't take any difficulty to realise that only a "small" further increase in global temperatures will be sufficient to tip whole areas into a dangerous situation in the event of heat waves where temperatures break records seemingly every year.

It turns out that Chinas Northern Plain is particularly vulnerable because it also uses a lot of water for irrigation which in turn increases water vapour in the air, increases local warming (water vapour traps more heat) and increases humidity - which of course makes it even harder for mammals to cool off.

The fact is we only need a relatively small increase in global temperatures to reach critical levels. All of your graphs and "smarts" are mis-direction on a mammoth scale. And attempting to then say that you never actually said

"A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario."

that is pure Trump talk.
Click to expand...


I thought you had said your farewells after calling me a "liar"? If I, or any member for that matter, called you the same (plus the filth base language you have called me over various posts) you would running off to mummy complaining how I was picking on you. ...Who's your daddy precious?:rolleyes:

And I don't expect you to understand science and engineering ... that takes a skillset and nous, hyperbole requires no thought.
 
Tisme said:
And I don't expect you to understand science and engineering ... that takes a skillset and nous, hyperbole requires no thought.
Click to expand...

I'm quite good at understanding logic, mis direction and BS. That usually works out OK. In particular when someone attempts to use science or engineering to push a case that is clearly insane ie

basilio said:
You immediately dismissed the paper discussing the risks of serious overheating in China by saying "
"A global rise of about 12 degrees C would be req'd for that scenario."
Click to expand...
 
Tisme said:
not as applicable IMO
Click to expand...

To clarify why the diurnal trend, the original report (Uen-Soon, Pal and Elahir) being referred to in this current discussion is predicated on sporadic maximums not averages.
 
basilio said:
In particular when someone attempts to use science or engineering to push a case that is clearly insane ie
Click to expand...

You listening to yourself? The article attempted to use science and engineering as the basis for the ramblings and you think personal insults and hysterical then gazump using science and engineering to question the validity of he original article?

We're not in the years of the inquisition anymore and I'm not an heretic.

You might actually learn something if you stopped to ponder the content of my posts instead of flying off the handle. You might even see some good news in what I say.

Because I post stuff about Latham, Trump and climate change doesn't mean I endorse the articles unless I specifically and seriously say so. Most of those post are for entertainment value. But when I say things like 12Cdb global rise to raise to global 35Cwb in a thread captioned as " is global warming becoming unstoppable" then consider the various corollaries to that argument.

Lets take the Chinese connection. I already posted the 0,4% data for Chongqing/Chunking as 36.4Cdb/25.8 Cwb. That's an RH%43 and dewpoint 21.93

holding RH constant and raising the wetbulb to 35C, the drybulb must rise to ~48C an increase of 12.4C. Dewpoint will rise to 32.1C.

Adiabatic cooling temp is then dewpoint of 32.1. As drybulbs increase the dewpoint will decrease and adiabatic cooling increase
 
Tisme said:
Lets take the Chinese connection. I already posted the 0,4% data for Chongqing/Chunking as 36.4Cdb/25.8 Cwb. That's an RH%43 and dewpoint 21.93

holding RH constant and raising the wetbulb to 35C, the drybulb must rise to ~48C an increase of 12.4C. Dewpoint will rise to 32.1C.
Click to expand...

The simple calculator I posted confirms those calcs.

I don't know if it's realistic to assume that the RH will stay the same though.
 

Similar threads

basilio
What does Lloyds think is happening?
2
Replies
22
Views
5K
springhill
springhill
2020hindsight
  • Poll
Which IPCC Scenario is your guess?
2
Replies
32
Views
10K
2020hindsight
2020hindsight
Top