Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, clouds can become thicker and produce more precipitation. The author hypothesis is that the pollution leads to stronger storms. Obviously, increasing particles in the atmosphere leads to higher potential for condensation but where the line was drawn was when the author jumps to a conclusion that storms are therefore stronger in the Pacific and affect weather around the globe.
To say that the pollution has an enhancement is reasonable. To claim this process drives more storms is just not supported.
The last sentence sounds arguable, maybe it's wrong. They, people with experience in the field, did a study that did support it. I would trust the authors, since that's their research speciality, more than random internet posters. Certainly not enough to dismiss as obviously unintelligent as he said at the beginning.
Also, you're contradicting yourself: more precipitation is more storminess.
Quote:
A great observation would be show higher amounts of pollution in precipitation with an origin from China say on the East coast of NA.
Another quote from it...
"To analyse this, researchers from the US and China used computer models to look at the effect of Asia's pollution on weather systems."
So in the study, they rely completely on model guidance and don't back it up with any supportive observations and never talked about the PDO, AMO, stratospheric, ect influences.
Observations would obviously be useful, but scientific studies are generally specific. Perhaps another group of scientists could try to test that observationally, though that could be really difficult. I'm sure the authors are aware of other influences (PDO, AMO, stratospheric, etc.)
That quote is not from the actual study. Look at the original source:
Increasing levels of air pollutants in Asia have recently drawn considerable attention, but the effects of Asian pollution outflows on regional climate and global atmospheric circulation remain to be quantified. Using a multiscale global aerosol–climate model (GCM), we demonstrate long-range transport of the Asian pollution, large resulting variations in the aerosol optical depth, cloud droplet number concentration, and cloud and ice water paths; enhanced shortwave and longwave cloud radiative forcings; and increased precipitation and poleward heat transport. Our work provides, for the first time to the authors’ knowledge, a global multiscale perspective of the climatic effects of pollution outflows from Asia. The results reveal that the multiscale modeling framework is essential in simulating the aerosol invigoration effect of deep convective cloud systems by a GCM.
Rather technical, but the point is that pollution changes cloud properties and precipitation, exactly what you agreed on in the beginning.
I tried to explain 850mb temps control the surface temps and you argued against me.
I was being nitpicky and not completely sure if I was right. What I was saying was that 850 mb temperatures are a good reflection of the overall air mass, but they're not controlling anything.
Quote:
I'm trying to tell you pollution and smog doesn't strengthen storms & affect weather systems across the globe and it seems like your arguing that as well.
I don't know enough to have a strong opinion, I'm arguing that isn't not an obviously inteligent claim.
The onus of proof is upon those who claim GW is the greatest threat to Earth since mankind inhabited it. The seas haven't covered FLA or other coastal areas, as predicted. The Arctic is covered with ice and Antarctica is in no real danger. On top of that, doesn't the GW crowd always preach to Americans how horrible WE are as WE have destroyed the Earth? How does China get to horn in on our action?
That, however, has little to do with the article (air pollution in China affects Pacific storms), which is what the quote was about. Read before posting, please.
A similar Air pollution incident in Donora, PA (one of our U.S. states) occurred in 1948. It "only" killed 20 but sickened 7000 and had the air inversion that instigated the smog lasted longer than the 4 days it did (some of these air inversions can go on for weeks), the death toll would have easily passed four figures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donora_Smog_of_1948).
Noticed there's a town upstream called Charleroi. A similar event happened not far from Charleroi, Belgium in 1930, the Engis catastrophe. The location of the town and the causes of pollution are very similar.
[/OT]
They have been going back and forth as to why the Midwest has not warmed as much as the models expected.
One reason they theorize is aerosols
Quote:
For more than a decade, researchers have puzzled over what’s causing the warming hole over the United States. Previous research has suggested natural variations in sea surface temperatures might be responsible, but a new study puts the focus on sulfates, a type of aerosol produced by coal power plants that’s known for causing acid rain. Sulfates are light-colored, and they cause cooling by scattering and reflecting sunlight. They also lower temperatures indirectly by making clouds more reflective and long-lasting.
Another theory is agricultural techniques are sending more moisture into the air, so fewer extremely hot days, but higher dew points...
Quote:
Crop irrigation could be cooling Midwest
Drop in hot days blamed on moisture from Great Plains
BY SID PERKINS 2:02PM, JANUARY 22, 2010
Read Later logo Read Later
ATLANTA — If summers seem cooler and wetter in parts of the Midwest in recent years, you can thank — or blame — farmers, two new studies contend.
While average global temperatures rose about 0.74 degrees Celsius during the past century, the U.S. Midwest has experienced a noticeable slump in summer temperatures in recent decades, reported David Changnon, a climatologist at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, on January 19 at the annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society.
On average, daily high temperatures in Chicago rise above 90° Fahrenheit (32.2° Celsius) on 24 days each summer. But from 2000 through 2009, only two years tallied more than 24 days hotter than 90°— the lowest decadal total in 80 years, Changnon noted.
Looking at the pictures make me feel sad for those who have to live it pollution like that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
