jonboy
-
Posts
1,824 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Learn About Weather and Meteorology
Community guides
Posts posted by jonboy
-
-
Never had any issues perhaps its a network provider issue
-
59 minutes ago, Sky Full said:
That is an interesting and revealing graph, but does it represent a global mean or is it representative of one particular location? I only ask because the temperature gradients are typical of the northern hemisphere seasons and I would have expected a global mean to be less sensitive to seasonal changes?
I would be interested to know if the temperature can be split between night and day. In my mind a lot of the increases in the mean is driven by high night time temperature rather than daytime temperature
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Cambrian said:
12z GFS op has maritime, then polar maritime, then Arctic air masses for the UK and Ireland.
Day 1-3, the first low travels out of the United States, through Newfoundland to phase with Ciarán. T850s stay around +4 degrees.
Day 3-8, two successive lows, of colder origin, move out of the northern Canada lobe of the PV, down the Labrador coast to swing around the low to our northwest. T850s around zero.
Day 8-12, a few days of attempted northward ridges in a standoff with the low heights to the north, lows continuing to be fed out from the Canadian lobe of the PV. T850s oscillating either side of zero.
Day 12-16, the low to the south of Greenland pulls a good chunk of the Canadian lobe itself east through the UK and Ireland, then heights build well north in the North Atlantic and a long track northerly sets in. T850s -4 to -8.
Starts with a named storm and ends with a wintry blast - suitably autumnal and a great run for a howler of a November afternoon!
Makes my temp quest for November look decidedly high!!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Methuselah said:
Yep, I got it too. No mention of H2O controlling Earth's climate, these past 4billion years, though.
Of course not h2o doesn't fit the agenda I would recommend reading some of the latest research papers!!
-
1
-
-
-
3 minutes ago, Winter Cold said:
What's that yellow circle in the sky??????
Where not seen it yet in York!!
-
39 minutes ago, Midlands Ice Age said:
And so to Part 3 of my Trilogy on Arctic ice status.
Before I get on to it, Part 2 contains an error. Cambrian has pointed out that I have used the word 'jet' stream, instead of 'gulf' stream. He is of course quite correct. Apologise from me.
Now
(Get ready for a long boring read!!!)
Part 1 was current weather impacts. (positive showing up until today)
Part2 was the medium term weather changes (Nino, NIna, SSW, etc), which are positive and negative... and
Part 3 the longer term changes and impacts.
Firstly I will start by apologising to CC haters for discussing this....
But the temperature over the longer term (greater than 3 -5 years) is on an upward trend, so something must be happening...
Long term there does appear to be warming associated with Carbon Dioxide.
Most models seem to think it is of the order of 0.03C per 10 years. (Quite small).
We could argue that this is long term natural warming (after the mini-ice age of 200 years ago) - but it is still happening.
This my summary of Global Warming.... ( take full responsibility if any of it is wrong\) ...
So what is it that brings up the 'warming' to about 0.1C decade being observed recently, and the possible 1.0C in the long term future?
Well the main answer is Water Vapour (1000 times more abundant, and 100 - 1000 times better as a Greenhouse gas in absolute intrinsic terms ). To a lesser extent it is also methane (much less abundant, though an even better G. Gas.) and some other impurities in the atmosphere, Some of these are seen to be cooling eg SO2 (sulphates, and Nitrates), whilst others warming and cooling (Ozone), whilst still others are warming (fluoro-halogens, etc).
A very complex chemical mixture which has stood us so well, for so long.
Even then it is even more complicated than I have written -- as some of the above chemicals work in different ways at different heights.... Water vapour in the Stratosphere appears to be cooling (at that height), but it causes warming of the earth as less heat is then transferred into space (Via OLR (Outgoing Long wave radiation)). Whereas lower down, Water Vapour is both cooling and warming depending upon the type of weather conditions (fog, thunderstorms, steady rain, lightening, etc). It can also increase in volume and mass in the air at higher temperatures. (Over oceans for example, but not in deserts)|.
I will say no more so as not excite the CC head hunters!!!
- apart from the fact that CO2 in itself is not a great warmer, (due to it relative scarcity), but that It utilises the other chemicals for its warming effect.
So above we have a long term warming happening (someway)...
What else might change the above chemical soup??
There are a few 'obvious' answers -
1) Humans. No further discussion on here. If someone wants to go further then its over to the C.C. section for more chat.
2) Volcanos and Vulcanology. (In other words the earth - see below)
3) Sun (and what I will call space).
We can do little about changes in the earth's orbit or the suns power. We may get energy sent to us from outer space. But who knows?.
So Vulcanology and Volcanos will be the main topic ...
Traditional volcanos are numerous (perhaps 10 every year) and (unless huge) present hardly any change to the earth's chemical atmospheric 'soup',
They, in the main, throw out oxides of Nitrogen and Sulphur, and quite a bit of iron oxides (in the form of magma), and some solids (mainly dust)|. Their atmospheric effects are 'cleaned' quite quickly ( a few days or weeks) by rainfall. In general they induce a very small underlying negative impact on temperature, which may last a few weeks (The Icelandic ones of a few years ago, eg).
Some actually throw out a bit of Carbon Dioxide, but not many and they can be ignored. (needs underlying Carbon to activate\.
A few produce Water Vapour (steam), when they pass through underground water or maybe glaciers., and these could have a positive impact on temperatures.
So (and this is the interesting new bit) we had had 2 occurrences of underwater/ocean explosive volcanos in the observable past .
1) Krakatoa - known for its explosive blowing away of a Pacific Island, but it also took away quite a bit below the ocean. from under the island.
It produced 1 - 2 years of worldwide cooling (Including several days of reduced worldwide sunlight), but it could have been worse (It seems ), if it hadn't managed to also send up quite a bit of steam, into the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere.. It is believed that steam was about 10% of the output.
2) Hunga Tonga (last year, where a more or less total underwater island was blown away.)
It is now estimated that about 50% of 'emissions' where water vapour (steam).
It therefore contained much potentially warming material.
This time it could be studied in great detail and the output is just being released by scientists, (mainly in China, Japan and in Holland).
They seem to agree that most of the vapour settled just below the stratosphere and was moved around by the world's weather systems mainly around the southern hemisphere. (which is where it occured).
However about 146 million tons crossed into the stratosphere (about 15% of the normal amounts there).. Compared to just 420 tons of SO2 ( the normal cooling agent). The overall impact is therefore thought to be a warming.
Early modelling is showing that this warming will be about 0.1C over the whole earth and as much as 0.2C in the southern hemisphere.. (most volcanic output still remains there).
It seems as though the stratospheric water vapour has remained below the equator, whereas the tropospheric is rapidly dissipating it.
it is thought that it may well take in excess of 2 years to remove the impacts.
There are quite a few papers and articles being published and if people are interested I will supply details.
H2O in the stratosphere will combine with Ozone as well as the oxides of most compounds, and what impact will this have? Also will it remove the fluoro-halogens?
Extremely interesting times for atmospheric science me thinks. They could not have arranged a better test.!!!!!!
The Antarctic is suddenly having one of its worst freezes ever... after 2022 saw its lowest ever temperature. Is there a connection?
So what does this mean for the Arctic?????
Not a lot in the short-term as the Stratospheric H2O has not reached the northern polar regions yet.
So far with the Autumn refreeze looking exactly like that of 2022, I would guess not much overall this year ..... But who am I to judge?
MIA
Thanks MIA
I copy a part of the introduction to a paper on the effects of water vapor in the stratosphere from 2019
Water vapor (H2O) is a key trace gas throughout the Earth's atmosphere. It fundamentally regulates the weather and climate of our planet (Brasseur & Solomon, 1995; Wallace & Hobbs, 2006). Water vapor in the stratosphere originates from both transport of tropospheric air through the tropical tropopause (Brewer, 1949) and in situ methane oxidation in the middle to upper stratosphere (Jones et al., 1986). Increasing stratospheric water vapor, especially in the lower stratosphere, cools the stratosphere but warms the troposphere (Dessler et al., 2013; Foster & Shine, 1999; Oinas et al., 2001; Shindell, 2001; Smith et al., 2001; Solomon et al., 2010). Accordingly, the 10% decrease of stratospheric water vapor right after 2000 (Randel et al., 2006) could have slowed the rate of global surface temperature increase by about 25% (Solomon et al., 2010). Increased water vapor in the stratosphere can also enhance polar stratospheric cloud formation and lead to more prolonged high-latitude ozone loss (Kirk-Davidoff et al., 1999; Shindell, 2001; Forster and Shine, 1999). In the upper mesosphere, more abundant water vapor from increasing methane contributes to more frequent polar mesospheric cloud occurrences at ~82 km (Thomas et al., 1989; Lubken et al., 2018). Based on all the mechanisms above, we argue that a long-term increase or decrease of water vapor in the stratosphere and mesosphere will have fundamental global and regional impacts.
It is clear to me that given the huge increase in water vapor in the stratosphere from the hunga tonga eruption that we should not be surprised by the large number of extreme heat and excessive rainfall pockets we have seen over the last 12 months.
There is considerable amount of research going on in regards to the effect of this eruption and I found it interesting in NICK F's early winter thoughts he referenced the possible effects as an unknown. So it is beginning to enter main stream forecasting.
Keep up the good work not everything is about CO2
-
3
-
1
-
2
-
-
41 minutes ago, Scott Ingham said:
We already understand it Jon jesus christ! The science is rock solid the theory has been proven 100% correct and certain. This is a fact! We need people now coming together to try to help get us out of this mess
Listen to yourself. You are ignoring the most powerful green house gas that has been circulating this planet for the last 18 months in concentrations not seen before in a place it shouldn’t . That has happened not because of co2 concentration but because of a volcanic eruption.
Until that effect is properly quantified you can't say that the excess warming over that period is down to co2.
I haven't said our climate isn't warming I have said let's not jump to conclusions on this most recent surge which could be temporary as that excess water vapour disperses.
So I suggest you fully understand the complexity of the science before you Jesus christ me.
-
2
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:
and what is the reality of what we face? Yes the world is warming but what is the true reality of a warmer world? Epoch wise we are still in an ice age don't forget
What I find really interesting in Nick F early winter thoughts he has specifically noted as one of the key variables that brings uncertainty to what is happening is the water vapour from hunga tonga that has now found its way to the poles.
Until we fully understand the impact this most important green house gas has had you can't fully understand the true underlying trend.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Scuba steve said:
There’s a lot saying the Range Rover is driving past the inferno which is behind a wall to left of image note the lights are on
Having had another look at both the video and pictures from the mail online article, firstly the fire at the front of the land/range rover looks odd to be caused by that vehicle and looking at the video again the collapse looks explosive rather than progressive you would expect with an ICE fire. This looks like an EV battery explosion that caused the collapse and the sheer intensity of the fire would point that way to.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, richie3846 said:
This is exactly what I was expecting. Do you have any links to this information please?
Its on the BBC feed into the incident.
-
1
-
-
Fire service now reporting that a 'lot' of EV involved from early on in the fire which would account for the intensity and speed of the fire.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Reports seem to confirm a diesel car started the fire. It will be interesting to read the reports once investigation completed as the spread and speed of the fire is quite extreme.
-
Some of the eye witness reports would suggest an EV. I wouldn't be surprised if all 1200 cars are lost as much down to the structural instability and the cost to shore up the floors before anything can be moved on ground floor. I would say everything above ground floor level is gone.
-
8 minutes ago, Scuba steve said:
Perhaps it’s because it’s a forced agenda and not market driven,after all anything worth having people will flock to buy
You have to believe in the sell and this government doesn't so why would the people
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Methuselah said:
All of which would be irrelevant, were HMG to pull its bloody finger out and provide the necessary infrastructure.
Under the present regime that won't happen
No profit in providing a proper nationwide network
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Sky Full said:
Yes indeed. I think the age of motoring is coming to an end but nobody in government wants to admit it. There is simply no way that everyone who wants one will be able to continue having a family car under present plans and the ability to travel anywhere at any time will no longer be an option. Maybe shared / rented autonomous self-driving cars will be the norm in 50 years and everyone will look back at the old way of driving and laugh….!
In 50 years we might have in the planning stage a high speed national railway network!!!
-
4
-
-
18 minutes ago, Scuba steve said:
They say there’s no more of a risk from fires with them than ICE cars though as they age ,suffer damage and diy mechanics messing with them I’m sure this will become a major issue
It isn't the increased risk as such its the increased intensity. When an electric car burns firstly its very difficult to control and put out but more importantly the heat generated is significantly greater than either diesel or petrol vehicles. in context a diesel /petrol burns at roughly 1500F whereas a EV burns at 5000F 3 times the intensity. In 2017 a fire in an old range rover destroyed a multi-storey car park with the loss of some 1300 vehicles imagine what an EV fire will do.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Sky Full said:
Not sure if this link is open to read but this is another report listing some of the reasons EVs are still in their development stage and should not be made mandatory for a long while yet (in my opinion!)…..
The great electric car experiment has taken a dangerous turn
WWW.TELEGRAPH.CO.UK
A 'terrifying' malfunction has added to concerns that the failures and risks of EVs are being ignored or casually explained awayIt seems completely impractical to set any dates for the forced demise of ICEs until the charging infrastructure for EVs is fully developed and tested nationally and is capable of serving at least a future 10 years increased growth in the number of EVs on the road. Among other things this means solving the problems of charging EVs if you live in one of the hundreds of thousands of terraced houses and flats in narrow streets often with parking only available on one side of the road, if at all. Are all public car parks where people have to keep their car overnight (especially blocks of flats and housing estates) going to be provided with electric charging points at every bay and charged at rates which are equivalent to domestic electricity prices at home? Even if they are installed, are all these public charging points going to be free from vandalism, fraud and 100% reliable? Otherwise, the many hundreds of thousands of people who cannot park their car off road at night will be at an immediate disadvantage and they will be virtually forced out of private car ownership altogether once ICEs are no longer available to buy.
Add into the mix the increased danger from electrical car fires that are very intense which means vastly increased fire protection for all underground car parks and arguably car parks in general that have charging points.
-
3
-
-
Just now, OverThere said:
Hi all,
Firstly just to state I do believe in man made climate change so I am not one of the sceptics. My question is have there been any studies on the effects the increase in water vapour in the atmosphere from the Tonga volcano has had on the weather this year? Coupled with an El Nino has this had a greater effect on SSTs and air temps than expected?
Cite as: Martin Jucker, Chris Lucas, Deepashree Dutta. Long-term surface impact of Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai-like stratospheric water vapor injection. ESS Open Archive . August 04, 2023.
DOI: 10.22541/essoar.169111653.36341315/v1-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, markyo said:
Sorry mate but you seem to be totally misinterpreting the facts. Actual solid data. Again you used a non proved adjective....Likely. Against that is proven by backed up solid data. Sorry but here you are the one with a closed mindset, not having a go at all, just surprised someone like yourself can get so hoodwinked. Your concept would be a linear increase which it isn't, and also takes no account of the increases in the last 40 years. Time for you to open your mind mate to reality.
Sorry Markyo
You totally miss my point. I am not talking about co2 climate change I am talking about certain extreme events which can be better explained by the hunga tonga event
These extremes have occurred since hunga tonga.
-
36 minutes ago, markyo said:
In what way? Your not making sense
Closed mindset springs forward.
Latest research would indicate that that the stratospheric water vapour from hunga tonga is likely to cause 1.5c of warming in parts of the NH but equally in other parts may cause 1 c of cooling.
The present pockets of extreme weather is not co2 induced
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, CryoraptorA303 said:
What's causing the warming if it's not increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations?
"Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out" - Richard Dawking
Just reinforced my point well done.
-
1
-
-
Just now, CryoraptorA303 said:
It's definitely not supposed to still be bright green. We almost always have at least some yellowing by now. This is ridiculous.
I suppose you've never heard the phrase Indian Summer.
Snow and Ice Northern Hemisphere - Winter 23 /24
in Spring Weather Discussion
Posted
The figures I've seen suggests a slow down in the rate of loss of ice for this time of year. If it continues at this rate for the rest of their summer it is likely it will no longer be at the lowest level on record. Interesting times.