Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Race To Find Who is Pumping a Dangerous Gas Into the Atmosphere (theoutline.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: When the research was published in Nature on May 16, it was like a bomb dropped. A greenhouse gas is billowing into the atmosphere from a source somewhere in East Asia that no one can identify at a rate scientists have never before seen, and it's ignited a scientific dash to get to the bottom of it. All countries are supposed to comply with the rules laid out in the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which banned the production of CFCs -- chlorofluorocarbons, which deplete the ozone layer and contribute to global warming -- with only temporary exception of a few economically developing countries. If everyone fulfills their end of the deal, the amount of CFCs in the atmosphere should gradually wane over the course of several decades. CFC levels plummeted through the 1990s, and then stagnated between 2002 and 2005. But in in 2014, mysterious toxic plumes of CFC-11 -- a type of CFC -- began to drift across the Pacific Ocean. Stephen Montzaka, a chemist who studies and monitors CFCs for The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), was shocked.
Without a doubt. The only problem is how to pin it to them. The political will also isn't there to pin it to them - too much money changes hands in the West on the back of Chinese goods being traded and we've become far too dependent on the Chinese for trinkets and future ewaste.
some quick old style enrichment of uranium and the CFC is the tell? Should have studied more and not released the one product the world still looks into.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I'm not saying it's aliens...But it's aliens! (The extra-terrestrial kind not the undocumented immigrant kind) They are terraforming the planet for their impending invasion.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Wow, that narrows it down to only three billion people! Great detective work.
First the NOAA satellite has a cooling issue and not gas that's contributing to global warming is being pumped into the atmosphere. We better get Charlie Sheen to Arecibo.
and throw the book on them!
Thanks,
The world
If we're going to get a handle on the environmentally destructive nature of capitalism then we're going to have to legislate that environmental capital be a real thing in all UN nations. That is that when you pollute the environment that you are held financially accountable for the costs required to remove it from the environment.
This tragedy of the commons has been going on far too long.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
TFS says "East Asia". India is not in East Asia by anybody's definition of that term.
On another note, wouldn't it be fun if this turned out to be Japan or North Korea?
With the hairspray.
Didn't he already outline his plan in that early 2000s documentary?
India is nowhere near East Asia.
It won't be either of those: NK too low-tech; Nippon too high.
Hence "fun", if it turned out to be either of them.
Trump on the issue of CFCs... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Most normal production lines and random consumer products would have advanced after the 1980's.
Low cost, export approved. Keep CFC going just for domestic consumer use?
A domestic factory and imports would soon out pace 1970's CFC tech.
A production line that was perfected in 1970-80, needs lots of CFC and has never been replaced?
What advanced industry, consumer use could that be? That is not now low cost for consumers?
That opens up non consumer use. A secret that relates to a lot of CFC.
What old military design can release a lot of CFC and is worth the risk for a nation to try?
Someone is cooking and is in a rush for the result.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Whew! This time it wasn't me.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
You know when you "recycle" all those old fridges and freezers.
And it costs a bucket to throw them away.
And then a market starts up around a slightly cheaper way to do it.
And the company just takes your equipment, ships it abroad, to someone who just signs off that it's being disposed of properly (but who doesn't care because it's not his life he's hurting).
And then the abroad country, not having any care at all for such things as they get a nice backhander to bury a bit of rubbish, just throws it in landfill..
Yeah... there. That's where I'd start.
Like when you GPS-track waste electronics and find out it almost all ends up in landfill in India, China, etc. and isn't even processed at all.
The number of households with fridges and air conditioners is growing exponentially. Would hundreds of Asian cities with millions of households with leaky ACs not throw up a plume? https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Gently reply
All of my cars and refrigerators still require R-12 you intolerant bastard. I mean, not that I've ever had to replace any of it but without team India/China how could I? Congratulations you've saved the environment by mandating something that wastes more electricity/fuel and isn't released into the atmosphere unless things go very wrong.
You can't save much if UV burns the shit out of everything.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Learn how to read dumbass. The gas in question is CFC-11.
Short story: not only that, they're quite potent too - much more so than CO2 (for the same concentration). The only reason they haven't received as much attention in this context as CO2 is that the international community has been quite successful at curbing their atmospheric concentrations and thus their impact on the climate. Which cannot be said about CO2.
Longer story at Wikipedia.
On the subject of getting attention: am I the only one who finds the theoutline.com link in TFS offensive? Not only did they succeed to combine the worst of late-2010s and early-1990s web design (scrolling site + white-on-black wall of text = teeth gnashing) but it's just a thoroughly sensationalized duplicate of the earlier TIME story. Complete with shamelessly copied misleading image of "largest Antarctic ozone hole ever recorded (September 2006)", but now with complimentary misleading caption "who did this?"
It's almost as if they're setting up a strawman for the purpose of bashing the more moderate people with legitimate concerns about anthropogenic climate change. But then there's Poe's law...
If we're going to get a handle on the environmentally destructive nature of capitalism then we're going to have to legislate that environmental capital be a real thing in all UN nations. That is that when you pollute the environment that you are held financially accountable for the costs required to remove it from the environment.
Nice sentiment but let's get real. Until we can do something as basic as forcing oil companies to actually pay the full cost of the pollution their products generate we're not going to get nation states to cooperate. Hell we still subsidize fossil fuel companies to the tune of around $5 trillion globally every year and barely regulate emissions. Good luck getting that under control.
This tragedy of the commons has been going on far too long.
And as long as we have economically selfish "leaders" who think anything that hurts oil company profits is some sort of evil plot it isn't going to change.
It's almost as if they're setting up a strawman for the purpose of bashing the more moderate people with legitimate concerns about anthropogenic climate change. But then there's Poe's law...
Never mind, it was written by an intern. Less "Poe's law" and more "Hanlon's razor" :-)
Nowhere does it state that CFC-11 is a greenhouse gas
They don't even need to, it should be common knowledge.
Ezekiel 23:20
CFCs are greenhouse gasses but their bigger problem is that they "eat" ozone. The Montreal agreement dealt with the ozone depletion problem though.
detected 4 years ago. And volcanoes do NOT release CFCs nor are they used in geothermal electricity production.
Theory shot.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This is all you need to know about any global environmental agreements
"...with only temporary exception of a few economically developing countries."
"If everyone fulfills their end of the deal..."
CFC-11:
Either someone's making a shed-load of fridges.
Doing a load of resonance imaging.
Or...
"Trichlorofluoromethane was formerly used in the drinking bird novelty"
Gosh, if only there were other volcanoes around the world we could use to compare its output with, or monitoring stations all over the world's volcanoes for all kinds of gas analysis?
Oh, he knows it, the anonymous coward is simply trolling. The fact that the greenhouse gas in question is CFC-11 is clear in the article linked, and it takes some very deliberate misreading to not see that it is in the summary.
CFC-11 is trichlorofluoromethane, for what it's worth. A better reference is here: https://www.nature.com/article...
Nowhere does it state that CFC-11 is a greenhouse gas
Because most people realize CFCs are a powerful greenhouse gas. Oh, and because you posted a Wiki link, here's one right back for you, and here's the important quote you should take from it:
the atmospheric impacts of CFCs are not limited to its role as an active ozone reducer. This anthropogenic compound is also a greenhouse gas, with a much higher potential to enhance the greenhouse effect than CO2.
Emphasis added. Don't blame your ignorance on others.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Don't volcanoes release mass quantities of CFC's?
No, volcanoes emit a large amount of many noxious gases (most notably sulfur oxides), but CFCs aren't among them-- these are man made, and have no natural sources.
The original article https://www.nature.com/article... (which would have been a better reference) said that the increase in northern hemisphere CFC-11 started in 2012, which is years before the current Hawaiian eruption.
detected 4 years ago.
Kilauea has been there for millions of years.
And volcanoes do NOT release CFCs
You know this how? Proving a negative ....
nor are they used in geothermal electricity production.
What's this?
Have gnu, will travel.
I wouldn't bet on "most people" knowing that CFCs are also greenhouse gases. I consider myself pretty well-read, and that was news to me -- to me the issue with CFCs was always ozone.
But now I know. If I had been a journalist writing the piece, I would have clarified the issue.
I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
detected 4 years ago.
Kilauea has been there for millions of years.
Yes, but the article is about a project that has been tracking CFCs in the atmosphere for many years seeing a new source of CFC-11 starting around 2012. That's not "millions of years".
And, not seeing a new source of other CFCs, just CFC-11. Volcanoes don't emit CFC-11 (there just aren't any magma sources for fluorine-- volcanic gasses to worry about are hydrogen sulfide and sulfur di- and tri-oxide.)
What's this?
"This" is a news article that says of the geothermal plant at Puna "a flammable gas called pentane is used as part of the process."
Pentane isn't a chlorofluorocarbon (although it's a contributor to photochemical smog.)
I had no idea CFC were greenhouse gases. I thought they just helped breakdown ozone. Are they released in significant enough quantities to be relevant to global warming?
Are they released in significant enough quantities to be relevant to global warming?
I was wondering, too; odds are no.
the atmospheric impacts of CFCs are not limited to its role as an active ozone reducer. This anthropogenic compound is also a greenhouse gas, with a much higher potential to enhance the greenhouse effect than CO2.
Emphasis added. Don't blame your ignorance on others.
Actually, CFC-11 is NOT a very powerful greenhouse gas. It's about 1/30 as powerful as CO2, for example, mostly because there just isn't very much CFC-11 in the atmosphere. If you add all of the halocarbons together, they're about 1/6 that of CO2 alone.
South Asia.
It would be trivial to check if it was volcanoes. They would know by now.
Also why only in the last few years, volcanoes have been around quite a bit longer than that...
Your cars and refrigerators can use a an isobutane/propane mix. They do not require R-12. Your lazy ass that can't connect two bottles to refill the system rather than one is the problem..
And no, I don't care that there is a very slight risk of a very small explosion, upgrade your shit.
Like I said, CFC are not natural (i.e. these are NOT made by nature) so can NOT be released by volcano since they do not exists in the wild. Nor are CFCs used in geothermal wells. Pointing to an article that says the magma is covering a well, means nothing. In fact, the magma SEALED the well
Finally, Hawaii itself is a series of volcanoes and not a 1 is more than 1 Million years old. Kilauea it self is around 500,000 year+-.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I was not think of the fridge itself to be releasing, but the manufacturer.
However, the amounts that they have picked up goes well beyond that small amount of manufacturing.
It is something being done on a large scale, with a large release at a time.
That is why I suggested the railguns.
Possibly foam, but that would indicate that it is in constant use. This is in puffs. large quantity puffs. As in, somebody had a reason to make heavy use of it for an hour or a day.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
See: https://www.express.co.uk/news... "SCIENTISTS have concluded a spike in banned chemicals which threatens to cause fresh damage to the ozone layer can be traced to badly recycled air conditioning units and fridges in China."
CFCs are 100% man-made. They are NOT found in nature. If they had been in nature, our ozone layer would be gone already.
In addition, if you read on some of the other articles, esp. going back to the papers, you will see that we are talking 1000's of tonnes. In addition, it is 10s of TONNES at a time. If this was manufacturing-related such as for foam, it would be constant for multiple days or weeks. It is known that this is being done over a period of a couple of hours to a day long. Then apparently no usage for a bit.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
And where is north Asia then ;D ?
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Are they released in significant enough quantities to be relevant to global warming?
In our days, no. Hence the article, as this exhaust is significant, and we can not find the source.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
You are misinterpreting.
CFC-11 is a nearly 5000 times stronger Greenhouse gas than CO2, but it is only in very small amounts in the atmosphere.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
That is a failure in researching ;D the link has nothing to do with CFC-11 ...
And the parent is right: volcanos don't spit out CFC-11 ... how the funk would they?
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Aliens with knees that bend the wrong way. Or the Chinese.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
that will depend on if the execs are doing it for the Chinese gov or not.
If they are using this for cooling railguns, then no.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Well, there is no date on the map
"23 Aug 2016"
I wonder what compounds are used to start the process of CFC and if that could be a 'natural' process?
I don't know. As someone pointed out, it could just be an old World War II dump that started leaking. The point is not to point fingers at Asia but to get their ground testing equipment over to Hawaii ASAP. That's where the plume appears to originate. On the other hand, if there exist other maps showing different sources, then why did they pick the one that clearly doesn't support the text of their story?
Have gnu, will travel.
I consider myself pretty well-read
Did you read TFA?
If I had been a journalist writing the piece, I would have clarified the issue.
From TFA: "As greenhouse gases, CFCs are also thousands of times more potent than carbon dioxide"
How could it be more clear?
NOT toxic.
yes, whoever wrote the article made a bad word choice. CFCs have many properties, but toxicity isn't one of them.
the original Nature article being commented on doesn't use that adjective. This is typical of popular science journalism, using high-impact words to make a story seem more important, instead of sticking to the actual words of the work being reported on.
Any chance this could be natural? I'm pretty sure it isn't but just asking.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Everybody wins by crushing thousands of tons of otherwise perfectly functional cars and appliances, got it. Does Everybody also work at your car dealership/appliance store? Putting R13A into a R-12 based system does not work.
They ought to.... If I recall correctly the so-called Greenhouse Effect has long been a concern about use of such gases since the early 1900s, and it was an environmental concern that CFCs might cause a Greenhouse Effect first and foremost, they were not known to be toxic pollutants otherwise. It was later into the late 1970s - more than 60 years after CFCs had started being used in products on a large scale that the other devastating truth about CFCs became exposed --- holes were discovered in our Ozone layer, and it was found the CFCs were the cause; everything from the propellents used in aerosol cans to gas used in refrigeration systems needed to change at enormous expense to stop using these and switch to alternatives from the 1980s to early 2000s.
By the way, in most cases the alternatives to CFCs developed such as HFCs and PFCs are still greenhouse gases, and maybe even more potent --- compared to CO2; most of the CFCs and the alternatives/substitutes that were developed are More potent contributors to global warming.
And all this work... in vain if some random company in one country or another believes they can do whatever the hell they want to in their factory; making and releasing CFCs at their convenience as a byproduct of some process anyways.
The release from one factory will not have a measurable affect on global warming, but Ozone depletion is another story, and it most likely has already caused damage that would be a measurable amount.
Yeah, but a leak can then be quite exciting, which is a big reason why the industry switched to non-toxic, non-flammable chloroflourocarbons in the first place.
That reminds me of when the Onion did a great article the Taco Bell morning after burrito, the Contraceptimelt.
https://www.theonion.com/taco-bell-launches-new-morning-after-burrito-1819564251
To be fair, CFCs were banned due to ozone depletion, the initial causality that was proven. The green house effects of CFCs or even methane, are generally unknown by the public at large, because those topics never really made headline news. With CFCs already out of the picture, and only CO2 being the major anthropogenic component of global warming, that's all most read about, provided they read anything about global warming at all. (Yes, it can be argued that methane has a large anthropogenic component as well due to cattle raising, but we'll gloss over that fact)
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
As far as I know, they only have "interns" as writers there.
No matter how potent CFCs are as a greenhouse gas, the amount is so absolutely tiny (relatively speaking) that it doesn't really matter. The chain reaction destruction of ozone is far more of a concern - because it multiplies its effects so broadly. I clicked away earlier and read that a single chlorine atom produced by CFCs breaking down in the stratosphere can destroy thousands of ozone molecules. But I'm too tired and lazy to cite my source, so just believe me instead.
From the left. Never was, never has been any "man made" global warming. It was the "modern maximum" sunspot cycles from the 50's through 2008/9 Since then, we've been in a solar activity free fall, with the sun being VERY quiet (just ask ham operators like myself how QUIET and dead the bands have been on 20 & 40 meters).
http://www.star-telegram.com/n...
I did a little bit of reading on this subject just now. I found some studies that state there are natural sources of CFCs. Then I found another paper that says there are natural sources of CFC.s
From reading that paper I believe its safe to say there are natural sources of CFCs. But these sources are insignificant to really matter.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Since the 1970s (yes, I'm showing my age), it's been relatively common knowledge that CFCs = ozone-depleting gases, and there have been published articles which seek to establish causal links to climate change as a secondary result of ozone depletion. So knowledge of CFCs as 'greenhouse gases' is not as common as knowledge of CFCs as 'ozone-depleting gases', but it's not as if it's completely out of the blue, either.
"Truth is what works" -- William James "It works!!" -- o-dark-AM comment
i think they called it the 'Raj' ?
R-12 worked a hell of a lot better than R-134a. You can still pick up cans but it's not cheap.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
No, it's not natural. CFC-11 is fluorotrichloride, or CFCl3. C-Cl and C-F bonds are artificial- in nature you don't see them much. To form them you need to invest energy, because you're starting with ionic chlorides and fluorides, which are not terribly interested in forming covalent bonds with a non-metal like carbon. That's why these chemicals fall apart so easily when they reach the upper stratosphere. The fluorine doesn't stick around for long, but the chlorine with the unpaired electron attacks ozone and survives the encounter. A single chlorine radical will destroy billions of ozone molecules for the two years it spends in the air. It attacks its first ozone to form ordinary oxygen and chlorine monoxide, which still has an unpaired electron. The chlorine monoxide attacks a second ozone, yielding more oxygen and releasing the chlorine radical to kill again. Although the chlorine radical itself only lasts a few decades, its fluorotrichloromethane precursor hangs around for decades to replenish the supply.
The fact that the molecule has four of these weird bonds makes it really suspicious. Someone is definitely making this shit.
If you read the Wikipedia link then you would have seen that North Asia is Russia east of the Urals.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
The article is poorly written. Yes CFCl3 is a potent greenhouse gas (and so is ozone actually), but the issue here is the ozone destruction, not the greenhouse effect. One shady factory in China manufacturing CFCs will warm the earth about as much as the factory next door legally manufacturing HFC. Sarin is a greenhouse gas too, but that's not what makes its release newsworthy.
I used to live in China and was in the data center cooling business. R12 is all over the place there in the HVAC industry. Officially, it's prohibited. Unofficially, you can buy it from any A/C dealer in just about any city. I've been gone for a few years, but when I was there, R12 air conditioners were still being made and installed new.
Everybody wins by crushing
Errr no. R-134a is a retrofit replacement. If you are crushing things or someone recommended crushing things they were trying to sell you shit you didn't need. Do you even google bro?
R-12 worked a hell of a lot better than R-134a. You can still pick up cans but it's not cheap.
Leaded petrol worked a lot better than unleaded too. What's your point? Fuck over everything for sake of tiny increases in convenience for ancient gear? Phosphoric acid is a better de-scaler and rust remover than it's replacements. Benzine is a better window cleaner than ammonia, not that there's much ammonia in modern cleaners either.
We can achieve a great many things when we don't give a shit about the consequences. R-134a is just fine as a refrigerant.
The green house effects of CFCs or even methane, are generally unknown by the public at large
Are you serious? Even my redneck brother-in-law, with an IQ of about 80, makes a joke about "contributing to global warming" every time he burps or farts.
those topics never really made headline news.
Uhh ... yes they have. I have seen many headlines about cows and NG leaks contributing to global warming. The big NG leak in California in 2015-2016 was national news, and every story mentioned the greenhouse effect. I have also read at least a few headline stories about freon as well.
Anyone ignorant of these issues is certainly not "well read".
I left the refrigerator door open in my hotel room while I was visiting China ten years back.
This is why your parents told you not to stand in front of the refrigerator with the door open....
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
The green house effects of CFCs or even methane, are generally unknown by the public at large
Are you serious? Even my redneck brother-in-law, with an IQ of about 80, makes a joke about "contributing to global warming" every time he burps or farts.
Rednecks aren't necessarily ignorant nor stupid, although the stereotype certainly paints them that way. That's why there are also stupid rednecks and dumbass rednecks, not to mention the "hold my beer, hey y'all, watch this" redneck.
Anyone ignorant of these issues is certainly not "well read".
Now that's a different argument and a lot more subjective, and I'll grant you that well-read in this context seems out of place given how much has been written about these various contributors to global warming.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
CFCs can be used to make boron and high energy fuels and rocket propellants are made with the boron.
My High School when I was a Junior and a Senior had a students' smoking courtyard. The school was built with these inner courtyards, which there were four or six of, so every classroom would have windows, and one of these courtyards was the designated smoking area for students. This was in Minnesota, by the way. I graduated in 1977.
This was before the Iran hostage crisis, the 'war on terror', and Reagan and we had the idea that we were going to be more and more free as time continued on.
These people you refer to have had names at times in the past. For a time they were called comrades in one area of the world, in another they were called Good Germans. Sometimes they are referred to as consumers by those who manipulate them. They have a set of memes called 'popular culture' that is manufactured to entertain, distract, and control them.
The fluid in the tank under your seat is only flammable as a vapor mixed with air. There is a lot of complicated machinery involved in converting it to a form where it burns very effectively. The vapors can occur to make it flammable by simply letting it escape and evaporate on it's own, but it's easily contained so that is a relatively uncommon occurance. That is specifically why it is such good mobile fuel. Completely unlike extremely unstable, corrosive and leak prone substances like hydrogen.
Because it's obvious to anyone who still has a pulse that measuring by country is idiotic with such differing sizes of countries.
For example, split China into 4 equal Countries, North South East and West China. Each will have more people and produce less CO2 than America. Suddenly America is 'the worst polluter in the world' again according to you. All from just drawing lines on a map. Was there an actual change in pollution though?
How many other volcanoes around the world are dumping molten lava directly into seawater? There could be something unique about the chemistry going on here.
Have gnu, will travel.
Any polyatomic gas is a greenhouse gas. If it's airborne and has three or more atoms, it qualifies.
Low energy infrared photons (like those emitted by a body at 300K) can cause bonds to bend side to side in a flapping motion.
Oxygen and nitrogen are diatomic molecules. They can stretch, but there's no way they can bend because there are only two atoms. So they're transparent to IR emitted from the ground and are not greenhouse gases. Molecules that can bend need three atoms or more, like carbon dioxide, which gets hit by an infrared photon and moves like a bird flapping its wings before reemitting it. H2O is also a greenhouse gas but its long term atmospheric concentration is stable over the long term and doesn't rise year over year. Methane is a potent gas because it's tetrahedral and its single bonds are easier to flex than e.g. the double bonds in CO2.
HFCs and CFCs also have tetrahedral shapes with single bonds, but they're more potent greenhouse gases than methane, because the fluorine and chlorine atoms distort the charge concentration and give the molecule a dipole moment that makes it better at scattering photons. They also provide it with more possible bending motions.
I'm not sure why this article is talking about illegal fluorotrichloromethane being a greenhouse gas. It's illegal because it destroys stratospheric ozone. Gram for gram, sarin is an extremely potent greenhouse gas, but that's not why it's illegal.
"What old military design can release a lot of CFC and is worth the risk for a nation to try?
Someone is cooking and is in a rush for the result."
Sounds plausible. Google search turns up several references to military use accounting for a large fraction of CFC pollution. But very little info about those military applications. Perhaps some manufacturing processes that involve controlling extreme temperatures?
Norks cooking up some chemical weapons, to hold onto as a deterrent after formal denuclearization? Japanese deciding now is the time to finish their 95% complete nukes, 'cuz something made them worry more than usual about China? Both sound like cool movies... But they don't really match the map.
It sure looks like the plume is coming from a Pacific island near Hawaii. Maybe that's an artifact of the monitoring infrastructure locations? Or maybe Uncle Sam is building something out there?
The article referenced in this post refers hints at alternative sources of the CFC's that the researchers considered. That seems key to know eg. were the CFC's produced from existing CFC laden garbage in landfills (old refrigerators) that have suddenly released their content?
But can't get to see that since the apparently publicly funded research is hidden behind a $199 publishers fee.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
I'm probably missing something glaringly obvious that will make me look stupid, but I'll throw this out there anyway. Wouldn't there be a pretty specific IR / spectral absorption profile for CFC-11, or at least for CFC's in general? If the rate of release is that great, wouldn't there be a chance of satellite fly-overs narrowing down the location significantly, if not actually pinpointing it?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Lots of them.
The vast majority of volcanoes are UNDER THE OCEAN.
Nuclear. Its always nuclear thats hidden and never mentioned in the media much.
Was it an industrial scam, consumer junk, an export scam it would be in the comedy section of the tech news.
Country A pumps out CFC to scam with fake industrial air conditioner. Name and shame.
With no names and no really funny make cash quick "origin" story?
Something really funny like Country B imported the industrial air conditioners and found them to be really good for the price until they needed servicing and the CFC free gas did not work...
No funny story? Its military and nuclear.
CFC only works for some many things and all the easy stuff got upgraded over the decades.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Which would result in CFCs remaining dissolved in the water.
This might be an alternate explanation of high CFC concentrations around Kilauea. Dissolved CFCs (produced over the years from man-made sources) are simply being boiled out on contact with the lava and released into the atmosphere. Not reabsorbed as would be the case with deep water volcanoes.
Have gnu, will travel.
Wow, you found 'some studies' and then 'another paper' but for 'some reason' you didn't want to share them with us...
No even then they will find a scapegoat. The PR hit would be too bad for them if they don't.
No unfortunately I've become used to entitled assholes blaming poor people for consuming too much while trying not to look in the mirror.
They seem to follow me around, I just (incorrectly) assumed he was another one.
Because if you are on a boat that is taking on water, you want to find the biggest holes and plug them first. Hint Americans are amongst the biggest holes, China is only a bit above average.
Even if you think lines on a map are somehow important for calculating who to blame, why are you patting youself on the back?
I get it, you hate China, they are filthy dirty scum and probably stole your coal job. But why are you so smug when by your own stupid measure you are SECOND WORSE IN THE WHOLE WORLD?
If you had more clue, you would knew that a) I was teasing and b) that the names are completely different from nation to nation. In German there ist no north or south Asia.
India is east Asia, and the parts east of Ural are simple Asia.
I guess you are one of the Guys who believe the 'middle east' actually starts in north west Africa.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
No, the chance that such an amount is ocuring naturaly is zero.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
These people also want climate-change deniers to be jailed.
No, it isn't. If you'd ever tried to do that swap you would know this. In order to retain the same cooling characteristics you'd need to increase the duty cycle of the compressor or upgrade it. Do you think GE (or whomever) chose some toxic thing just because? They chose it because it was the most effective refrigerant they could find.
If I legitimately need a new appliance/car/home air conditioning system fine, I will spend the money. The problem is that we're now legislating that 'need'. By the power of law you can no longer repair things that need sealant and will go for another 20+ years, you now need to spend thousands on less efficient gear that may not even last 10 years. If any of my R-12 systems need recharging in the future I will be contacting India or China or flipping ISIS if that's what it takes.
I also did read "the 1987 Montreal Protocol" with is about ozone reduction.
So replacing a reliable and efficient working thing with an "approved" non-working thing and then replacing it with a semi-working thing (many dollars later, provided you can jump through enough government mandated hoops and endured months of a thing that does not work) is the "best" path? I think I'd rather fund terrorism. Virtually all of the supplies going into Afghanistan are shipped through Pakistani tribal lands. The US government pays bribes to allow each of those shipments to go through. Who do you imagine receives those funds? I can assure you it isn't the Red Cross, it's the exact same groups we're "fighting" in Afghanistan. The government would like to pretend drug sales are funding them while they literally find them.
And yet it is the routine retrofit and replacement gas that is used constantly in exactly the applications you describe it as not being the replacement. Just because your duty suffers slightly doesn't make it a direct replacement.
The problem is that we're now legislating that 'need'.
Do you still wash your windows in benzine? Do you still use leaded paint and petrol? Do you still use large tubes of mercury to make tilt switches? You can thank legislation for your current life expectancy and the world you live in. Screw your shitty compressor and its duty cycle.
If any of my R-12 systems need recharging in the future I will be contacting India or China or flipping ISIS if that's what it takes.
On behalf of the world, fuck you you inconsiderate fuck.
Obviously it has refrigerant properties. I would hazard a guess that since it boils at room temperature, it would make a great inorganic solvent for electonics/solar manufacture and other processes. Looks to be a lot safer than dichloromethane, if you're willing to flout international law.
Accidentally calling someone an idiot while surrounded by other idiots is hardly the same as bombing people. I don't think slopes can get that slippery can they?
You're idiot-signaling pretty heavily right now.
But yet you think that lines on a map are important when you want to assign blame to people of the US? But not when the finger is pointed at the biggest polluter, China? So its only important when you can blame the U.S?
You see you are not looking to solve the problem? You are just looking for someone to blame. Since you can't blame the whole U.S. any more as the number one polluter, you pull out this per capta crap so you can continue to do so.
We get it, you hate the U.S. But here is something for you think about. There are 1.2 billion Chinese. While U.S. emissions have been on the decline for more than a decade. Yes, we used to be the first, now we are the second. What do you think will happen as those 1.2 billion Chinese want to start emitting like the average U.S. does?
We won't talk about India and Africa who are about to surpass the U.S. in emissions in probably the next decade. Will you shuffle the numbers around again so you can continue to blame the U.S?
An, no I don't hate China, India, or Africa. The point is silly people like you want to pass the blame but don't want to do anything about it. You have to recognize where all the true issues are to deal with it. Shuffling around numbers so you can still have your favorite boogy man doesn't solve squat.
Blaming individual people won't make the problem any better. We have to work with countries as a whole because that is the way our society is set up.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
The fact that the molecule has four of these weird bonds makes it really suspicious. Someone is definitely making this shit.
Well that blows. Thanks for bring me up to date.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
I can see you don't have a science/math/logic background. Pretending something is true and then figuring out it's not consistent with reality is a common way to prove things are false.
Did you really not know Africa isn't a country? Africa isn't going to overtake you. What 'African government' is set up to tackle this?
Logically there can be only 2 posibilities, profound ignorance or trolling. Anyone who could make the kinds of 'arguments' you are making, either knows they are easily refuted nonsense, or is just parroting what someone else told them to say. You don't seem completely stupid, so #2.
I feel truly privileged you responded, since my lowly post didn't ever get above 1...
Did you really just say you think the USA has the 2nd worst government in the world?
+1 groupthink doesn't make you smarter if the group are all idiots.
And I can run 100 meters faster than Usain Bolt, I just don't want to hurt his feelings. He trains so hard.
It's obvious you put a lot more effort into this than I did. But you still didn't get the response you were looking for. Better luck next time.
You did manage to get one thing right. Your 'fame' did get me much more attention to my arguments, so thanks for that. I got exactly what I wanted.
Is this the part where you tell me how smart you are again?
If I could still get those things I might.
Lead paint is in no way toxic unless you eat/burn it. It lasts far longer than its modern equivalent. It's gotten better but a paint that will last 60+ years is called lead paint. I wouldn't use it on wood (since the thing it's attached to won't last that long) but on metal, sure. Steel coated in this stuff on both sides will last longer than any of us.
Lead, as a fuel additive, no. While it is an excellent octane booster there are plenty of other things that can do that too (Benzene,Toluene,etc). The only benefit other than its relative cheapness was that it didn't require hardened valve seats in engines. If your engine is so equipped (even 50 year old trucks have this) then there's no real benefit to running tetraethyl lead fuel other than as bragging rights that you own your own time machine. It's also pretty shitty for the environment since that comes out in the exhaust.
Asbestos (embedded in other materials since it's an excellent fire retardant) is in no way toxic unless you crush those materials releasing the embedded fibers. In high heat applications it's now been replaced by ceramic wool fibers that are arguably just as dangerous and for the exact same reasons. My father worked literally ACROSS THE STREET from an asbestos baling facility (for shipment from where it naturally occurred to other parts of the world) for 20+ years and he's fine at age 70.
Creosote comes from a bush+coal tar, its pretty toxic if you burn it but ordinary wood coated in it lasts FOREVER. Go to the coast, look at a pier (or look at pretty much any old railroad tie). See that brown stuff on the pilings? That's Creosote. Since it's been illegal for the last 30+ years and those pilings are still doing just fine yes I'd like some of that please. Your ecologically friendly-ish (but still toxic) pressure treated lumber is a far cry from that.
Benzine as a window washing fluid? I guess you could but...why? I've never needed anything other than ammonia based products. Glass is pretty easy to clean, you can even use a razor blade on it if whatever substance won't come off with an approved solvent. You can still (IIRC) legally obtain this but if you order a 50 gallon drum of it then expect to go on some sort of homeland security watch list.
Mercury based switches, I guess you mean thermostats? Modern equivalents are better. If you want to always turn on something at X degrees then fine, it works and will continue working until whatever plastic bits that are attached to it break( If it does break please dispose of it properly ). If you only want to turn stuff on when you're home, not so much. You need electronics for that.
Incidental contact to any of these materials is not going to cause problems, it's only with repeated contact/as an inhalant that you start to get those.
The Romans literally had water pipes made out of lead, lead was in their wine, etc. Yes some of them eventually went nuts but thinking a tiny amount is OMG dangerous is a fallacy. Any exterior paint made prior to 1977-ish? was a lead based paint. It's exposure based, just like radioactive substances. Some is fine (seawater everywhere, also soil in my area are naturally radioactive), it's only when you get a lot of it that you start to have problems since your body can only absorb so much before 'bad things' (cancer) start happening, or in the case of Lead poisoning it's IIRC dementia.
Back to my main point, virtually every A/C (house, car) system that I own runs on R-12. They all still work fine and have not impacted the environment in any way other than by electricity usage, which they use less of. I have owned 'modern' refrigerat