Extreme Weather Caused By Us

 Positive that still more researchers are convinced that we ourselves cause extreme weather:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120325173206.htm

In my experiments earlier (see older posts) I showed that CO2 or CO2 and traces of certain particles in calm water caused an uneven and delayed melting of ice there compared with ice in pure water - so with CO2 there were outbursts of heat only at some moments to give the ice cube a sidewise pointy edge by those outbursts that probably had one part of warmer current together with a bit cooler one - this meant a regular triangular shaping of the ice cube (opposed to the ice cube in pure water that melted regular with square shape). When I stirred contents there were further delayed melting of ice cubes no matter of how much CO2 or extra particles there were, but there was even and regular melting of the ice cubes - meaning better distributions of heat is of utter importancy in the environment.

In the experiments with calm water the ice cubes floated near the water surface, so the heat currents at the water surface spread along downward the ice cubes and did not go deeper than the lower part of the ice. If there was more heat at the water surface than at the bottom of the ice cubes, I guess there after awhile would be a pointy top edge of each ice cube, but that was not the case. By this I have shown that the experts were wrong to think that CO2 bubbles will isolate against melting of ice, since the sides were straight and the top of ice cubes covered with less CO2 bubbles did not melt faster to give a cavity there!

By stirring the contents I spread the heat below the lower part of the ice cubes, so there was much less heat from currents that would melt the floating ice cubes, and the currents got locked in regular distributions all over. So no wonder the ice cubes lasted much longer after first some stirring. When you have a cool drink with ice cubes you must remember to stirr at once (otherwise the ice cubes will melt much faster and the drink will all in all be less cooled down). Stirred and not shaken, then. Opposite with a hot coffee, hot soup... that will have an early cooler upper part ("skin" in some cases) - stirring will release heat in lower pockets to make the coffee etc feel warmer than without stirring. To make the coffee "last longer", you only stirr at a later moment.

By carefully terraforming the environment man may take controll over the weather when we learn how currents can be spread out and distributed no matter how much heat is added in the system by the sun (and the internal heat from the earth) and no matter how much CO2 and particles (aerosols) there are. But we must cut the releases of CO2 plus particles until we are clever enough. And in the meantime we can use simple terraforming and restoring solutions we already have the knowledge about - no excuse to delay that!

It's A Jungle Out There !

Go see the wilderness this Summer... and perhaps the wilderness sees you! (Carpenters: "...they long to be close to you...";-))

Puzzle I solved during 27 hours - a whole week passed until I finished! (I'm a hard working man struggling with different branches...;-)) Better shape on roller skis on Sunday: I already set a new personal best then by 14,2 km/h during one hour of exercise using classic roller skis with kick brake.

Springtime - Already!

My birdfeeders are empty or almost empty now... record high temperature of 16,5 C at Monday here north of Dröbak! So no snow left as you can see from my balcony. My flag pole has done it's duty for this Winter with much variety of temperatures (more than ever!) - I've shown that CO2 and aerosols together with increased mono cultures around the world must take the blame. It's very important that small turbulences are created in the air because of much variety in the landscapes, and not that still air or violently currents in the air dominate.

But instead of keeping a variety of landscapes and plants - like rocks, small hills and different bushes, people level the ground and burn those plants everywhere in an attempt to keep the landscape open - for more variety, the politicians say... but that is totally crazy! If we want a variety of landscapes, that must be done carefully and gradualy with plant eating animals and earth shifting and aeroating animals like wild boars and moles in their habitats with small hills outside the cities, which also could be transformed with green roofs, etc. A lot of ideas that cost just a little money and brain - but the politicians won't listen! Only a few environment friendly green parties understand this, but they seem never to get much influence most places (also here!) of the world.

Sadly no more ski trips for me this early of Spring, but that is a small sacrifice, of course. Luckily I have my roller skis - I started the season already today; I've never used those roller skis this early of a year before! With my Garmin Forerunner 310XT (picture above) I measured 8 km at 36 minutes and 11 km at 50 minutes - a speed of 13,3 / 13,2 km/h. Best result last year was 14,1 km/h - but that was later in the year, so I think I'll do better this year. Because of more unstable weather during the Winter, I have not been able to use my skis very much, so I have gained several extra kilos; now the scale show 88,5 kilos - ten kilos overweight! 3 - 4 times of roller skiing every week from now on!

My Last Trip To Kikut This Season

Idyllic pond 1,5 km from Kikutstua that looked a bit more opened up today than usually in the crosscountry season. A snowfall in the morning gave me this rare upportunity that I wouldn't miss.

The popular Kikutstua today. The thermometer showed +4C when I arrived at 2 PM, so difficult to get there early, my skis went often backwards - adding kick wax under my skis stopped that, but then snow and ice built up under the middle of them skis. Several stops to brush'em skis. 2 hour 17 minutes on 16 - 16,5 km from Sognsvann (north of Oslo) to Kikutstua, and almost 2 hours back...!

The skis mounted up while I was at Kikutstua, so I guess the business went well there... nevertheless there are great expences to run such a place. Notice the barrel to the right (fer fermentation to keep the expences down?)

Mixing Seriousness And Fun...

Busy times this have been. But fun. And difficult, like mixing business with pleasure:

http://workawesome.com/office-life/successfully-mixing-business-with-pleasure/

So I probably got some errors along in my science work lately... To get to the last part about the first case of water with CO2 plus ice and some traces of lemon juice (lj), I think now that when there are stirred conditions the lj will be spread out too much to enhance segregation, and probably be an obsticle to the CO2 and let the ice melt a little faster than the second case of water + CO2 + ice. A bit like sulfer not to close to moisture+oxygen, I guess, so sulfer only connected with O2 will be an obsticle to CO2 etc in the atmosphere and the formation of smaller air pockets of heat (that may get together and cause an outburst of heat after a while). So the lemon drops will a time after the stirring in the experiment cause a more rapid melting of the ice chip because of sabotage of the build up of "heat cells" due to CO2. That is perhaps why the ice chip in the first case melted faster than the ice chip in the second case.

Phuuu! I think I got this correct, now.... (though my English could be better, naturally!)

I hope this "lab work" of mine (and giants at NRK and their associates) will regain interest in the science community, and not be shuffled aside from the debate about environment and climate this time. We are certaintly not able to terraform Earth in a short period, so our next best option is to stop the increase of aerosols and CO2 parts in the atmosphere. That alone will after several years be enough to stop global warming over our current level, I think. So the "meltdown" will be under our control if we act now... if so, there will be a stable, but lower level of ice etc much like today. It' s not too late today, but "tomorrow"...?!

CO2 and aerosols to blame for temperature differences? Part 3

Continued today 8.30 this morning with suction straws through lids and taped upper end of each straw.  The opening around each straw was sealed by tape. I did a smaller timing error in first trial, so I did a second trial at 9.00. The cup with yellow straw contained FARRIS+ (bottled water plus CO2 plus lemon drops), the cup with red straw contained FARRIS (bottled water plus CO2) and the cup with blue straw contained tap water - every liquid at room temperature at 15 degree Celsius at both the start and the end of the experiment. In each cup I placed an ice cube of similar size before closing the lids and at the same time started the timer at 12 minutes.

At 12, 10, 8, 6, 4 and 2 minutes left on timer, I did a stirring of each cup by using the straws while I counted fast to 12: I started with the yellow straw, then the red and then the blue in the first round; in the second round I started with the red, then the blue and then the yellow; and in the third and final round I started with the blue, then the yellow and then the red. No favorish straw and each round lasted about ten seconds of stirring, so a total of 30 seconds of stirring of each 2 minutes.

When I opened the lids after 12 minutes all ice chips left looked the same in shape and size - and they were all bigger than the ice chips from the first day of experiment (without stirring and at the same duration). The ice chips now were regular, oblong, rectangularish in shape with rounded corners.

Leaving the lids opened I observed that the ice chip in the cup with tap water melted faster and began to reach a more quadratic shape - much like yesterday, and similar the ice chip in the two other cups got a more pointed one end - also like yesterday. But to my surprise the ice chip in the cup marked FARRIS lasted about one minute more than the ice chip in the cup marked FARRIS+. The first trial today also showed that the ice chip in FARRIS cup lasted longer than the ice chip in FARRIS+ cup.

Not until 23 minutes the ice cube in the cup marked WATER was all gone, and 5 more minutes later the ice cube in FARRIS+ cup was all melted, while the ice cube in FARRIS cup lasted a total of 29 minutes!

What does this mean? I think, by stirring, we avoid there beeing segregated warm and cold parts of liquids, so the ice doesn't get so much effected by warm pulses that might suddenly burst out from the warm parts when the ice melt and bring colder currents toward the warm parts (that try to "get away"). The warm parts are of less density than the colder parts, so some warm bursts will reach the surface where the ice cube float (in the case of no stirring). No stirring means the colder currents seek down to the bottom of the cups and we are left with warmer upper parts distant from the floating ice cube, so when the ice still continue to melt and the denser cold currents reach the warmer upper parts, warm parts will be forced to reach the ice cube in an attempt to "get away" - then the melting of ice is faster and still faster.

It seems that the ice chip in FARRIS+ cup melted faster than the ice chip in FARRIS cup due to the probably enhanced force by traces of lemon to stop the currents beeing more evenly distributed a while after I ended stirring, while that was not the case with FARRIS cup where there probably was a slower segregation of colder and warmer parts.

By stirring a little we avoid the segregation and get more evenly distribution of heat (and some is of course lost out of the cup - but I think I minimized that in my experiment). So by transferring this result to "the real world" we see the importance of mixed variety of the environment if we want the world to be regular with stable climate and with little bursts of really bad weather (both cool or hot) and with the glaciers and polar ice cups in same condition. It's not so much about the content of CO2 and aerosols in air and seas if we terraform the Earth to get rid of excessive heat and distribute heat much more evenly than before. Otherwise, the increasing of CO2 and aerosols will be our doom... wake up!

CO2 and aerosols to blame for temperature differences? Part 2

A picture of the cups on a plate at the end of the experiment (do try this at home!), see Part 1.

So why did the ice cube in the cup labelled FARRIS+ melt slower? Well, CO2 dissolved in water and lemon drops both have acid characteristics that perhaps work together. Much like CO2 and sulfer plus moisture in the atmosphere, I guess. Streams of hotter fluids have a tendency to keep the heat they get from surroundings away from other streams that are cooler, if there is no forced convection at work.

The liquids in the cups was not stirred, so warm currents of almost same temperature would easily segregate the most heat effective collecting parts of liquids and follow each other around in the cups. The most effective streams to collect heat would contain both CO2 and lemon traces, and not only CO2. These more narrow streams would isolate the heat from the bigger colder streams of much less CO2 (and less lemon traces), so there would easily be colder streams to dominate the outside of the ice cube in both the cups labelled FARRIS and FARRIS+. That's why the ice cube in the cup containing only water melted faster and more even than the ice cube in the other cups: And the more ablong chip of ice in the other cups confirm a more differentiated environment with greater temperature differences between the currents.

So, yes, more CO2 and aerosols (especially containing acid parts) in the environment must be to blame for increased temperature differences (and more unstable weather) that we suffer under all over the world. The less mixture of  fluids (especially in more calm weather conditions) means that heat are trapped more easily in air and water, so energies are delayed from radiating to space and only leave Earth in bigger, later chunks of energy. That gives the impression that the world is heating up in some periods and some places, and cooling down in other periods and other places. But as long as the level of CO2 and acid forming aerosols are high and still higher, the global temperature will rise totally - though there will be more often snow in The Middle East (but more melting of ice in The Arctic area). IT'S REAL, FOLKS !!!!

I will tomorrow complete my experiment by having taped suction straws through the lids to find out if stirring the content of cups every two minutes cause a smaller difference to the melting of the ice cubes. Perhaps you will try that out for yourselves, too?

CO2 and aerosols to blame for temperature differences? Part 1

An experiment I did today at AM 8.40. I used 0.15 litre of liquid in each of three cups, put an ice cube of same size in each and closed all cups with a lid (taped them all). The liquid in the first cup was plain tap water (labelled WATER), the liquid in the second was bottled water with CO2 (labelled FARRIS), and the liquid in the third was bottled water with CO2 and  a small amount of lemon juice (labelled FARRIS+). All liquids had beeen for three days in the same room where this experiment took place. The temperature in the room at the start and end of experiment was 15 degrees Celsius.

After 12 minutes I opened the cups and saw there was just a small, but still a four squared ice chip left in the cup labelled WATER. In the cup labelled FARRIS there was a more ablong chip of ice left - probably more voluminous than the ice chip in the cup labelled WATER. In the cup labelled FARRIS+ there was also a more ablong chip of ice left, but difficult to see if this one was bigger than the ice chip in the cup labelled FARRIS.

After about 4 minutes later the ice chip in the cup labelled WATER was all melted, but there was clearly still an ice chip left in the two other cups. After about 5 minutes more the ice chip in the cup labelled FARRIS was melted, but the ice chip in the cup labelled FARRIS+ was still hanging on. After still more 3 minutes this last chip of ice was all gone.

This experiment confirm a similar experiment made by a TV crew at NRK a few years ago. The experts then thought the CO2 bubbles isolated against heat reaching the ice cubes, but with my cup filled with water and CO2 plus traces of lemon juice showing a still longer time for the ice cube to melt completely, I don't think that hypothesis is correct. In the next part I will present my own ideas about this.