JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Weekend Unthreaded – how can any post not be an anti-climax

I’ve been humbled by donations from Australia, USA, UK, Canada, NZ, Ireland, Germany,  France, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Holland, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Israel, Austria, and Cyprus. I hope I haven’t missed any? (For the record, Queensland has the most skeptics per capita. :- ) )

I thought I might have had writers block trying to live up to that.

Here’s the irony, can you believe? I’ve run out of chocolate. More than 600 people bought me a chocolate, yet I have none in the house.

Back soon…

Donors came from all over the West. This graphs the number of donors from each country.

 

(Thank you to everyone, I’m trying to send emails, but I may not manage…)

*Holland/Netherlands — yes I realize, but I’m acknowledging the names that donors used.

 

UPDATE: Oh! Norway added to the post and to the graph, as it should be! – Jo

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.9/10 (66 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded - how can any post not be an anti-climax, 9.9 out of 10 based on 66 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ozj9vg7

82 comments to Weekend Unthreaded – how can any post not be an anti-climax

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    E-mail? “We don’t need no stinking e-mail.” [Those not familiar with this phrase need only replace the last word with the word “badges” and search.]
    Seriously, take a break, but if someone gave you lots of money, okay then, maybe an e-mail.

    100

  • #
    Otter

    I could send you a box of chocolate dollars……..

    You are too kind! – Jo

    40

  • #
    Byron

    Votes so far in the Tasmanian state elections , results by electoral division

    Lyons counting has the Liberals out with 59.3% of the vote (3.7 quotas) ahead of ALP with 21.5% (1.3) and the Greens on 9.2% (0.5 quotas).

    Franklin with the Liberals leading with 48.1% of the vote, followed by Labor on 25.9% and the Greens on 19.5%.

    Denison The Liberals are leading with 33.2% of the vote, but the Greens are close with 30.9% followed by Labor on 26.8%

    Braddon the Liberals are polling almost 60 per cent of the vote
    The Labor vote is down to 17 per cent and the Greens 8 per cent.

    Bass with the Liberals polling around 52.8%, with Labor on 15.7%, the Greens on 14.8% and PUP on 9%.

    Map of Tasmanian electorates

    Now without looking at the map can You guess which electorate contains the capital city , Hobart along with the bulk of the public service bureacracy ?

    80

    • #
      the Griss

      “Now without looking at the map can You guess which electorate contains the capital city”

      Ahh the inner city green/ALP luvlies. !! :-)

      hint…… get out and get a life, luvlies !!

      61

  • #
    the Griss

    Did I go to hard? :-)

    Posts from March 15, 2014 at 1:51 am

    20

    • #
      Truthseeker

      I think you were remarkably restrained.

      20

    • #
      the Griss

      Looking at the Tassie elections results.. BLISS.

      Greens losing 7 to 11% .. Labor pummelled..

      So sweet..

      Tasmanians finally wake up to reality :-) :-)

      Unfortunately the South Australians are still wiping the sleep from their eyes.

      70

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        the Griss:

        the counting says that the Liberals at 52.5% lead Labor at 47.5% (as 2 party preferred basis).
        There are about 15% absentee and postal votes yet to be counted and these are expected to favour the Liberals, so their share of the vote won’t decrease. So they could end up with 44-48% of the seats.
        Last election they beat Labor yet wound up with 38% of the seats.

        I wonder who drew up the electoral system?

        20

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    The most fundamental mistake in the IPCC “explanation” of their greenhouse conjecture is the assumption of isothermal conditions in the absence of water vapour and radiating gases in the troposphere. Such a state is not the state of thermodynamic equilibrium with the maximum possible entropy. So the Second Law of Thermodynamics (which states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems always evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium— a state depending on the maximum entropy) is telling us that the isothermal state is not the norm.

    This abstract outlines my paper upon which my book “Why it’s not carbon dioxide after all” (April 2014) is based.

    20

  • #
    Bones

    Here’s the irony, can you believe? I’ve run out of chocolate. More than 600 people bought me a chocolate, yet I have none in the house.

    Jo,Why does this surprise or shock you,a house that has kids never has chocs in it for long,or lollies or drinks,the list goes on.

    10

  • #

    Our nation needs strong government and effective opposition.
    It really is a sad situation when the best of the last four federal labor leaders has been Mark Latham……………………….

    30

  • #
    Jaymez

    Glad to see someone in Cyprus can still access their money so they could buy you Chocolates Jo!

    40

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Email: not necessary. Keeping JoNova on the air: very necessary!

    End of story. :-)

    100

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      And Jo, if you find it among all the others, I really do mean what I said in PayPal’s instructions to seller.

      10

  • #
    ATheoK

    “…Queensland has the most skeptics per capita…”

    Not necessarily; Queensland has the most skeptics willing to put their money where their mouth is per capita…

    You can add me as another who doesn’t need an email of thanks. You still have my faith in you!

    40

    • #
      scaper...

      Qld has the highest percentage of members at the Institute of Public Affairs. IPA events in Brisbane are a whose who in the fight against the warmists and the useless tax.

      Qld is the home of the Carbon Sense Coalition, the Galileo Movement and was very well presented in the Convoy of No Confidence.

      Talk and walk comes to mind.

      50

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    For anyone interested in just how big a problem it has become to keep track of everything in the air these days, try this site.

    This view is centered on the U.S. but you can move the map and zoom to get anywhere you want. The data to the right of .com/ is position and zoom information so just go to your favorite place and bookmark the site with your browser (don’t save my URL which will still be centered on the U.S.).

    This thing will give you a lot of detail on anything in the sky. Just click on it.

    40

    • #
      Joe V.

      Nice one Roy. It’s better than the Flightaware app. I’d been using on the iPhone.
      It even tracks them on the ground . I’d been watching this one for a while , identified as LEADER4. When it finally took up position as if to embark and be the next one to rattle my tiles I called up its details to see. Fire Department. I wondered why it had been hanging around most of the day. It’s a bleedin’ Fire Engine I’ve been tracking.

      40

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Joe,

        I suspect that since anything very large on the ground will show up on airport surveillance radar they probably have a transponder on it so it’s easy to identify. Usually pilots only take the transponder off standby into mode C (altitude reporting) as they take the runway for takeoff and put it back on standby before touchdown, since the tower would have full view of everything on the ground. But procedures maybe are different where you are and can also vary with the airport.

        Glad you find this at least interesting and I hope it can help.

        40

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Joe,

        I just read your response back on the original thread where you complained about the noise. It looks like pilots are being careless with the departure procedure. If airport management can’t or won’t take action then you may have to try political action to get noise abatement procedures enacted into law with monitoring the noise level required. Having a bunch of your neighbors angry enough to back you up will be a lot of help.

        Pilots hate noise abatement for obvious reasons as well as some not so obvious. But it could end up reducing your noise problem or even stopping it altogether.

        I tried using flightradar24 to track some planes on takeoff and landing and it didn’t give me accurate enough data to be worth anything. One plane I followed on final to LAX was headed straight into a residential neighborhood south of the airport when the radar data ended just 50 – 100 feet above ground. I know there was no crash so Google wasn’t able to keep up with the plane’s ground track. I have a FIOS internet connection at 58 MBIT download speed so it should have been able to get data fast enough. This computer isn’t all that fast either which probably doesn’t help.

        I just discovered flightradar24 yesterday after going to one I had used several years ago and finding out it no longer exists. So I’m feeling my way around it gradually.

        20

        • #
          Joe V.

          Well as I’m just learning these RNAV1 routes can be 2 Nautical miles wide, the ’1′ standing for how much they can deviate on either side of these Random NAVigation routes.

          How the Airport can claim one whose centreline passes just 0.7 NM from the village then , doesn’t pass over it seems fanciful at best.

          10

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Fascinating site Roy.

      Looking at local aircraft movements near Newcastle.

      Amazing.

      KK

      10

    • #
      Ray Boorman

      Roy, thanks for the link to the air traffic site. It is interesting to watch what is going on up there.

      10

  • #
    Davet916

    Jo,

    This is what you get for doing the right thing.

    You have become one of the most admired, appreciated, respected and loved individuals in the climate blogosphere. I’m sure many men wish they had the stones you have. It’s one thing to have the truth, it’s another to stand with it against the opposition.

    Well done and keep up the good work

    Dave Trimble
    Sacramento, California

    50

  • #
    farmerbraun

    Oh come on now. How gullible do you think we are?
    It is abundantly clear to every conspiracy theorist that BIG OIL is now channelling its support for “deniers” through a web of private individuals. Totally devious!

    40

  • #
    Another Graeme

    Dear Jo, I’m sure I speak for everyone when I say how pleased we are that you’ve had such a good response to the chocolate drive. In future though, don’t wait for Jaymez to beat you with a stick for you to ask for help. While many of us may not be in a position to regularly contribute via the tip jar, we can usually spare some coin in times of need. What you provide is certainly worth it and good value for money.
    Best regards.

    130

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    For the Week End.
    A dedicated AWU union worker, let us call him Craig, was attending a convention in Sydney and decided to check out the local brothels.
    When he got to the first one, he asked the Madam, “Is this a union run house?”
    “No,” she replied, “I’m sorry it isn’t.”
    “Well, if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?”
    “The house gets $80 and the girls get $20,” she answered.

    Offended at such unfair dealings, Craig stomped off down the street in search of a more equitable, hopefully unionized shop. His search continued until finally he reached a brothel where the Madam responded, “Why yes sir, this is a union house. We observe all union rules.”
    [SNIP. Sorry to snip the joke, a bit too unthreaded. thanks - Jo]

    60

  • #
    Craig Landrith

    Jo I think your blog is a world treasure. Happy to help out. Craig from Folsom CA

    30

  • #
    Mark D.

    Looking at the pie graph, I see no obvious oil rich nations represented. I’m suspicious…….

    Que the warmists with conspiracy notions

    20

  • #
    farmerbraun

    oopsie!!
    Jo Nova is a propaganda site. Posters at Hot Topic will have any link to this site snipped.

    http://hot-topic.co.nz/is-misinformation-about-the-climate-criminally-negligent/#comment-41176

    30

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    Today’s comment in my debate with Neil J. King from the Skeptical Science team ….

    Neil, Lucia and others: This thread is rapidly becoming the most important one ever seen in any climate blog, because it is addressing the trillion dollar question, was Loschmidt right?

    Graeff admitted to having little formal education in physics. He made a huge mistake which I am surprised you did not pick up, Neil, in that he incorrectly multiplied the standard -g/Cp gradient by the degrees of freedom, and because of that thought he had found potential perpetual motion. However, you would have to admit that, since he did find a gradient in virtually all his 850 experiments, the probability of isothermal conditions is infinitesimal.

    Now, let’s please agree that the second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems always evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium — a state depending on the maximum entropy.

    Hence, an isothermal state is not what will evolve in a vertical plane in a gravitational field. I leave it to you to prove your case, because what you are claiming is that the isothermal state would have no unbalanced energy potentials (so that no further work could be done) and of course it does have unbalanced additional gravitational potential energy at the top, as I have proved with mathematical induction applied to the four molecule thought experiment. The assumptions of Kinetic Theory include gravity affecting the molecules.

    Furthermore, let’s consider Venus. Its surface only receives less than 20W/m*2 of direct solar radiation – about a tenth of what Earth’s surface receives. The “runaway greenhouse” explanation is complete and utter rubbish. Physicists know that the second law applies to a single independent process and that, during that process, entropy never decreases at any point. Hence, radiation from a cold atmosphere cannot raise the temperature of the hotter Venus surface. Physicists know that such radiation is “pseudo scattered” as I explained in my peer-reviewed paper “Radiated Energy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics” two years ago. Yet the Venus surface temperature does rise by about 5 degrees during its four-month-long day, namely from about 732K to about 737K.

    The rising Venus surface temperature simply cannot be explained by radiative forcing. Even the difference in the required radiative fluxes for 737K and 732K is about an extra 450W/m^2 and yet the only difference between day and night (when it cools by 5 degrees) is the extra 20W/m^2 of solar radiation reaching the surface after carbon dioxide has absorbed most of the insolation. During its daytime, the Venus surface must be receiving energy absorbed in the atmosphere from incident solar radiation and then transferred by downward “heat creep” which is non-radiative diffusion and advection (convection if you like) as is explained in the four molecule experiment above.

    Likewise, you cannot explain temperatures in the Uranus troposphere unless you understand that “heat creep” sends some (or most) of the energy downwards in the day, and radiation sends it back out of the troposphere at night on all planets.

    The “heat creep” process is restoring thermodynamic equilibrium in accord with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It does not violate the Second Law: rather it is a corollary of the Second Law. It must happen. You have no other plausible explanation.

    30

  • #
    scaper...

    Been reading the submissions to the Joint Select Committee on Northern Development. ANDEV’s submission is very extensive as it should be as we are the drivers behind the decision by the government to instigate such enquiry.

    Didn’t even bother reading the warmist submissions, the Wilderness Society and the like because their instincts are anti development which will be mostly ignored.

    It is my belief that this is a once only opportunity to grow the nation as the left are also anti development and nothing comes out of the enquiry, then the future generations will not look back kindly.

    Great Southern Cross put forward a submission and so did my colleagues. Will be appearing before the committee this year I expect, looking forward to the opportunity.

    Link to the submissions for those interested.

    10

  • #
    pat

    CAGW accounts for so much ABC air-time, one wonders how they’ll fill it when the scam is over:

    14 March: ABC Naked Scientists: Chris Smith: Water management
    With climate change expected to bring more bouts of extreme weather and longer periods of drought and floods, this week we take a look at the management strategies which could help us tackle this looming water crisis. Plus, in the news, the schoolboy who has become the youngest person ever to achieve nuclear fusion…
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/nakedscientists/water-management/5314656

    From transcript at UK site, different heading, same program:

    Turning the Tide on Flooding
    With climate change expected to bring more bouts of extreme weather and longer periods of drought and flooding, this week we take a look at ways to turn the tide on the looming water crisis…
    •20:26 – Is climate change altering weather?
    Is the extreme weather of recent years a consequence of climate change? Climate scientist, IPCC lead author and 2007 Nobel Peace Prize-winner Don Wuebbles explains to Chris Smith why he thinks this is a taste of what is to come…
    Don – The climate is changing worldwide, climate being the long term variations in weather of course, but it’s much more than that. The fact that that change’s occurring because of human activity’s becoming clearer and clearer over time. We now are beginning to even talk about that dangerous climate change isn’t just going to happen in the future. It’s happening now.
    Chris – Just summarise for us what the big changes are. What are we seeing and where?
    Don – So, we’re seeing overall long term changes in temperature. We’re seeing relatively small changes overall in precipitation. Some places getting dryer, some places getting wetter, but it’s much more than that. It’s this concern about severe weather. We’re seeing much more concern about heat waves, less cold waves overall. We’re also seeing more precipitation coming as much larger events than in the past.
    Chris – What do we think the drivers of this are?
    Don – The analysis are very clear, that you cannot explain these long term changes we’re seeing as being due to natural causes. The only thing that really is able to explain the observed changes is the fact that because of our burning of fossil fuels, other human induced changes in our planet that we’re increasing the amount of carbon dioxide, the amount of methane, the amount of some other key gases…ETC ETC ETC
    http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/podcasts/naked-scientists/show/20140311/nocache/1/?cHash=81517472805352b1ff769c2005295893&tx_nakscishow_pi1%5Btranscript%5D=1

    00

  • #
    pat

    on and on…

    16 March: ABC Sunday Extra: Jonathan Green: Multi-nationals rule the World?
    There are some big problems in the world. Poverty. Climate Change. War.
    Traditionally we turn to our governments to sort these things out on our behalf, but how can national governments work effectively on global issues?
    One possible and radical, even dangerous thought is that our best hope might lie in the problem solving capacity of multinational corporations rather than governments.
    That’s an argument put forward by a visiting US academic, William Starbuck…
    Guest: Professor William Starbuck
    Courtesy Professor-in-residence at the Lundquist College of Business of the University of Oregon and Professor Emeritus, New York University
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/sundayextra/multi-nationals-rule-the-world3f/5306154

    16 March: ABC Background Briefing: Jonathan Green: The trouble with offsets
    A Senate inquiry has just been launched into claims a key environmental policy, offsetting, is falling over.
    Under offsetting, developers have to compensate for what they’re bulldozing…
    However offsets have always been controversial and an increasing number of scientists, ecologists and conservationists say there are many loopholes and the policy is being manipulated by governments who won’t say no to developers.
    Federal Greens Senator Larissa Waters pushed for the Senate inquiry, listing five developments for investigation.
    They include the Abbot Point Coal Terminal and Waratah Coal’s Galilee Coal Project in Queensland, the Jandakot Airport in Perth, and the Maules Creek coal mine in northern NSW…
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-03-16/5320906

    00

  • #
    pat

    ABC is ground zero for the protests!! thousands? not really. ABC is carrying every pic & placard possible…u need to scroll down to see them all:

    16 March: ABC: Thousands drawn to Australia-wide protests against government policies
    Protesters waving placards are voicing their anger to the Government’s policies on topics such as climate change, the treatment of asylum seekers, the tax system and media ownership.
    The March in March event started on Saturday and will continue until Monday…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-16/protesters-march-in-march-across-australia-against-govt-policies/5324048

    20

  • #
    pat

    found what turned out to be a much-abbreviated AP piece in a regional paper:

    15 March: NWIndianaTimes: AP: Mary Esch: Fish-eating ducks hard hit by severe winter, ice
    DELMAR, N.Y. (AP) — The Niagara River corridor from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario is renowned as a winter haven for water birds. But this year’s bitterly cold season has made it notable for something else: dead ducks.
    Biologists say carcasses began piling up by the hundreds in early January after consistently low temperatures started icing over nearly the entire Great Lakes, preventing the ducks from getting to the minnows that are their main source of food. Necropsies have confirmed the cause: starvation.
    It’s a phenomenon that has been seen elsewhere along the Great Lakes, with news reports of diving ducks and other waterfowl turning up dead by the hundreds along the southern part of Lake Michigan. They’ve also been found in Lake St. Clair between Lakes Erie and Huron
    http://www.nwitimes.com/news/national/fish-eating-ducks-hard-hit-by-severe-winter-ice/article_5f4d67be-8027-5787-a58e-7e930c12b708.html

    looked for other MSM coverage. found a little abc america regional coverage, plus Fox News, with what would appear to be the full AP article. MSM doesn’t like to report such things:

    15 March: Fox News: Fish-eating ducks hard hit by severe winter, ice
    “All have empty stomachs. They’re half the weight they should be,” said Connie Adams, a biologist in the state Department of Environmental Conservation’s Buffalo office who has personally seen 950 dead birds.
    “This is unprecedented. Biologists who’ve worked here for 35 years have never seen anything like this,” she said. “We’ve seen a decline in tens of thousands in our weekly waterfowl counts.”…
    “It’s a hard winter for ducks, like everything else,” said Russ Mason, wildlife director with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
    Necropsies and toxicity analyses showed many of the Michigan ducks were subsisting on invasive zebra mussels, which caused the birds to have potentially toxic levels of selenium in their bodies, Mason said…
    Dead birds have been seen along shorelines, on docks and on the ice, their carcasses feasted upon by gulls and bald eagles.
    Two weeks ago, Adams said, there were 240,000 water birds in her area’s weekly count. Last week, there were 43,000. It’s unknown how many birds — which also included such species as scaup, canvasbacks and grebes — migrated elsewhere and how many died…
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/03/15/fish-eating-ducks-hard-hit-by-severe-winter-ice/

    10

  • #
    BilB

    It is way beyond the time when Novarians should stop looking at the past and take notice of what is happening in the present. And this is what you should be paying attention to in the Arctic.

    http://arctic-news.blogspot.com.au/search?q=high+methane+levels+over

    It seems that nature has found a way to reach down to the depths and begin to release those billions of tons of methyl hydrates in the Arctic depths. How did this happen? The likely mechanism is that huge amounts of Russian polar region warm fresh water run off may be forcing the Atlantic conveyor’s more saline but warmer water to flow under the lighter fresh water forcing it to sufficient depth to begin the unlocking of the clathrates. The released methane gas rising to the surface is transporting the heat from the conveyor water to the surface further heating the surface fresh water.

    This is not part of any natural climate cycle.

    As for some arguable immediate and direct link between solar variance and the polar jet stream I think is far fetched. It takes some years for warm water from the mid Indian Ocean
    to travel the distance to the North Atlantic to deliver energy surges to northern Europe and the Arctic. This delay is one of the influences that creates a seemingly cyclic climate. The jet stream is a consequence of overturning atmosphere at the boundary of the Mid Latitude Cell and the Polar Cell, and the boundary between the two systems is very definitely a product of the amount of energy in the Global atmosphere. However, the North Atlantic climate is very much driven by the delayed energy delivered from the Indian Ocean. It is this delay that makes the conclusions drawn in this “study” highly speculative.

    [Bill, this is meant for the marine sediments post? And the idea that paleoclimate is pointless is inane. Were looking for cause and effect. We need to understand the last millennia. - Jo]

    01

    • #
      BilB

      Yes, this was neant for the sediments thread, oops.

      I’m not saying that the paleoclimate is unimportant, I’m saying that the type of conclusions being drawn by some from this artificial climate zone are missleading.

      What the ice core and mud studies did identify early on is that the Arctic Clathrates have been disturbed to release huge amounts of methane in the atmosphere occasionally in the past with disasterous consequences. This time it is human activity that will be the triggering cause, and that is a cause for which you really should be studying the consequential effects. BilB

      [I hoped you might move it to the appropriate thread, is relevance not the aim here? Since you already "know" the cause, why do we bother paying for more research? - Jo]

      01

      • #
        BilB

        I think,Jo,that non of yours or my money goes to paying for Arctic research (perhaps a little at the educational level). In fact Australians get pretty much a free ride for access to the bulk of the world’s knowledge. Of course we contribute something, but that would be a pittance against the benefits we gain for access to the body of global research knowledge.

        If you are so cost conscious, I have to wonder why you argue against sustainability so energetically? I’ve just watched a group of sustainability centric entrepreneurs explain how their enterprises improve the lives of millions at no cost to government or the public at large. In fact the public get a substantial windfall from the external benefits of their enterprises.

        [Bilb, a transparent diversion to pretend you haven't flashed your Unscientists Membership Card. You "know" the cause. Congrats. Who needs science when you are a God? - Jo]

        02

  • #
    the Griss

    And at the far-left union web site of Newcastle trades Hall run by Gary Kennedy , who btw has some suggestions about Alan Joyce

    quote from Bolt http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/barbarians_march_in_march/ update at bottom..
    “UPDATE
    Perhaps worst of all, Newcastle Trades Hall Council secretary Gary Kennedy tells a March in March rally that Qantas chief Alan Joyce “should be shot somewhere in the back of the head” (from 2 mins.). Note the scary applause:

    http://www.newtradeshall.com/Default.aspx

    These guys really have reached the ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING phase !!!!

    YOU can vote on “Do you support introducing a tax on carbon pollution? ” Currently running “No 64%” but I’m sure we can push that up :-)

    20

    • #
      Doug.  Cotton 

      The Griss: May I ask you to consider joining the important discussion here between Neal J. King M.A.(Physics) from the SkS team and myself. While my latest comments are still awaiting moderation, you can read copies of them here and following.

      21

      • #
        the Griss

        Sorry Doug, I start a new job this week, only be here for a short time at breakfast.

        00

        • #
          Doug.  Cotton 

          Roy Spencer is of course just as wrong.

          Roy has not even aver attempted to justify his assertive statement that there would be isothermal conditions in an atmosphere without GH gases. Roy could not come any closer to explaining it than did Neil J. King from the Skeptical Science team. Here’s what I replied in a new attempt to get Lucia to accept her error and Neil King’s.

          No Neal J. King You have made a serious (and obvious) mistake. You wrote …

          “However, my view on that is that, if there are an equal number of visitors from level 0 to level z as there are from level z to level 0, for each “cooling” visitor from 0 to z, there is an equally “cool” native (or visitor) at z, that goes down to level 0.”

          If you have a ball bouncing (under the influence of gravity) it always accelerates towards the ground when it is going downwards. Likewise all (not half) of the molecules going from the higher level “z” to the lower level “0″ also accelerate so that all of them are warming molecules, arriving at “0″ with more kinetic energy than what they had when the left “z.” So there is no “equally ‘cool’ native (or visitor) at z, that goes down to level 0.”

          11

  • #
    pat

    16 March: UK Daily Mail: The bonfire of insanity: Woodland is shipped 3,800 miles and burned in Drax power station. It belches out more CO2 than coal at a huge cost YOU pay for… and all for a cleaner, greener Britain!
    The UK is committed by law to a radical shift to renewable energy. By 2020, the proportion of Britain’s electricity generated from ‘renewable’ sources is supposed to almost triple to 30 per cent, with more than a third of that from what is called ‘biomass’.
    The only large-scale way to do this is by burning wood, man’s oldest fuel – because EU rules have determined it is ‘carbon-neutral’…
    Only a few years ago, as a coal-only plant, Drax was Europe’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, and was often targeted by green activists. Now it boasts of its ‘environmental leadership position’, saying it is the biggest renewable energy plant in the world.
    It also gets guaranteed profits from the Government’s green energy subsidies. Last year, these amounted to £62.5 million, paid by levies on consumers’ bills. This is set to triple by 2016 as Drax increases its biomass capacity…
    Meanwhile, in North Yorkshire, the sheer scale of Drax’s biomass operation is hard to take in at first sight. Wood pellets are so much less dense than coal, so Drax has had to commission the world’s biggest freight wagons to move them by rail from the docks at Hull, Immingham and Port of Tyne. Each car is more than 60ft high, and the 25-car trains are half a mile long. On arrival, the pellets are stored in three of the world’s largest domes, each 300ft high – built by lining colossal inflated polyurethane balloons with concrete. Inside one of them, not yet in use, the echo is impressive. Light filters in through slits in the roof, like a giant version of the Pantheon church in Rome…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581887/The-bonfire-insanity-Woodland-shipped-3-800-miles-burned-Drax-power-station-It-belches-CO2-coal-huge-cost-YOU-pay-cleaner-greener-Britain.html

    00

    • #

      For the life of me, I cannot understand how people can be so gullible to actually believe this Drax Plant can be classed as ….. Renewable.

      The fuel (whatever it is) has to be burned to boil water to steam, which is then pressurised enough to actually be able to drive the turbine to drive the generator.

      To make the heat which makes the steam, more CO2 is emitted from burning the wood pellets than from burning coal in the first place.

      Then, added to that there’s the immense CO2 emissions from turning the trees to wood pellets, transporting the wood pellets to the port, loading them on the ship, then moving that ship across the ocean, unloading the ship, loading the rail cars, transporting it via rail to Drax, to then burn it in the furnace.

      I don’t care if the wood is classed as Biomass, hence renewable. If the wood pellets remained as trees at their origin, then the CO2 stays locked in the trees and not emitted to the Atmosphere to add considerably to overall CO2 emissions.

      Is it that somehow CO2 derived from wood is different from the CO2 emitted by burning coal, you know, cleaner, greener CO2, you know, plant more trees to soak up the CO2 and then chop them down and burn them to release the CO2.

      Green lunacy!

      Tony.

      40

      • #
        BilB

        It is entirely possible, Tony, that the wood chips are coming from Canada’s vast dead forests killed by mountain pine beetles (Global Warming consequence).

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_pine_beetle#Biofuel.2Falternative_energy_production_from_beetle-killed_trees

        00

        • #
          BilB

          Not going to post this, Jo?

          “That volume of unexploited US wood waste dwarfs Drax’s predicted requirement of 7m tonnes a year. Though much of Drax’s supply is expected to come from outside North America, the company is investing in two pellet production plants in Mississippi and Louisiana and has also struck a long-term contract for the supply of pellets from pine wood killed by beetle attacks in western Canada.”

          From the Financial Times. Lets not let the facts get in the way of a tasty renewable energy put down.

          01

    • #
  • #
    pat

    17 March: AFR: Carbon buyback strikes at root of problem
    …Two major approaches to emissions reductions are used by various countries. The carbon tax approach, used in Australia by the former government, imposes costs on the entire economy as it is in effect an electricity and fuel tax.
    The other approach is to directly purchase emissions reductions. This is the basis of the largest abatement system in the world – the United Nations Clean Development Mechanism, which has generated approximately 1.4 billion tonnes of emissions reductions. The advantage of the carbon buyback approach is that it directly targets the problem. If you wanted to reduce emissions from 100 to 95, why would you tax the entire 100 into submission when you can just buy back the five ?
    The Emissions Reduction Fund will achieve the carbon buyback with the classic market mechanism of a reverse auction to obtain the lowest-cost abatement.
    The Emissions Reduction Fund approach is remarkably similar to the former government’s Non-Kyoto Carbon Farming Fund, which Professor Garnaut supported…
    http://www.afr.com/p/opinion/carbon_buyback_strikes_at_root_of_1A1XT2AcxW1KUdveIA2AUO

    17 March: BusinessSpectator: Reuters: 17 nations authorised to swap UN offsets for EU carbon
    The European Commission on Friday gave approval for companies in 17 EU member states to exchange United Nations-backed offsets for EU Allowances under the bloc’s carbon market…
    The Commission said it approved so-called International Credit Entitlement (ICE) tables for Austria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and Britain.
    “The outstanding tables are expected to be approved in two or three more batches. By early April all tables should be approved and uploaded,” it added in a note on its website.
    The approved tables will now be uploaded to the bloc’s emissions trading registry, after which account holders will be able to swap eligible CERs or ERUs for EUAs – the staple currency of the EU’s ETS…
    In an effort to limit costs for participants in the ETS, companies can use a limited number of offsets to cover their emissions between 2008 and 2020.
    While they were able to surrender offsets outright during the second phase of the ETS (2008-2012), companies must from 2013 exchange any eligible credits for EUAs.
    However, the swapping process, expected to be launched last year, was delayed.
    This was because of a complications stemming from a change to rules governing how many mainly Russian and Ukrainian ERUs remain eligible in the EU ETS.
    In an effort to encourage countries to do more to tackle climate change, the EU last year banned ERUs issued after 2012 by countries without legally binding targets to cut emissions.
    But doubts lingered over exactly which of the roughly 700 million ERUs were still eligible in the EU ETS.
    http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2014/3/17/carbon-markets/17-nations-authorised-swap-un-offsets-eu-carbon

    00

  • #
    pat

    talks fail, more talks planned, Figueres says a new “phase” has begun:

    14 March: Reuters: Ben Garside: U.N. climate talks launch formal process to 2015 deal
    U.N. climate talks wound down on Friday with parties agreeing to launch a formal process to draw up text for a 2015 global deal binding all nations to curb emissions, inching ahead after two years of wrangling between rich and poor nations…
    The formal process will start at the next round of Bonn talks in June with the aim of agreeing on the main elements of a deal at a high-level session in Lima, Peru at the end of the year.
    ***“We are now entering a serious and significant phase in the evolution of international, cooperative climate policy as we look towards both Lima and Paris,” said Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in a statement…
    This week’s meeting also launched a year-long process of technical meetings showcasing existing technologies that could scale up reductions of greenhouse gases before 2020.
    The U.N. said this week that emissions before 2020 are on track to amount to at least 20 billion tonnes above the level scientists say is needed to avert runaway climate change…
    http://www.trust.org/item/20140316205344-ub685/?source=hptop

    single out China in the headline, include India in opening line, add 24 nations in the second line, then claim developing countries are demanding what developed countries themselves promised (however fake that promise was):

    15 March: Bloomberg: Alex Morales/Matthew Carr: China-U.S. Fault Lines Open Up at UN Climate Treaty Talks
    Fault lines are opening up between developing countries led by China and India and richer nations including the U.S. in talks in Bonn over a new climate treaty.
    China and India are in the 26-nation Like-Minded Developing Countries bloc that argues they shouldn’t have to bear the same legal responsibility for tackling climate change as developed economies…
    Wrangling in discussions ending today in Germany suggests the controversy will be dragged out until a Paris conference at the end of next year, potentially undermining a final deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol on curbing greenhouse-gas emissions. Developing countries argue rich nations are responsible for the bulk of historical greenhouse gases and must lead the way…
    “The concern is the firewall never really left us,” Jacob Werksman, an envoy from the European Commission representing the 28-nation EU, said in an interview. “We still have the Chinese and others insisting that there are two sets of countries and expectations for their commitments are determined by that.”…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-14/china-u-s-fault-lines-open-up-at-un-climate-treaty-talks.html

    00

  • #
    pat

    as a former Greens voter, i must ask: when will the Greens decouple themselves from this alliance with nuclear, realise they were duped, & stop supporting a scam that was designed to kill the coal industry & create the right atmosphere for a heavily-subsidised nuclear “renaissance”?

    16 March: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: Keep carbon tax, say green and nuclear energy chiefs
    The Chancellor is widely expected to take action to curb future rises in the carbon tax, to ease costs for households and manufacturers alike
    Vincent de Rivaz, EDF Energy chief executive, insists that Britain “has right policies on climate change and energy” and warns of the dangers of abandoning long-term policies, such as the carbon price floor.
    “Crucially, the political consensus and stability of these policies have given investors the confidence to put their money into Britain,” he says.
    The Chancellor is widely expected to take action to curb future rises in the carbon tax, to ease costs for households and manufacturers alike, and to prolong the life of coal plants as a capacity crunch looms.
    But while consumer and industry groups and some suppliers have urged the Chancellor to scrap the tax altogether, Mr de Rivaz urges the Government to “send a strong signal that it remains committed to its long term energy polices even if it makes short term and temporary adjustments to them”…
    EDF owns 80pc of Britain’s existing nuclear fleet and stands to profit from a rising carbon price because it will push up the market price for power.
    But Mr de Rivaz insists the policy is working because it is “tipping the balance away from coal to lower carbon gas” and it is “encouraging spending on new low carbon power generation like wind, biomass and nuclear”…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10701635/Keep-carbon-tax-say-green-and-nuclear-energy-chiefs.html

    i know some of you are pro-nuclear, but i have many reasons why i, personally, am not.

    10

    • #
      scaper...

      You are not alone here, Pat. My understanding is nuclear is more expensive and until the waste can be effectively dealt with, I remain against it. There won’t be nuclear generation in Australia in our children’s lifetimes.

      Coal will be king for centuries to come.

      20

      • #
        the Griss

        “Coal will be king for centuries to come.”

        And why not, I say. :-)

        We have plentiful high quality coal.

        Technology is such that very little pollution is created.

        And with the added bonus of releasing plant food from its sequestered burial, so the plant can thrive. :-)

        Australia should have one of the cheapest , most reliable supplies of electricity,

        and if coal to liquid fuel technology continues to progress, we should be able to become self-sufficient.

        20

      • #
        the Griss

        ps.. If someone sort it out efficiently, Thorium nuclear may take off reasonably quickly, will have to be cost efficient though.

        But coal will definitely be the main stay for most countries.

        Only other places will be where hydro actually has the rainfall and terrain to do the job, or have natural thermals that can be used.

        20

      • #
        wayne, s. Job

        New modern reactors make waste a thing of the past. The stock piles of waste from old reactors are about 100 years of fuel supply for new reactors. The french are laughing.

        10

  • #
    pat

    why does Foxtel fund A-PAC Channel, which runs every speech by Milne & other Greens, and has CAGW hours on repeat regularly. sky news is no different to abc & fairfax. their menu after the tassie election had entries – almost as long as the speeches they gave – for giddings & the Greens, but no entry at all for the winning party. AAP is another CAGW hotbed – this could be written by Milne.

    17 March: Australian: AAP: WA Senate draw good for Greens
    The ballot draw for the re-run West Australian Senate election has delivered an immediate boost to Greens candidate Scott Ludlam, with a fewer-than-expected 77 nominees for the historic ballot…
    And the random selection of the Wikileaks party in the ballot’s first column could prove a big advantage for the Greens, with the movement founded by Julian Assange immediately indicating their preference support would flow to Senator Ludlam…
    “They will need the eyesight of a hawk, the dexterity of a limbo artist, and the skill of an origami expert to fill in and fold this ballot paper,” Mr Green said.
    “And this will have to be the last time this election system is used, because it has become an international joke.”…
    Euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke is also standing, as are former ABC Perth personalities Russell Woolf and Verity James, who intend to run on a Save Our ABC ticket and scored a top three position on the ballot…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/wa-senate-draw-good-for-greens/story-e6frg90f-1226856866981

    00

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    The big debate continues and SkS physicist Neil J. King is tied in knots, making a very obvious mistake today.

    Here’s my reply awaiting moderation on Lucia’s Blackboard – you see it first here ….

    Neil: I don’t buy your “that a single molecule interacting elastically with a gas of like molecules will not, on the average, gain or lose momentum or kinetic energy.”

    Perhaps on average it won’t gain or lose KE if it happens to come back to the initial height, but while ever it is at higher altitudes it will have less KE (and more PE) and at lower altitudes it will have more KE and less PE.

    The assumptions of Kinetic Theory (which I encourage you to study more closely) include these two …

    “Except during collisions, the interactions among molecules are negligible … their dynamics can be treated classically.

    “Because they have mass, the gas molecules will be affected by gravity.”

    It seems you are just leaving out any effect of gravity acting on the molecules during free path motion between collisions. The effect of gravity is the very thing we are investigating, and that is the very reason why the mean kinetic energy at lower levels is greater than the mean kinetic energy at higher levels.

    Don’t forget, we see the -g/Cp gravito-thermal gradient very clearly in the Uranus troposphere. Furthermore, you cannot explain how the Venus surface warms from 732K to 737K without the “heat creep” process of downward diffusion and advection towards warmer regions.

    You misunderstand that the two levels in the four molecule experiment are such that there are no intermediate collisions. If there had been I would have said so. The spacing could be about the mean free path of air molecules, which I’ve mentioned elsewhere.

    In #126854 your (a) is countered by the induction process (extending it to the whole troposphere) and also by the fact that, just about whatever trajectory the molecule has between collisions, there will be a vertical component in the vector (plus or minus) and the corresponding interchange of KE and PE will of course be based on the difference in height between the two collisions which marked the beginning and end of the free path motion. Surely you can understand how this leads to different mean KE at different heights. Clearly KE tends to homogeneity only in horizontal planes, so the old (replaced) Clausius (hot to cold) statement only applies in such horizontal planes. In a vertical plane we must have homogenous (PE+KE) or otherwise there are unbalanced energy potentials, and so we would not have thermodynamic equilibrium if there were such unbalanced potentials. It’s not hard to understand.

    In your (b) there are no such things as molecules native to that altitude. They all move randomly all over the place. The “altitudes” are only about 68 nanometres apart. Kinetic Theory assumes elastic collisions. Maybe the averaging of KE is not precise, but the one with more KE ends up with less than it had, and the one that had less ends up with more than it had. Diffusion in a horizontal plane ends up with homogeneous KE after multiple collisions. So, in the long run (at thermodynamic equilibrium) the thin horizontal regions have homogeneous KE, but KE varies between these horizontal regions such that mean (PE+KE) per molecule is constant.

    In your (c) your concept of “visitor” is missing the mark. There is no distinction between molecules other than the fact that, on average, they end up with less KE at higher altitudes than lower altitudes. As you can see in the 4 molecule experiment, thermodynamic equilibrium is only established when there is no further possible net transfer of KE up or down. That can only happen when the thermal gradient is established. When it is, then you can select any two molecules and you will find that the difference in their PE equals the difference in their KE such that (PE+KE)=constant for all molecules. So if one then moves towards the other, when it collides its KE equals that of the molecule which it struck.

    The molecules that have any downward component in their velocity vector always lose PE and gain KE so they are always warming molecules. The ones that have any upward component are always cooling molecules. You seem to have missed this point. Once you accept this point you should easily understand how and why the thermal gradient evolves spontaneously, because the Second Law tells us the system will evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium with maximum entropy, and thus no unbalanced energy potentials.

    If there is still the possibility of any net KE transfer across any internal boundary, then we don’t have thermal equilibrium, let alone thermodynamic equilibrium.

    Remember, you can’t do without the gravito-thermal effect if you are trying to explain why the thermal gradient in the outer 9Km of Earth’s crust is so unexpectedly steep that it is about 270C at 9Km in the German KTB borehole. Try extrapolating that to the core of the Earth if you don’t realise that the specific heat is far larger in the hot mantle. Nor can you explain temperatures in the Uranus troposphere, or why the Venus surface warms by 5 degrees. Just try!

    However you look at it, a temperature gradient starts to form, and the system has no propensity to revert to isothermal conditions. To do so would be reducing entropy.

    So, Neil, to pinpoint your misunderstanding, you say ” for every event that would bring about cooling at level z or heating at level 0, there is an exact inverse visit that cancels the effect.”

    No there is no “exact inverse effect.” An inverse effect would be a molecule from 0 to z supposedly bringing about warming at level z, and one from z to 0 bringing about cooling. How would that happen, Neil?

    You seem to be just making the point that the first two effects neither create or destroy energy, or vary the total KE. Of course they don’t, but KE is redistributed, and the top row loses some while the bottom row gains the same amount of KE until thermodynamic equilibrium is achieved. Only then is there no further net change in KE at each level, and so only then is there thermal equilibrium with no net KE across the boundary, meaning no heat transfer at the macro level between the two thin horizontal regions represented by the rows of molecules.

    11

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Doug,

      My understanding of temperature changes in the atmosphere due to altitude must be due to two factors. Just to be clear, I am referring to thermometer readings taken at increasing altitudes by weather balloons or similar measuring mechanism. I am referring to ambient temperatures on a macro scale and so I am not concerned with molecular collisions or movement.

      Factor 1 would be the reduction in air pressure. The mechanism would be the lower number of molecules in a given volume so that less heat is detected by the thermometer.

      Factor 2, as you are suggesting here, is energy conversion. The mechanism would be the conversion from KE to PE as you go up in altitude (KE + PE cannot increase without additional energy being added). Temperature is a measure of mean KE.

      Given that PV=nRT and P is reducing as you go higher in altitude and V, n and R are constant then T must reduce. How does your KE/PE ratio change fit into this ideal gas equation?

      00

      • #
        Doug.  Cotton 

        Reducing the density does not alter the temperature reading on a thermometer. The temperature is based on the mean kinetic energy of the molecules – nothing else. See this

        “The average kinetic energy of the gas particles depends only on the absolute temperature of the system.”

        You don’t need to use the Ideal Gas Law at all. Just equate PE loss with KE gain to get (PE+KE) = constant …

        M.g.dH = – M.Cp.dT

        dT/dH = -g/Cp

        00

        • #
          BilB

          I haven’t been following your argument, Doug, but in simple terms if you put a thermometer in a bavuum chamber at ground level the only reason why its temperature will not slowly fall to zero degrees is due to the radiant energy that it receives from the walls of the vacuum chamber. If you slowly increase the air pressure the thermometer will slowly rise towards the temperature of the chamber as it recives more convectively transfered energy from the walls of the chamber.

          In free air a gas molecule travellin away from there earth’s mass will indeed be slowing down. But it will also have fewer opportunities to interact with other molecules as the relative density decreases. The energy in the atmosphere, however, is entirely supplied from the sun and the residual heat from the Earth’s core. Without those external energy sources the atmospheric temperature would plummet towards zero degrees, gravity or no gravity.

          So rising air cools because it becomes less dense through expansion. Falling air heats because it compresses. A parcel of hot air in a body of cold air will rise because it is less dense and denser air (due to gravity) moves in to take its place.

          If you reduce the air density enough the temperature
          of a thermometer will fall when the energy it is radiating is no longer being balanced by energy it is receiving through conduction and convection from its environment.

          I don’t see how you are claiming some victory over a “greenhouse” effect.

          00

          • #

            Please read this from Victor a few days ago.

            Do you understand what you are arguing for?

            00

          • #
            Mark D.

            If you slowly increase the air pressure the thermometer will slowly rise towards the temperature of the chamber as it recives more convectively transfered energy from the walls of the chamber.

            Whaaat???

            You don’t know what you are talking about

            Let’s just summarize by saying: WRONG

            00

        • #

          If you calculate the the work done in expanding a gas to a lower pressure, its the same as if you calculated the extra gravitational potential energy. Six of one half a dozen of the other because the pressure difference with altitude is set by gravity and molar masses of the gasses.

          00

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    Neil King from the Skeptical Science team has been unable to fault the physics in my derivation and proof of the existence of the gravito-thermal effect. I presume no one else from the SkS team can do so, even though about 1 in 6 of them have qualifications in physics, including John Cook.

    So I think that just about wraps it up as cogent proof, because no one from Judith Curry, Jo Nova, The Air Vent, WUWT, DrRoySpencer, Australian Climate Madness, Clive Best or any other climate blog has been able to prove wrong the answer to the trillion dollar question, namely that the Loschmidt gravito-thermal effect is a reality..

    Hence the greenhouse conjecture is debunked once and for all.

    Are there any last minute challenges?

    10

    • #
      the Griss

      As I have said.. I think you are probably on the right track…

      Just one thing Doug..

      Certainty is never a part of real science.

      Be circumspect.. always.

      Always feel just a bit unsure of yourself.

      DO NOT adopt the arrogant “settled” certainty of the ordinary average climate scientist.

      Always think.. “Am I really correct?”.

      10

      • #
        Doug.  Cotton 

        That’s good advice for the likes of Roy Spencer who referred to me as a “dude” in a private email today. Very professional indeed!

        00

    • #
      Doug.  Cotton 

      Lucia showed her true colours by deleting all my comments today and leaving Neal King with the last, but obviously wrong, word. Need I say more about the bias in her blog?

      00

  • #
    RW

    Doug,

    You need to chill out man.

    00

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    Wikipedia as it should read at last …

    The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases in the course of every spontaneous (natural) change.

    In other words: over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and density tend to even out in a horizontal plane, but not in a vertical plane due to the force of gravity. For example, density and pressure do not even out in a vertical plane, and nor does temperature because gravity acts on individual molecules, and this means molecular kinetic energy interchanges with gravitational potential energy in free path motion between collisions.

    Entropy is a measure of progression towards the state of thermodynamic equilibrium which has the greatest entropy among the states accessible by the system. In a vertical plane in a gravitational field, thermodynamic equilibrium exhibits a non-zero gradient in pressure, density and temperature, each being less at the top of a planet’s troposphere.

    The most common wording for the second law of thermodynamics is essentially due to Rudolf Clausius:

    “The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.”

    There are many statements of the second law which use different terms, but are all equal. Another statement by Clausius is:

    Heat cannot of itself pass from a colder to a hotter body.

    This, however, is strictly only correct in a horizontal plane where the state of thermodynamic equilibrium has uniform temperature. When that state exhibits a thermal gradient in a vertical plane, then temperature inversions can occur in which the upper, cooler region is warmer than normal, even though cooler than lower regions. In such instances there can be heat transfers from cooler to warmer regions because such transfers are increasing entropy and restoring thermodynamic equilibrium. This is how energy absorbed in the cooler Venus troposphere is transferred into (and warms) the surface.

    An equivalent statement by Lord Kelvin is:

    A transformation whose only final result is to convert heat, extracted from a source at constant temperature, into work, is impossible.

    The second law is only applicable to macroscopic systems. The second law is actually a statement about the probable behavior of an isolated system. As larger and larger systems are considered, the probability of the second law being practically true becomes more and more certain. For any isolated system with a mass of more than a few picograms, the second law is true to within a few parts in a million.[1]

    A simple stylized diagram of a heat pump’s vapor-compression refrigeration cycle: 1) condenser, 2) expansion valve, 3) evaporator, 4) compressor.

    Overview

    In a general sense, the second law says that temperature differences between systems in contact with each other tend to even out and that work can be obtained from these non-equilibrium differences, but that loss of thermal energy occurs, when work is done and entropy increases.[2] Pressure, density and temperature differences in an isolated system, all tend to equalize (in a horizontal plane) if given the opportunity. A heat engine is a mechanical device that provides useful work from the difference in temperature of two bodies.

    00

    • #

      I’m not sure that you like me dumbing things down but …

      A molecule of a gas doesn’t hover. It floats because of collisions with other molecules beneath it. Each molecule accelerates towards the Earth like a feather or a hammer on the moon. Each movement upwards leads to slight decrease in kinetic energy and each movement downwards has slight gain of kinetic energy before a collision with another molecule.

      You expect a gas to be isothermal because transfer of energy between molecules should average out that more energy is transferred from the more energetic to the less energetic. In a vertical plane, the upward movement of energy should be less than the downward. Only very slightly but it all adds up over kilometers.

      Question. When does the air get thin enough that a molecule travels a relatively large distance before collision? Does the upward velocity of individual molecules diminish significantly before a collision in the mesosphere, so that those with higher initial kinetic energy travel higher leading to lesser gradient of temperatures?

      00

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    Climate models can’t tell us anything at all, because they are based on false assumptions, namely ..

    (I) That the troposphere would be isothermal in the absence of radiating gases.

    (2) That radiating gases from a colder atmosphere can boost the incident Solar radiative flux to a combined sum which then supposedly can be used in S-B calculations to determine the temperature of the thin transparent surface layer of the ocean through which the UV, visible and IR Solar radiation all passes, but the low energy IR from the troposphere does not.

    00

  • #
    KW

    Forgot Norway !!??
    :-)

    OH No! I did, so I’ve fixed that graph and the post. More donors from Norway than from Switzerland, or Israel, Austria or Cyprus! My apologies! Jo

    00

  • #
    Doug.  Cotton 

    Further experimental proof of the Loschmidt gravito-thermal effect can be easily seen in a Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube wherein a force far greater than gravity separates a gas into measurably hotter and colder streams as it redistributes kinetic energy, just as happens in a planet’s troposphere due to the force of gravity.

    10

  • #
     Doug Cotton 

    Neal J. King, a Skeptical Science team member, is still tied in knots with his fictitious fissics fantasy …

    I wrote to him on Lucia’s blog …

    Don’t forget you are still trying to calculate the thermal gradient at the state of maximum entropy which the Second Law of Thermodynamics says evolves spontaneously. Remember? I did it quite easily with mathematical induction from the four molecule experiment. You’re wandering off track and now getting side-tracked about the vortex – just read Wikipedia about that.

    And please don’t misquote me, Neal, as when you wrote “His claim is that the isothermal assumption is self-contradictory … “ because you know that gets my back up. What I did say was that an isothermal state would not be a state of maximum entropy because it still has unbalanced energy potentials. You can see from the four molecule experiment that there is still a potential transfer of kinetic energy across the boundary between the two layers 68 nanometres apart.

    Now you know that we can’t have kinetic energy transfers across a boundary if there were thermal equilibrium, don’t you, Neal? And to have thermodynamic equilibrium we must have thermal equilibrium, mechanical equilibrium, radiative equilibrium and chemical equilibrium. The inter-molecular radiation reduces the -g/Cp gradient by about a third on Earth when we have the radiative equilibrium as well as the thermal, mechanical and chemical equilibrium.

    I know it’s a little involved, but that’s why we really shouldn’t try to teach it to young school kids or politicians, now should we, or get it all mixed up at SkS?

    When you realise you are off the track with all those radiation calculations about insolation that passes straight through the ocean surface, and back radiation that just raises electrons through energy states, rather than adding kinetic energy, then I assume you will tell them all on the SkS team just how wrong has been the carbon dioxide hoax, now won’t you?

    ———————————
    REPLY: I’m starting to detest the non-word fissics. It is a mindless insult and does not reflect well on the people who use it. – Jo.

    00