From the National Science Foundation:
Americans face 70 percent increase in unhealthy ozone levels by 2050
 Ozone pollution across the continental U.S. will become worse as global temperatures rise.
|
May 5, 2014
Ozone pollution across the continental United States will become far more difficult to keep in check as temperatures rise, according to new research results.
The study shows that Americans face the risk of a 70 percent increase in unhealthy summertime ozone levels by 2050.
The results appear online this week in a paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, published by the American Geophysical Union.
The work was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Department of Energy.
Warmer temperatures and other changes in the atmosphere related to a changing climate, including higher atmospheric levels of methane, spur chemical reactions that increase overall levels of ozone.
Unlike ozone in the stratosphere, which benefits life on Earth by blocking ultraviolet radiation from the sun, ground-level ozone can trigger a number of health problems.
These range from coughing and throat irritation to more serious aggravation of asthma, bronchitis and emphysema.
Even short periods of unhealthy ozone levels can cause local death rates to rise. Ozone pollution also damages crops and other plants.
Unless emissions of specific pollutants associated with the formation of ozone are sharply cut, most of the continental United States will experience more summer days with unhealthy air by 2050, the research shows.
Heavily polluted locations in parts of the East, Midwest and West Coast, in which ozone already frequently exceeds recommended levels, could face unhealthy summer air in most years.
“It doesn’t matter where you are in the United States, climate change has the potential to make your air worse,” said National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Gabriele Pfister, lead scientist on the study.
In addition to NCAR, the paper co-authors are from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; University of Colorado, Boulder; and North-West University in South Africa.
“A warming planet doesn’t just mean rising temperatures, it also means risking more summertime pollution and the health effects that come with it,” said Pfister.
However, the research also showed that a sharp reduction in the emissions of certain pollutants would lead to dramatically decreased levels of ozone even as temperatures warm.
The research is one of the first of its type to be conducted with new, highly advanced geoscience supercomputing capabilities.
“Understanding future changes in surface ozone over the summer has tremendous implications for air quality and human health,” said Anjuli Bamzai, a program director in NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funded the research through NSF’s Decadal and Regional Climate Prediction using Earth System Models (EaSM) Program.
“Through a series of ‘what if’ simulations,” said Bamzai, “atmospheric chemists, climate modelers, regional modelers and developers of emissions scenarios demonstrate that a balance of emission controls can counteract the increases in future temperatures, emissions and solar radiation that in turn lead to decreases in surface ozone.”
Ozone and heat
Ozone pollution is not emitted directly. It forms as a result of chemical reactions that take place between nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight.
These gases come from human activities such as combustion of coal and oil, as well as natural sources such as emissions from plants.
To examine the effects of climate change on ozone pollution, Pfister and colleagues looked at two scenarios.
In one, emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds from human activities would continue at current levels through 2050.
In the other, emissions would be cut by 60-70 percent. Both scenarios assumed continued greenhouse gas emissions with significant warming.
The researchers found that, if emissions continue at present-day rates, the number of eight-hour periods in which ozone would exceed 75 parts per billion (ppb) would jump by 70 percent on average across the United States by 2050.
The 75 ppb level over eight hours is the threshold that is considered unhealthy by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (The agency is considering tightening the standard to a value between 65 and 70 ppb over eight hours.)
Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.
Although the range itself shifts only slightly, the result is a much larger number of days above the threshold considered unhealthy.
There are three primary reasons for the increase in ozone with climate change:
- Chemical reactions in the atmosphere that produce ozone occur more rapidly at higher temperatures.
- Plants emit more volatile organic compounds at higher temperatures, which can increase ozone formation if mixed with pollutants from human sources.
- Methane, which is increasing in the atmosphere, contributes to increased ozone globally and will enhance baseline levels of surface ozone across the United States.
In the second scenario, Pfister and colleagues found that sharp reductions in nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds could reduce ozone pollution even as the climate warms.
In fact, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 27 to 55 ppb.
The number of instances when ozone pollution would exceed the 75 ppb level dropped to less than 1 percent of current cases.
“Our work confirms that reducing emissions of ozone precursors would have an enormous effect on the air we all breathe,” Pfister said.
Pfister and a nationwide scientific team expect to learn more about the sources, chemistry and movement of air pollutants this summer when they launch a major field experiment known as FRAPPÉ along Colorado’s Front Range.
The role of supercomputing
The study was among the first conducted on the new 1.5 petaflops Yellowstone supercomputer. The IBM system, operated by NCAR and supported by funding from NSF and the University of Wyoming, is one of the world’s most powerful computers dedicated to research in the atmospheric and related sciences.
“High resolution models can consume significant time and resources on massive computers, but as shown in this research, they’re often required for accurate regional ozone projections,” said Irene Qualters, division director for Advanced Computing Infrastructure at NSF.
“Running these models wouldn’t have been possible without the parallel processing power of the Yellowstone supercomputer, a critical part of NSF’s cyberinfrastructure.
“The work will also help other researchers in related climate topics determine scenarios where coarse resolution is sufficient and, conversely, where high resolution is needed.”
Thanks to its computing power, the scientists were able to simulate pollution levels hour-by-hour for 39 hypothetical summers.
This allowed the team to account for year-to-year variations in meteorological conditions, such as hot and dry vs. cool and wet, thereby getting a more detailed and statistically significant picture of future pollution levels.
To simulate the interplay of global climate with regional pollution conditions, the scientists turned to two of the world’s leading atmospheric models, both based at NCAR and developed through collaborations in the atmospheric sciences community.
They used the Community Earth System Model, funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy and NSF, to simulate global climate as well as atmospheric chemistry conditions.
They also used an air chemistry version of the multiagency Weather Research and Forecasting Model to obtain a more detailed picture of regional ozone levels.
Even with Yellowstone’s advanced computing speed, it took months to complete the complex simulations.
“This research would not have been possible even just a couple of years ago,” said Pfister.
“Without the new computing power made possible by Yellowstone, you cannot depict the necessary detail of future changes in air chemistry over small areas, including the urban centers where most Americans live.”
-NSF-
=============================================================
UPDATE: Chip Knappenberger writes in comments:
Lest anyone forget, levels of low level ozone have been trending downward across the U.S.–despite rising thermometer readings:
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/ozone.html
It’s just broadside after broadside now. Rationality abandoned, panic button pushed.
“To simulate the interplay of global climate with regional pollution conditions, the scientists turned to two of the world’s leading atmospheric models, both based at NCAR and developed through collaborations in the atmospheric sciences community.”
This paper puts the flop in petaflops.
Damn, 2050 is going to be such a remarkable year. Shame I won’t be around to see it.
notice how every projection these days goes into 2050? Wonder why that is……..
Once again comes the bogus claim that superior computing power provides superior modelling.
Ok, so the models just need more power to overcome their climate coding deficiencies? We have entered the modeled world of the obsurd. Another painful waste of of funds.
Plants, we must eliminate plants. Increasing volatile organic compounds in the atmosphere come from plants, and when they decay, methane is produced. Eliminate plants, decrease atmospheric ozone. Or, eliminate people. We increase atmospheric CO2, which causes plants to grow faster… see how simple it all really is?
/s
“….. as temperatures rise …..”.
So when are the temperatures going to start rising, then?
Or is this research from 18 years ago and they have just got round to publishing it?
I rate this as just more hot air.
I’ll see your ozone and raise you some stinky feet.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-warming-increases-likelihood-of-athletes-foot-and-other-fungal-infections-74959697.html
Climate Change Increases Likelihood of Athlete’s Foot and Other Fungal Infections
SKILLMAN, N.J., May 12 /PRNewswire/ — Whether you’re at the beach, pool
club, gym, camp, work, or even hanging around the house, there’s a good chance
you may develop a fungal infection as global temperatures rise.
“Global warming and increased humidity brings excess moisture and sweating to our
bodies, creating the perfect setting for fungi to grow or fungal infections to
develop,” says dermatologist Guy Webster, M.D., Associate Professor and
Director for Cutaneous Pharmacology at Thomas Jefferson University. “Fungi
tend to thrive in warm, moist places, such as between the toes, in the groin,
under the breasts, and other parts of the body.” One of every five persons
gets a fungal infection at some time. Climate change may increase that to 4 of every 5.”
Ok so I altered the story a bit to make an asinine assertion.
But who would be surprised to see this seriously reported?
Anyone can make up any ridiculous claim imaginable and it becomes climate science.
So why can’t I? I suspect many WUWT regulars could do this all day long and outpace the alarmists’ fabrications.
Perhaps there should be a blog that is solely made up crap. To compete with alarmists. One thing after another. Made up crap without any basis whatsoever.
I’ll bet alarmists would show up and postulate how some of the crap is quite possible, highly likely or already occurring.
The last I heard “No global warming at all for 17 years 9 months” so could someone give me the straight scoop. If temperatures are not going up then what’s all the hub bub about?
http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/05/04/global-temperature-update-no-global-warming-at-all-for-17-years-9-months/
They used the Community Earth System Model
Oooh, another computer game!
Is it out on Playstation yet?
More GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out), someone should have taken the “Principles of Computing” class!
It wasn’t research; it was running a program – programmed to do what you think it should.
Now now. Be respectful. Those guys are the “science experts” remember? (but can we please never ever let their kind build an AI?)
“Ozone pollution is not emitted directly.”
Say what? Lots of things emit ozone, for example all motors with a commutator. There’s more than one or two of them about.
ah 2050, the year the world’s population will hit 9 billion according to the UN.
In the past climate change wiped out civilizations. This new one is going to double ours.
The ozone standard – not that long ago – was 125ppb. Many States and Counties cleaned up their air emissions of many, many pollutants, and suddenly almost every county in the US had “attainment status” and had “good air”.
The American Lung Association and the EPA couldn’t handle that, because it meant less power, so the EPA gave the American Lung Association a bunch of money so that the ALA could sue the EPA to amend the standard. In a classic case of sue-and-settle (all using your tax money), the EPA agreed to lower the ozone standard to 80ppb.
Most States and Counties reduced their air pollution even more, so the ALA sued the EPA AGAIN (again with your tax money) and the standard was lowered to 75ppb.
Now, because a vast majority of States and Counties actually meet the 75ppb standard, as the above article mentions, they are considering reducing the standard to 65-70ppb.
There are 3 possibilities – ozone keeps getting less and less healthy for you, ozone has always been really unhealthy for you but the EPA is just now realizing how low the level REALLY has to be, or the EPA keeps changing the standard because it is anti-business and wants more money and power.
You decide which of the three possibilities is correct.
If the ozone standard were still at the 125ppb level, virtually 100% of the US would be well under that level, even on hot, humid, stagnant days.
Col Mosby said:
“notice how every projection these days goes into 2050? Wonder why that is……..”
Yeah they have stopped all predictions for anything less than 30 years. They may not have learned anything about “Climate Science”, but they have certainly learned that saying things like “British schoolchildren in 2005 won’t know what snow is” can bite you in the arse.
There must be a new climate science prediction rule stating something like: “make no prediction which can be disproven before your retirement”.
If not, I call this ‘Harkin’s Rule’.
Science by model. *SIGH*
According to my latest greatest computer models,which I run on my Etch-A-Sketch, the Klingons and the Cylons will join forces to wipe out life on Earth as we know it by 2050 unless we lower CO2 now.
Sure, the above paragraph is remarkably stupid. There’s a difference though: I’m willing to tell you upfront that the above paragraph is remarkably stupid. The “catastrophe on the hour” CAGW proponents are hoping we don’t figure that out about their outrageous statements.
I expect to hear any day now that Godzilla is being blamed on climate change, and that if we want to save Tokyo we must act now.
It is far safer to make longer term projections than to to make short term ones and have to keep changing jobs in anticipation of scorn and ridicule. Alarm is therefore quite rational in some monetary respects.
ozone is the PERFECT thing to be used to exert control over all of us, since we have no control over ozone levels no matter what we do they can claim we need to CONTROL you humans……..ozone is OXYGEN in an unstable molecule, human activity does NOT cause ozone formation, IF it did we would have high ozone levels year round, HEATING oxygen causes ozone to form………they talk about ozone as if it harms the lungs YET they also promote home IONIZERS which produce ozone INSIDE the home…………that is another little fact about ozone it actually helps to clear stagnant air masses by bonding with some of the pollution causing it to fall to the earth………….
‘Unlike ozone in the stratosphere, which benefits life on Earth by blocking ultraviolet radiation from the sun, ground-level ozone can trigger a number of health problems.
‘These range from coughing and throat irritation to more serious aggravation of asthma, bronchitis and emphysema.
‘Unless emissions … are sharply cut, most of the continental United States will experience more summer days with unhealthy air by 2050, the research shows.
‘Heavily polluted locations in parts of the East, Midwest and West Coast,…could face unhealthy summer air in most years.
‘“It doesn’t matter where you are in the United States, climate change has the potential to make your air worse,” said National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Gabriele Pfister, lead scientist on the study.’
Dearest Gabriele,
Do you have asthma, bronchitis, or emphysema? (BTW: emphysema has been referred to as COPD for several years now – Gabriele.) If you don’t, and I’m going to guess you don’t, please don’t trouble people who actually do have those conditions with your research that states that most of the US “will” experience “unhealthy air by 2050” and then backflips that expressed certainty with “could face unhealthy air.” So, what is it; will or could; or maybe you can’t really predict something 35 years in the future? And, dammit, don’t even pretend to state to people who actually do have those conditions that you know what’s best for them. You don’t. Ozone or not, what they really ‘need’ are affordable electrical rates so they can stay indoors with air conditioning. Got that, Gabriele? And your ‘research’ (paid for by the tax dollars of those same people) is on track to take that away from them. Forgive me for being blunt, Gabriele, but how dare you.
-Thomas Judd
More model results. Next.
Lest anyone forget, levels of low level ozone have been trending downward across the U.S.–despite rising thermometer readings:
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/ozone.html
-Chip
Ozone pollution ?
Cities supplying material to fix the Ozone Hole is pollution? Or has the Ozone Hole ceased to be a problem that we can now dispense with this vital substance? If it is now abundant can we go back to ubiquitous chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons and halons?
By 2050 human population will hit peak levels and start declining due to current demographic trends. Birth rates in all countries have been declining for some time as the human species gets wealthier. Although regional birth rates are below replacement in several areas of the world already, the global birth rate still has some ways to go. Our computer models expect that the global birth rate will be below replacement by 2050.
Quite happy to take bets that my prediction does better than this one.
Articles like this one forces me to think of the human beings who lived in the Eemian interglacial period which peaked about 125,000 years ago. They must have had a terrible time living then with the temperaturs in the tropics being 2 C above what they are now, and at higher lattitudes, about 6 C above current temperatures. Does anyone else share my concern for our ancestors who had to cope in such heat? The temperatures then were far more than what the IPCC now predicts will be our state 100 years from now.
“…atmospheric chemists, climate modelers, regional modelers and developers of emissions scenarios…”
No mention here of plant biologists. Interestingly the flux of some volatile compounds from plants is partly controlled by stomata in leaves. More carbon dioxide may mean fewer stomata and therefore lower flux rates of volatiles into the atmosphere and a smaller pool of reactive chemicals. Too, in the hottest part of the day, plants close stomata to prevent water loss, which has the happy effect of reducing the loss of (some) volatiles.
But one wouldn’t expect certain types to know that or care about it if they did.
@DAV
Ozone at ground level won’t fill the ozone hole, unfortunately!
@Jit
Are you applying for funding for a paper?
… But is the ozone risk really that much greater than install a laser printer in your office ? … or is this just a ploy to take away your laser printers ?
mjmsprt40 says:
May 12, 2014 at 10:14 am
/
I expect to hear any day now that Godzilla is being blamed on climate change, and that if we want to save Tokyo we must act now.
————————————————————–
That would be May 16th! 😉
“High resolution models can consume significant time and resources on massive computers, but as shown in this research, they’re often required for accurate regional ozone projections,”
Can anyone parse this? It sounds like utter nonsense.
Another job security study where the results are based on computer outputs. Are these computer results verifiable? Tell me what you want and I can produce it. How does this super machine and program “look back?”. Whenever I’m told a report is based on computer results I am extremely dubious of the “researchers” conclusions. This ozone threat is another crisis that will require additional funding to find a life saving solution. Heaven help us from computer predicted catastrofies.
This research is EXCELLENT NEWS!! As GLOBAL COOLING sets in, ozone pollution should diminish!
So any day now, we can expect that petafloppy Yellowstone, will output a brand new GCM global circulation (not climate) model, that exactly matches GISS, and HADCRU, and RSS, and UAH all at once. We can depend on it; Yellowstone is that fast; But I did discover this escape clause:-
“””””…..“High resolution models can consume significant time and resources on massive computers, but as shown in this research, they’re often required for accurate regional ozone projections,” said Irene Qualters, division director for Advanced Computing Infrastructure at NSF……”””””
See it still is only giving “projections”, they can’t do predictions yet.
By the way, if we are doomed to have more ozone; why would we then care about ozone holes ??
The solar UV can’t get to us without encountering some ozone somewhere, and I don’t see why we care where that is.
I do see a plea for “please bring (lots) more money” in this report. This new IBM jugglenaught takes a lot of energy, which we don’t have unless we burn coal.
It would appear that our profligate use of energy, will make the USA an unlivable wasteland, right about the time that the Obama economic plan, brings all of the USA business to a screeching halt. It will be the perfect storm, and all the newbie yuppie ex rug rats, will suddenly find their textifiers no longer work, because all the fake AT&T trees have no power.
But I saw enough what ifs, and maybes in this report that the lawyers will find us a way out.
Does anybody happen to know just what the mean global temperature anomaly long term trend rate has been over the last, say one million years?? That ought to be a long enough time for their models to get fairly close to the real world, so they don’t have to cherry pick short biased periods..
Keep throwing it against the wall..something’s bound to stick.
‘We have to drain the ocean’ said National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Gabriele Pfister, lead scientist on the study. ‘There is always more ozone at the beach. We can fix this by draining the ocean.’
/sarc – if anyone needs it
“””””…..Tom J says:
May 12, 2014 at 10:20 am
‘Unlike ozone in the stratosphere, which benefits life on Earth by blocking ultraviolet radiation from the sun, ground-level ozone can trigger a number of health problems.
‘These range from coughing and throat irritation to more serious aggravation of asthma, bronchitis and emphysema…….”””””
Right on Tom; you tell that righteous taxpayer dependent twirp, what we asthmatics think about his opinions about our wishes or needs.
If I didn’t have to keep working right on through the twilight years, and on into the midnight years; to keep these unemployable parasites swilling at the taxpayer’s trough; I could afford to take care of my respiratory needs, in a variety of free choice ways, that suit me; not some unconstitutionally fabricated, and unelected public agency, that never ever produces ANY product, needed by us taxpayers.
They don’t even want to let us see the secret machinations of their overly imaginative exercises in futility, lest we see how we are being taken for a ride.
For the record; my particular asthmatic difficulties, essentially disappeared totally once we made enough noise in Sacramento; “Can You Hear US Now ?? ” to force the CARB and Cal EPA, to remove their rat poison MTBE, and ETBE from our gasoline.
And when we finally force them to remove their idiotic Ethanol from our gasoline, and give us a full tank of gas, instead of a partially burned one, then our air will get even cleaner, because we will save about 15% of the fuel, we currently need.
Now if Mister Pfister really cares about clean air; why doesn’t he work on getting tobacco eliminated from our environment. That would REALLY help asthmatics. I believe NCAR is where there is a legal alternative to tobacco.
How much worse is ozone in the South in the summer? (I presume the paper looked at that.)
Yeah. And it may decrease also. And start causing measles in chimps,and cure arthritis in humans. And cause the sun to rise in the east and set in the west! Ahhhh.The sky is falling. Us climate realists HAVE to start ridiculing these fools every chance we get. Nice guys finish last.
And george.e.smith….second-hand smoke was discounted years ago. Another leftie boogy construct.And yes,I am a non-smoker.
This torrent of CAGW diatribe almost makes the “hell and brim-fire” pulpit thumpers look downright sane – nah, Chicken Little Nutters all.
.I don’t mind them being out there, in very small doses they are mostly amusing, BUT PULLEASE, someone with their hand on the cheque book stop handing these patently absurd morons real workers taxes!
Justthinkin says: May 12, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Wasn’t the second-hand smoke being discounted WRT cancer. Regardless of studies, as an ex-asthmatic, second-hand smoke can and does cause asthma attacks. For some, simple airborne dust will. It is an allergic reaction, and if george says ozone affects him, I’d take his word for it.
***
Gamecock says:
May 12, 2014 at 11:06 am
“High resolution models can consume significant time and resources on massive computers, but as shown in this research, they’re often required for accurate regional ozone projections,”
Can anyone parse this? It sounds like utter nonsense.
***
It’s a cleverly concealed code for “Dear Mom — send money for control of the massive computers”.
“””””…..Justthinkin says:
May 12, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Yeah. And it may decrease also. And start causing measles in chimps,and cure arthritis in humans. And cause the sun to rise in the east and set in the west! Ahhhh.The sky is falling. Us climate realists HAVE to start ridiculing these fools every chance we get. Nice guys finish last.
And george.e.smith….second-hand smoke was discounted years ago. Another leftie boogy construct.And yes,I am a non-smoker…….”””””
Well thank you so much for your timely information.
Who the hell said ANYTHING about second hand smoke ??
But pray tell; in just what way was second hand smoke “discounted” ??
Are you saying is doesn’t stink like a stale ash tray. It doesn’t cause someone having it puffed in their face, to cough; certainly does me. Smoker or not, if you aren’t an asthmatic, or a COPD sufferer; you don’t know a damn thing about it, so just keep your opinions to yourself (yes you are entitled to them).
No I’m not expecting to catch lung cancer from second hand smoke; but I do walk out in the street, with the cars, to get by a smoker coming down the sidewalk towards me. And I also don’t go into any establishment of any kind that allows smoking on their premises
A now retired buddy of mine, who has worked in epidemiology all his career; mostly associated with the U of Miami Medical School, once put it this way:-
There’s a large body of medical evidence that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. There’s also a large body of medical evidence, that sex causes children. The cigarette data is much more convincing.
So it’s legal, and I wouldn’t lift a finger to make it not so. It’s none of the government’s business.
But I don’t stick around anyone, or anywhere I can smell tobacco smoke. But they are welcome to it and all its benefits.
We need to invest in millions of fans to blow all that ozone up to the ozone hole. Two problems solved at once.
These massively parallel computed chemical calculations sound to be very dependent on specific input criteria along with defined rates of growth.
All that computing power wastefully used to calculate simple in-line growth rates. As George E. Smith points out there are government types dependent on our being fooled for their long term salaries. Add to that the incredibly expensive mega-compute costs including support structures and I have no doubt that the results would be far more trustworthy if they were from mjmsprt40’s etch-a-sketch!
As Willis likes to point out, these results have a great deal of trouble passing the ‘smell’ test.
Otherwise why calculate growth rates hourly for 39 years when one is only calculating regionally?
“””””……Steve Keohane says:
May 12, 2014 at 1:25 pm
Justthinkin says: May 12, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Wasn’t the second-hand smoke being discounted WRT cancer. Regardless of studies, as an ex-asthmatic, second-hand smoke can and does cause asthma attacks. For some, simple airborne dust will. It is an allergic reaction, and if george says ozone affects him, I’d take his word for it……”””””
Well actually Steve, I’ve never ever said that ozone affects me; certainly not negatively. It is specifically the smoke from cigarettes that causes me to cough and choke, and sets off my asthma constricted gasping for air.
Actually, ozone I find rather pleasant, and have NEVER experienced ANY negative effects from it.
I love it when there are thunderstorms with nearby lightning, the ozone clears out my sinuses in a hurry, and I can breathe freely. Sparking electric motor commutators likewise.
One of my favorite fishing haunts, is on a lake with some high Voltage transmission lines going across the lake, and good fish spots underneath. Whenever it is misty, and we can hear the sizzle of the moisture leakage across those long insulators, the ozone spritzer is just wonderful.
Now the NOx that accompanies (and maybe the origin of) air pollution in places like the LA basin, is unpleasant, but I think it’s the NOx and not the ozone that is what causes the discomfort for asthmatics and COPDers.
I also don’t find the sulphurous fumes in geothermal areas to be obnoxious. In small concentrations, the odor is not terribly unpleasant, and it never causes me breathing problems. At large enough concentrations the odor gets a bit overpowering, but long before I ever experience any breathing difficulty; never have in fact.
Ozone,second-hand smoke,or simple dust are NOT allergens. Allergens cause an immediate and can be fatal reaction in your immune system.None of the above do such a thing. And I am married to an asthmatic. I spent 6 weeks,24/7,living with people who smoked.When I was drug tested,not ONE of the so called carcogines showed up. You are being sorely duped by power-junkies and hucksters,but then that is what LIP’s do.
I wonder if the ozone and methane would not very fast anihilate. Ozone is very reactive towards cumbustable substances.
‘Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.’
Um, where to begin with this. Ok, let’s start off gently. Our society is clearly doomed since we need the most powerful computer in the whole galaxy to say that levels of something, thirty five years from now, will be higher, thirty five years from now, then those very same levels are, in the right here and now, when we don’t know what the hell those very same levels are. Right. Now. And, therefore, have to estimate.
Phew, I got that out. One would not believe how hard it is to describe something so extraordinarily stupid that the description defies describing. I trust, but am not convinced, that I succeeded.
Can we not just spray CFCs into the atmosphere to kill the ozone…?
Dang near fell out of my chair when I read “The research is one of the first of its type to be conducted with new, highly advanced geoscience supercomputing capabilities.” Sounds like a line from a 1950’s B SF thriller.
Didn’t you already do this story about a week ago?
Why the repeat?
REPLY: It was a simple mistake of getting double press releases, one later than the other in emails, and being distracted at home by family matters. One was from UCAR seen here, the other was from NSF, seen above. From experience, if I take something down that has already been published, people ascribe nefarious motives to that. For example, my wackadoodle Internet stalker known as hotwhopper aka “soubundanga”, aka Miriam O’Brien is already saying I’m losing my memory for this simple mistake, she’d holler just as loud if I took it down too. From the perspective of those sorts of people, I’m damned if I do, damned if I don’t so I’m leaving it up.
Of course, if I could just get some of that “big oil” money people claim I’m flush with, I could hire an assistant editor.
– Anthony
Here’s the missing link http://broadcast.homestead.com/BroadcastTheory.html
“How much worse is ozone in the South in the summer? (I presume the paper looked at that.)”
More to the point why is Atlanta in trouble? Well, put a bunch of cars (NOx emissions, though much less than if the cars did not have cat converters), in the middle of a pine forest (lots of terpene emissions from the trees even though we have cut down human emissions) and heat. That is the recipe for tropospheric ozone
The answer is simple.
Just point all those bird-chopping windthingies toward the Ozone Holes. It’s a win-win!
sunshine causes ozone. sunshine causes warming. thus warming causes ozone and ozone causes warming.
“””””…..Justthinkin says:
May 12, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Ozone,second-hand smoke,or simple dust are NOT allergens. Allergens cause an immediate and can be fatal reaction in your immune system.None of the above do such a thing. And I am married to an asthmatic. I spent 6 weeks,24/7,living with people who smoked.When I was drug tested,not ONE of the so called carcogines showed up. You are being sorely duped by power-junkies and hucksters,but then that is what LIP’s do……””””””
Not sure who or what post this comment of yours is addressed to.
For example, if you read my posts above; meaning ANY post I have EVER made on WUWT, you would discover that NEVER have I claimed to be allergic to anything. So far as I know I am not allergic to anything; well anything I have so far encountered.
So what is “simple dust”.
Ozone specifically does nothing to me, nothing negative that is; clears my breathing wonderfully.
No Idea what “second hand smoke” is. But I immediately start coughing, and eventually wheezing, if I get near smoke from tobacco cigarettes, or cigars. To me that is first hand smoke; comes directly to me from the fag.
Don’t understand why you would be drug tested for being around someone who smokes; it is after all legal to smoke.
I’m sorry your spouse is also asthmatic; I hope she has reliable treatment remedies, when she needs it.
For me and my younger sister, it meant an entire childhood of isolation, and ostracism for being “wallflowers”. When there were school break times, each of us sat alone (separately) in the shade; just praying for the bell to ring, so we could go back into class. Yes the “normal” kids thought we were “weird”.
If you have never had to consciously force your lung system to take each and every breath for an hour or so, waiting for some rocket fuel medication, to kick in, and hoping like hell, that it didn’t blow your heart up (Ephedrine Hydrochloride), then you don’t know much about asthma.
If you have ever wondered why so many Olympic class swimmers, are purportedly asthmatic, try an ephedrine pill for yourself, and immediately a light will go on in your head. You really can leap small buildings, in a single bound. (if you survive the medication.
“””…You are being sorely duped by power-junkies and hucksters,but then that is what LIP’s do…..”””
Sorry, you completely lost me ; no idea, what that is all about.
Justthinkin on May 12, 2014 at 2:58 pm
There are different types of asthma. You are refering to the allergic type. There are also non-allergic and exercise induced types (I have all three of them).
Airborne chemicals (like ozone, smoke from tobacco/burning wood, solvents incl. alcohols, many perfumes/flowers and a lot of other stuff) affect those who have non-allergic asthma.
One of your ” followers” offered the link to this site and I have been reading the posts since the weekend. It is obvious that many comments are not engaging in a intellectual, or even a scientific, debate on the various links posted here.
This one is a ideal example. The article includes much of the known information on the causes of ozone pollution. Is that something to deny?
As the world population grows and industrializes ground level ozone will continue to be a major public health problem.
You can dispute the modeling but honestly it is the 21st century so you have to except the fact of its beneficial uses.
Is one to assume that the majority of posters here are scientists, engineers, and the such who are either work in the private or government sectors and who are the “silenced”, at the risk of losing their careers, by the overlords of the behemoth of the global climate conspiracy?
Maybe that is the case for some of you but I am surely not for the majority of you.
If you want to expand the debate you need to do more than just criticize and deny the data.
[snip]
Snaggletooth says:
May 13, 2014 at 3:17 am
If you want to expand the debate you need to do more than just criticize and deny the data.
=========================
“Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.”
Snaggletooth, your failure to find a problem with this data speaks volumes about YOU. It is rich for criticism. What is this “If you want to expand the debate?” What does that even mean?
One other thing about ground level ozone. It is transient. It lasts for a few hours. If ground level ozone becomes a problem by 2050, we can take action in 2050. Taking action now is silly.
Ozone is unhealthy? Not so long ago, people in illhealth were urged to go to the seaside and “breath in the ozone”.