From the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE
A new study suggests that tiny aerosol particles from pollution plumes have a greater influence on stormy weather over pristine regions of the world, such as oceans and large forests, than previously believed. Because water cycling in these areas contributes substantially to global weather patterns, the human-made aerosol effects observed in these regions may also trigger climate shifts around the world, the authors say.
Deep convective cloud (DCC) systems (thunderstorm-causing clouds) in the Amazonian tropics are major sources of precipitation, changes in atmospheric heat energy, and absorption of radiation from the sun. The formation of DCCs begins with the creation of droplets, in which atmospheric moisture condenses around airborne particles, such as human-made aerosols. However, the association between aerosols and climate patterns remain uncertain, and ultrafine aerosol particles (smaller than 50 nanometers in diameter) are thought to be too small to affect cloud formation.
Now, using observation and simulation-based data to analyze urban pollution effects on the Amazon rainforest, Jiwen Fan and colleagues showed condensation around ultrafine aerosol particles increased cloud formation and warmed the surrounding air, ultimately intensifying DCC systems. Before the particles intruded the DCC system, the rainforest’s naturally low-aerosol environment was low in condensation and highly water-saturated, the authors found.
When the ultrafine aerosols entered the basin, the supersaturated atmosphere condensed on the particles, leading to increased rain production, warm rain and supercooled cloud water. The authors suggest similar aerosol effects may be observed in other tropical regions with ample atmospheric moisture, highlighting the global importance of their results.
###
Climate campaigners who claim there is more severe weather due to climate change would be well advised to take note of this.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
My only qualifications were that I was a computer programmer before retirement. There has never been a piece of code written beyond a couple hundred lines without at least 1 bug. Even without bugs you are assuming that your code represents 100% accuracy as to the theory which in turn must represent 100% accuracy of the actuality. Then we get into measurement problems for the data and then deliberate data fraud compounded by changing of the reference points and further compounded by combining data sets from different measuring techniques from different eras. Add to that rounding errors and on top of that wholesale changes in the program when new theory becomes available which introduces more bugs in the code. Add to this the impossiblity of carrying out valid global field experiments on the data outside of your computer program because we are talking about a globe a bit less than 25000 miles in circumference at the equator and a bit less than that if measured at the poles. Add to that the incompetence of climate modellers in not understanding the difference between precision and accuracy. Again See Dr. Frank’s talk in the following:
http://industrialprogress.com/power-hour-dr-patrick-frank-on-the-accuracy-of-climate-models/
Solar brightening is real:
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00074.1
And can be shown in solar hours that has gone up a lot.
8% in Sweden: https://www.smhi.se/klimat/klimatet-da-och-nu/klimatindikatorer/stralning-1.17841
Anthony should make this study a separate post so we can argue the effective merits of air pollution. I would guess that if you added up all the air pollution around the globe as of the end of 2017 versus 1980 I would say that there is even more now than in 1980 because if factory and transportation emissions prove an increase in CO2 i dont see how there can be less air pollution emitted because we have simply transferred it from North America and Europe to China. Therefore the conclusion of the study is invalid. I suggest they look to changes in the solar forcing as reasons for more brightness than before.
“effective merits of air pollution”
I should have said decreasing air pollution
Ion-aerosol-cloud processes in the lower atmosphere
Authors
R. G. Harrison,
K. S. Carslaw
First published: 16 September 2003Full publication history
DOI: 10.1029/2002RG000114 View/save citation
Cited by (CrossRef): 129 articles Check for updates Citation tools
“[9] The goal of this paper is to review the “state of the science” regarding atmospheric electrical processes and their effect on aerosol and cloud microphysical processes. We begin by reviewing our understanding of the basic physical processes involved in atmospheric electrification (section 1) and atmospheric ionization (section 2) through to aerosol electrification (section 3) and the effects of such electrification on aerosol physical processes. Such a didactic review is necessary because much of the literature on this subject appears to be largely unknown to practitioners of modern atmospheric aerosol science. Our summary of aerosol electrification studies is the first to be aimed at those interested in aerosol physical properties and aerosol-cloud interactions rather than the electrical properties of the atmosphere. We then summarize the studies that have suggested a link between the electrical state of the atmosphere and weather (section 4) and examine the magnitude of electrical effects in each case. Section 5 considers ion-aerosol-cloud processes on other planets in our solar system. We close by outlining what further studies are needed to advance the field, emphasizing the need to formulate hypotheses amenable either to physical experiments or numerical modeling (section 6.)”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2002RG000114/full
Magnetic and Electric Effects on Water
Martin Chaplin
Emeritus Professor of Applied Science
London South Bank University
“If electromagnetic effects do indeed influence the degree of structuring in water [1323], then it is clear that they may have an effect on health. The biological effects of microwaves, for example, have generally been analyzed in terms of their very small heating effects. However, it should be recognized that there might be significant non-thermal effects (for example, [714]) due to the imposed re-orientation of water at the surfaces of biomolecular structures such as membranes [356]. Similar effects on membranes have been proposed to occur due to magnetic [657] and electric fields [1086]. Additionally, as low-frequency, low-level alternating electric fields have been found to affect the electrical conductivity of pure water [358], the effects of living near power cables and microwave towers should, perhaps, not be thought harmless just because no theory for harm has been formally recognized. Even variations in the geomagnetic field may have some long-term exposure effects. [Back to Top to top of page]”
http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/magnetic_electric_effects.html