Recent content by johnbbahm

From the data it is difficult to see if any positive forcing happened at all, in the longwave spectrum. Without the initial perturbation, there would not be anything to feedback upon.

I thought of that also, but for it to be feedback, it has to be feedback from some earlier warming input. The earlier warming input would have to be forced by an energy imbalance, but if the OLR is increasing, it cannot be added greenhouse gases that caused the forcing, as their forcing would...

Observational Assessment of Changes in Earth’s Energy Imbalance Since 2000: 2024 Added greenhouse gases are supposed to be decreasing the OLR.

He did a good job of explaining things and a good perspective drawing. Many decades ago I worked for Western Geophysical, and was exposed to a lot of our understanding of geology and oil. Basically oil is a mid step in the breakdown of organic matter. It exists in low density almost everywhere...

Beam ex panders work both ways, they can also make the beam diameter smaller. Depending on the power level, you might want to avoid a real focal point, it takes less energy per square mm to ionize air than you think.

I am going to assume you are taking about a second harmonic crystal, and because double 405 nm is 810 nm your laser source is a laser diode. As long as you power is low enough, you should be able to get a lens to collimate the beam, and then bring the beam size down to the size of the crystal.

I found the answer to my question, they are not counting the Airborne Fraction, but simulate a 100 GtC pulse directly increasing the ppm level. A second Study, The time lag between a carbon dioxide emission and maximum warming increases with the size of the emission had a footnote where they...

The conclusion reached in the study is good, because the smaller size emission more closely resembles how Humans emit CO2, if the average time to maximum warming is about a decade, then there is minimal warming in the pipeline. I was attempting to extract the sensitivity from their finding but...

It goes to the climate sensitivity, it is 0.2K for 100 Gt, that would be a lower sensitivity compared to 0.2K for a 44 Gt injection. The graph has a unit of 2.0 per 1000 Gt, so 100 Gt is 0.2. 100 Gt would be an increase of about 47 ppm in the CO2 level, but 44 Gt would only be 20.6 ppm. The...

The 50 lbs per year did not come from that reference but from this one. Trees help tackle climate change One tree planted has a decent scientific description. One tree Planted

10cm diameter at breast height, is a very small tree.

I agree, I was simply questioning the 50 lbs of CO2 per year per tree. Perhaps they meant 50 lbs of carbon, which would be much closer to the 100 lbs of carbon per year I cam up with.

I question the part about a single tree taking in 50 lbs of CO2 per year, because I have read that the average dry biomass increase per year per tree is about 103kg per year. This is 226 lbs, cellulose is 44% carbon, so a growing tree needs ~100 lbs of carbon per year. Sourcing 100 lbs of carbon...

There are a lot of sources but, NOAA Airborne Fraction describes it best, I think.

I do not think you could plant enough trees to stay ahead of the curve.