Tunnels Reverse Global Warming And Weaken Hurricanes

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by cat2only, Sep 17, 2007.

  1. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    I - and others - already have, Mac, but he just doesn't get it. Actually instead of pressure alone, he's depending on the southward flow of the cold water returning from the North Pole. It's speed is a mere 4mph and he ALSO wants to tap that to generate electricity at the same time! Absolutely no concept of flow resistance and the rest of the basic physics involved. He seems determined to have his cake and eat it too despite it having been explained to him in detail.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Cool...thanks R.O....I thought something smelled a little fishy about the design. Well, hopefully he can learn something from the experience.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    You're welcome. Yes, and I hope he will learn something from it, too. His heart is in the right place, it's just that his practical studies haven't caught up with his grand visions yet.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Eventually, they will.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334

    Hold that open end against a flow of water traveling 5mph like the Gulfstream and water will indeed flow out the other end.
     
  8. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Pascal says any pressure differential within an enclosed system where energy is conserved a flow will occur!
     
  9. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Therefore, Pascal's law can be interpreted as saying that any change in pressure applied at any given point of the fluid is transmitted undiminished throughout the fluid including against the walls.
     
  10. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,925
    Would the weight of the water counteract the pressure differential?
     
  11. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    And you are completely ignoring the resistance to flow that is generated by the water moving through the tunnel - not to mention the HUGE resistance presented by whatever you propose to use to generate electricity from it!

    When are you going to answer the direct questions I asked you? I'm not going to give up nor relent until you do.
     
  12. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Pascal says any pressure differential within an enclosed system where energy is conserved a flow will occur!

    I can't explain it any better than Pascal does.Sorry.:shrug:
     
  13. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028

    Will a current of 8 kph (FYI, we use the metric system in the world of science...even if your American like me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) be able to overcome gravity and push all that water upwards? In the garden hose...maybe...in a 300 meter long tunnel...no.
     
  14. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    No because at depth the cooler water is more dense than the water near the surface. It would just push it out of the way.That is why upwelling occurs anyways in the oceans along deep western boundry currents.
     
  15. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
  16. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    The frictional losses are much smaller the bigger the diameter or cross section. These are no garden hoses.
     
  17. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Tunnels prevent this as they regulate SSTs in the Gulftream to lower temps..


    Greenland Snowmelt This Year Could Cover U.S. Twice
    By Andrea Thompson, LiveScience Staff Writer

    posted: 25 September 2007 04:15 pm ET

    Share this story
    Email The amount of ice that has melted away from Greenland's ice sheet this year could cover an area twice the size of the United States, with more melting occurring in 2007 than the average going back to 1988, a new study finds.
    Using satellite data, NASA scientists compared the average snow that melted from Greenland annually between 1988 and 2006 with the snow that melted away this summer and found an overall rising trend in the amount of melt, especially at high altitudes where melt was 150 percent higher this year than the average.
    The melting index—an indicator of where melting is occurring and its duration—for Greenland's high altitude areas (those over 1.2 miles above sea level) was significantly higher than usual so far this year. Melting in these areas lasted for 25 to 30 days longer this year than for the average over the last 19 years.
    "When snow melts at those high altitudes and then refreezes, it can absorb up to four times more energy than fresh, unthawed snow," said study leader Marco Tedesco of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "This can affect Earth's energy budget by changing how much radiation from the sun is absorbed by the Earth versus that reflected back into the atmosphere. Refrozen snow can also alter the snow density, thickness and snow-water content."
    As this refrozen snow absorbs more energy, it can cause even more snow to melt in subsequent seasons.
    The 2007 melting index for lower altitudes was also high, ranking in fifth place behind 2005, 2002, 1998 and 2004, in that order.
    "Increases in the overall melting trend over Greenland have an impact that stretches beyond its icy shores," Tedesco said. "Aside from contributing to direct sea level rise, melting especially along the coast can speed up glaciers since the meltwater acts like a lubricant between the frozen surface and the bedrock deep below. The faster glaciers flow, the more water enters the ocean and potentially impacts sea level rise."
    Tedesco's findings are detailed in the Sept. 25 issue of the American Geophysical Union's Eos newspaper.


    http://www.livescience.com/environment/070925_greenland_melt.html
     
  18. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Tunnels also prevent the pain and swelling of hemorrhoids.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Tunnels prevent this as they regulate SSTs in the Gulftream to lower temps..




    Arctic Sea Ice Shrinking, Thinning Even in Winter
    Tuesday , September 25, 2007

    By Andrea Thompson


    ADVERTISEMENTThe opening of the fabled Northwest Passage and the recent announcement that Arctic sea ice has reached a new record summer low are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to polar problems, so to speak.

    Two new studies by scientists who keep an eye on sea ice melt provide further evidence that the Arctic is currently suffering the brunt of global warming's effects, with the ice becoming thinner and winter ice also beginning to decline.

    Ice melt in the summer is a normal phenomenon: As summer temperatures heat up the Northern Hemisphere, Arctic sea ice begins to melt, and its edge retreats and covers less of the North polar region. When temperatures begin to drop again in the winter, the ice reforms.

    • Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

    But in recent years, rising air and ocean temperatures, fueled by global warming, have caused more and more ice to melt each summer, with ice extent reaching a record low on Sept. 16 this year, according to the University of Colorado at Boulder's National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

    Winter sea ice, on the other hand, had remained fairly steady — until now.

    Winter decline

    A new study examining satellite measurements of the winter sea ice covering the Barents Sea (located north of Scandinavia) over the past 26 years has shown that the ice edge has recently been retreating in the face of rising sea-surface temperatures, said study leader Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University.

    Her research, detailed in a recent issue of the journal Geophysical Research Letters, showed that the warming waters in the Barents Sea — which have risen about 3 degrees Celsius since 1980 — are to blame for the reduction in winter ice cover.

    Two factors contribute to the warming of the Barents Sea: warming Atlantic waters funneled in by the Gulf Stream and solar heating of the open ocean as ice melts in the summer, both of which make it harder for new ice to form in the winter.

    The latter factor, known as the ice-albedo feedback, has been predicted by climate models and works like this: As ice melts in the summer, the open ocean warms up as it absorbs the solar radiation that the ice would normally reflect back to space; as global temperatures rise, more ice melts, so the ocean absorbs more heat, and less ice re-forms the next winter, which just keeps the cycle going.

    Francis says that this retreat of the winter ice edge is "another piece of evidence that the ice-albedo feedback is appearing in the real world and not just in the model world."

    A retreating ice edge isn't the only problem plaguing the Arctic sea ice. It's also getting thinner.

    Younger and thinner

    Julienne Stroeve of the NSIDC used satellite data that tracked the movement of the sea ice over the last 30 years to estimate the age of the ice — the older the ice, the thicker it is.

    Newly formed ice (about 1 or 2 years old) will only be about 1 meter thick, whereas ice that is closer to 5 years old will be between 2 and 3 meters thick.

    Ice thickness is key to the survival of sea ice, because thinner ice vanishes much faster in the summer than thicker ice.

    Stroeve and her colleagues found that while most of the Arctic sea ice in the 1980s was around 5 years old (with some sections even climbing up to 9 or 10 years old), the oldest ice the researchers can find now is only 2 or 3 years old. All the 10-year-old ice has melted away.

    "The ice is getting a lot younger in the Arctic," said Stroeve. "Much more of the Arctic is about 1 meter thick."

    The warming ocean is again to blame for the sea ice's woes.

    Sea ice isn't static, but rather is pushed around by Arctic winds, Stroeve explained. These winds push the sea ice through places where the ocean water has warmed and the sea ice simply melts away.

    Ice-free by 2015?

    This news doesn't bode well for the future of the Arctic sea ice and has left Francis and other scientists worried.

    "Is this the beginning of a precipitous decline in the sea ice?" Francis wondered.

    In another study that came out earlier this year, Stroeve compared current measurements of sea ice melt with the predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's models — and what she found gave her cause for worry.

    "We're about 30 years ahead of where the climate models say we should be," Stroeve told LiveScience.

    Stroeve, Francis and others will be keeping a close eye on the sea ice this winter, as the new record summer low may mean a record low winter ice extent this year as well, thanks to the ice-albedo feedback.

    Francis and Stroeve both say that an unusually cold summer or winter in the future could pump ice levels back up, but they aren't optimistic that the ice will ever return to historic levels.

    "It's hard to imagine seeing it turned around," Francis said.
     
  20. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,925
    The ocean would still warm, no matter how much you mix it up with your tunnels. In fact you could destroy any undersea environment that depends on cooler water. If the cooler water were raised, warmer water would move to replace it. It's basically a giant radiator, the capacity of the ocean as a heat sink is large but limited.
     
  21. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Correct it would still warm back up over time due to the solar radiation but that may take a few months to do so as this cooler water moves along at pretty good clip in the Gulfstream.. Meanwhile, as this now cooler water enters the Arctic it would prevent more ice from melting.
     
  22. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,925
    No it wouldn't, the cooler water would evaporate less and be fresher, thus shutting down the thermohaline current.

    Besides that, I'm talking about the average temperature of the ocean, which would still increase.
     
  23. cat2only Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334

Share This Page