5 ms·

"preindustrial" being tagged at 1900 seems more than a bit off. Steel boomed in the 1880's (starting in 1850's with Bessemer). I would think a better data set

"preindustrial" being tagged at 1900 seems more than a bit off. Steel boomed in the 1880's (starting in 1850's with Bessemer). I would think a better data set would be to look back to 1850 or better 1800 to be sure to capture a decent number of years that show the "preindustrial" time period. All that said. It is nice to see the trend over the past 30 years!

rjsw 10y ago
I think it needs to start a lot earlier. I would expect that a lot of the acidity would have come from the UK, we were to blame for a lot of the acid rain that affected the Black Forest.
- btilly 10y ago
  A combination of short smokestacks and global weather patterns mean that while England created a lot of local problems for itself, it wouldn't show up well in the Greenland ice sheet record that is being sampled here.
olkid 10y ago
Agreed. The direction we're trending is good, but isn't that entire range [4.99-5.75] considered "acidic"?
- jplasmeier 10y ago
  Rain is normally acidic due to dissolved Carbonic acid. Source: http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/190acidrain.html http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/190acidrain.html
  - olkid 10y ago
    "Normal rainfall is slightly acidic..." ~ thanks for the info
maxerickson 10y ago
Half the steel ever made has been produced in the last couple decades. 1913 production was ~60 million tons (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2892944/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2892944/posts ). 2015 production was ~1500 million tons.
- al_biglan 10y ago
  True, and we are getting cleaner production methods. The early production was incredibly inefficient and produced way more pollution than now. I can say _that_ with some certainty, but I can't say that they produced x% of the current production back then and were N times more polluting. Plus, it isn't clear how the atmosphere absorbs/reacts to the pollutants. (is there a lag? why the spike in 1970s? did the levels really fall off so quickly? I thought once steel left the US production it got much "dirtier" to produce?) Lots of questions, I'm mostly asking to show me a bit of the range that is clearly outside the definition of "preindustrial"
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    Presumably China adopted some of the pollution control technologies developed in the 1970s as it industrialized. edit: It's pretty likely that steel production since 2010 is greater than all steel production prior to 1900. I would think that the energy used to make steel since 2010 is at least comparable to the energy used for all metal production prior to 1900. Industrialization certainly got started prior to 1900. I would say it took a while to really hit it's stride.
  - kogus 10y ago
    For the record, steel production has not left the US (although many of the jobs have due to automation). The US is #4 in the world for steel production[1], although China produces about 17x more. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_pro...
    - dpark 10y ago

rjsw 10y ago

I think it needs to start a lot earlier. I would expect that a lot of the acidity would have come from the UK, we were to blame for a lot of the acid rain that affected the Black Forest.

btilly 10y ago
A combination of short smokestacks and global weather patterns mean that while England created a lot of local problems for itself, it wouldn't show up well in the Greenland ice sheet record that is being sampled here.

olkid 10y ago

Agreed. The direction we're trending is good, but isn't that entire range [4.99-5.75] considered "acidic"?

jplasmeier 10y ago
Rain is normally acidic due to dissolved Carbonic acid. Source: http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/190acidrain.html http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/190acidrain.html
- olkid 10y ago
  "Normal rainfall is slightly acidic..." ~ thanks for the info

maxerickson 10y ago

Half the steel ever made has been produced in the last couple decades. 1913 production was ~60 million tons (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2892944/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2892944/posts ). 2015 production was ~1500 million tons.

al_biglan 10y ago
True, and we are getting cleaner production methods. The early production was incredibly inefficient and produced way more pollution than now. I can say _that_ with some certainty, but I can't say that they produced x% of the current production back then and were N times more polluting. Plus, it isn't clear how the atmosphere absorbs/reacts to the pollutants. (is there a lag? why the spike in 1970s? did the levels really fall off so quickly? I thought once steel left the US production it got much "dirtier" to produce?) Lots of questions, I'm mostly asking to show me a bit of the range that is clearly outside the definition of "preindustrial"
- maxerickson 10y ago
  Presumably China adopted some of the pollution control technologies developed in the 1970s as it industrialized. edit: It's pretty likely that steel production since 2010 is greater than all steel production prior to 1900. I would think that the energy used to make steel since 2010 is at least comparable to the energy used for all metal production prior to 1900. Industrialization certainly got started prior to 1900. I would say it took a while to really hit it's stride.
- kogus 10y ago
  For the record, steel production has not left the US (although many of the jobs have due to automation). The US is #4 in the world for steel production[1], although China produces about 17x more. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_pro...
  - dpark 10y ago