5 ms·

Reduced travel and industry will see this happen and saw this in China, globally over the year the effect will be interesting and whilst it will do wonders for

by Zenst 7y ago

Reduced travel and industry will see this happen and saw this in China, globally over the year the effect will be interesting and whilst it will do wonders for the climate. One aspect that I'm currently pondering is the winter 20/21. Reason being that it has been shown that less planes flying means temperature difference day/night, slightly warmer during day, but also colder at night. As we saw for the days post 9/11 in America. So whilst the effect upon climate from this virus is going to be notable, what will the impact upon the 20/21 winter, will it make it more inclined to be colder (normal for many parts). That is the aspect that intrigues me.

bamboozled 7y ago
This is 100% anecdotal but I saw it snow the other day in Tokyo in March and it’s been very cold. It’s been a while since it’s snowed in March I’m sure. I’ve also noticed the Japanese alps we’re having a super bad winter until a few weeks back when things kicked into gear and the snow started falling again. I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ?
- Zenst 7y ago
  Yes you will get events outside the norm, it is not the single events but the whole period average you need to look at, like looking at a single day or week of weather note and remembering the whole period around that single event. Yet the whole winter period would be warmer. Then you can have one part of a large country have it colder than normal and yet the other parts has it warmer and the average for that whole country being warmer, yet for those in the colder part they will disagree. Yes you will get events outside the norm, it is not the single events but the whole period average you need to look at, like looking at a single day or week of weather note and remembering the whole period around that single event. Yet the whole winter period would be warmer. Then you can have one part of a large country have it colder than normal and yet the other parts has it warmer and the average for that whole country being warmer, yet for those in the colder part they will disagree. EDIT ADD: >I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ? I don't think this is going be as short term and will certainly playout throughout the year at least. LongTerm: The World will be a different place a year from now, hard to speculate, but this is WW3 The World vs a Virus
  - squiggleblaz 7y ago
    > this is WW3 The World vs a Virus if only we were so unified though. It would be a great ww3 if we were all fighting this together, but it seems like when it was in China the west was like "this is a chinese problem" and now it's in the west and almost dead in china it's more like "this is a democratic problem" (since allegedly democracies were too brittle to be able to respond until it was too late - democracies dither while autocracy hide). it could have been fought together but instead it's only about us vs them.
  - selimthegrim 7y ago
    You double pasted
    - Zenst 7y ago
      DOh - thanks, alas missed edit window, my bad :()
- baq 7y ago
  what you're seeing is weather. what's important is climate. you'll see more strange weather as a consequence of the changing climate.
- leftyted 7y ago
  > I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ? no
  - bamboozled 7y ago
    So like, really reducing air pollution honestly has no effect on "weather"? Seems like it would go somewhat against common sense. Take a look at the meteorological effects the forrest fires had on Australia recently. I would say you're hyper smug answer might be right and might be wrong at the same time.
adrianN 7y ago
Afaik, aerosols have a cooling effect. Reduced pollution should lead to higher temperatures.
- Zenst 7y ago
  depends, some reflect, some don't, but all done high up and the layers above them warms, having a detrimental effect overall. So a mixed bag, certainly not a solution.
zemvpferreira 7y ago
Not to be a downer but the opposite could also be true. The less economic activity, the less particle emissions. While those particle emissions eventually contribute to global warming, they actually prevent a rise in temperatures in the short-term by blocking sunlight. Like you mentioned, the highs are higher and the lows are lower. We could actually see an acceleration of some of global warmings' effects on the climate as temperature peaks increase.
- brain5ide 7y ago
  I hope you understand that your declaration sounds bonkers to any rational person? I understand of course that there is a possibility as the system is chaotic. But narrative wise this creates an impossible situation, where everything, even the movement in the supposedly right direction is bad? I would consider "What else do you want from me? ---- off" a normal and valid reaction to this.
  - leftyted 7y ago
    Regardless of how it sounds to "any rational person," it's quite possibly true: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2612/can-poor-air-quality-mask-global-warmings-effects/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2612/can-poor-air-quality-mask... In the short term, decreasing economic activity could raise temperatures. Your objection only makes sense in a bizarre universe where there are only all-good and all-bad choices. In our universe, good choices have bad effects and bad choices have good effects.
  - joshspankit 7y ago
    This theory speaks more to me of “because our effect on the environment is so excessive and unknown, we have no idea how the environment actually is naturally (in 2020)”
rubyfan 7y ago
It seems like this is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of all the pollution that’s happened over the last 150 years. Is it reasonable to expect a lasting effect here?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  On the one hand it's just a drop in the bucket; on the other hand, emissions have been growing exponentially, so it's quite a big drop.
- Zenst 7y ago
  Once the dust settles, the data and more so, political and populus consensus will be more pro good air quality than currently and the momentum will see much change. That's my prediction of how this will traction over the years ahead. Certainly see airplane tickets become more expensive as the days of cheap subsidized (low fuel tax's/duty) flights are in the end of days. Airlines running on razor thin margins will not survive this and personally, that's a good thing given the that IMHO the overall impact is a false-economy upon the environment. Though that will only see more investment into electric planes, which will have a fair chance with a fair market for such competition. Interesting times ahead, kinda focusing on the positives over the loss of life that will drive such change.
easytiger 7y ago
Airline co2 emissions represent an irrelevant amount compared to the great benefits it provides
- bobbychairs 7y ago
  Could you back this up with statistics?
  - easytiger 7y ago
    https://theicct.org/publications/co2-emissions-commercial-aviation-2018 https://theicct.org/publications/co2-emissions-commercial-av...
- baq 7y ago
  stratospheric water vapor, on the other hand...
- lm28469 7y ago
  CO2 isn't everything, what about disrupted air streams or high altitude pollution (NO2, NOx, PM2.5, &c.) ? Surely burning 1L of jet fuel at sea level is not the same as at 15k feet (ozone layer ?) It's very easy to focus on CO2, it's probably the least harmful thing a jet engine will exhaust.
  - easytiger 7y ago
    > It's very easy to focus on CO2, it's probably the least harmful thing a jet engine will exhaust. Not when the focus is on global warming

by Zenst 7y ago

bamboozled 7y ago

This is 100% anecdotal but I saw it snow the other day in Tokyo in March and it’s been very cold. It’s been a while since it’s snowed in March I’m sure. I’ve also noticed the Japanese alps we’re having a super bad winter until a few weeks back when things kicked into gear and the snow started falling again. I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ?

Zenst 7y ago
Yes you will get events outside the norm, it is not the single events but the whole period average you need to look at, like looking at a single day or week of weather note and remembering the whole period around that single event. Yet the whole winter period would be warmer. Then you can have one part of a large country have it colder than normal and yet the other parts has it warmer and the average for that whole country being warmer, yet for those in the colder part they will disagree. Yes you will get events outside the norm, it is not the single events but the whole period average you need to look at, like looking at a single day or week of weather note and remembering the whole period around that single event. Yet the whole winter period would be warmer. Then you can have one part of a large country have it colder than normal and yet the other parts has it warmer and the average for that whole country being warmer, yet for those in the colder part they will disagree. EDIT ADD: >I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ? I don't think this is going be as short term and will certainly playout throughout the year at least. LongTerm: The World will be a different place a year from now, hard to speculate, but this is WW3 The World vs a Virus
- squiggleblaz 7y ago
  > this is WW3 The World vs a Virus if only we were so unified though. It would be a great ww3 if we were all fighting this together, but it seems like when it was in China the west was like "this is a chinese problem" and now it's in the west and almost dead in china it's more like "this is a democratic problem" (since allegedly democracies were too brittle to be able to respond until it was too late - democracies dither while autocracy hide). it could have been fought together but instead it's only about us vs them.
- selimthegrim 7y ago
  You double pasted
  - Zenst 7y ago
    DOh - thanks, alas missed edit window, my bad :()
baq 7y ago
what you're seeing is weather. what's important is climate. you'll see more strange weather as a consequence of the changing climate.
leftyted 7y ago
> I have absolutely no idea but Is it possible to have a short term decrease in emissions change the weather like this ? no
- bamboozled 7y ago
  So like, really reducing air pollution honestly has no effect on "weather"? Seems like it would go somewhat against common sense. Take a look at the meteorological effects the forrest fires had on Australia recently. I would say you're hyper smug answer might be right and might be wrong at the same time.

adrianN 7y ago

Afaik, aerosols have a cooling effect. Reduced pollution should lead to higher temperatures.

Zenst 7y ago
depends, some reflect, some don't, but all done high up and the layers above them warms, having a detrimental effect overall. So a mixed bag, certainly not a solution.

zemvpferreira 7y ago

Not to be a downer but the opposite could also be true. The less economic activity, the less particle emissions. While those particle emissions eventually contribute to global warming, they actually prevent a rise in temperatures in the short-term by blocking sunlight. Like you mentioned, the highs are higher and the lows are lower. We could actually see an acceleration of some of global warmings' effects on the climate as temperature peaks increase.

brain5ide 7y ago
I hope you understand that your declaration sounds bonkers to any rational person? I understand of course that there is a possibility as the system is chaotic. But narrative wise this creates an impossible situation, where everything, even the movement in the supposedly right direction is bad? I would consider "What else do you want from me? ---- off" a normal and valid reaction to this.
- leftyted 7y ago
  Regardless of how it sounds to "any rational person," it's quite possibly true: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2612/can-poor-air-quality-mask-global-warmings-effects/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2612/can-poor-air-quality-mask... In the short term, decreasing economic activity could raise temperatures. Your objection only makes sense in a bizarre universe where there are only all-good and all-bad choices. In our universe, good choices have bad effects and bad choices have good effects.
- joshspankit 7y ago
  This theory speaks more to me of “because our effect on the environment is so excessive and unknown, we have no idea how the environment actually is naturally (in 2020)”

rubyfan 7y ago

It seems like this is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of all the pollution that’s happened over the last 150 years. Is it reasonable to expect a lasting effect here?

TeMPOraL 7y ago
On the one hand it's just a drop in the bucket; on the other hand, emissions have been growing exponentially, so it's quite a big drop.
Zenst 7y ago
Once the dust settles, the data and more so, political and populus consensus will be more pro good air quality than currently and the momentum will see much change. That's my prediction of how this will traction over the years ahead. Certainly see airplane tickets become more expensive as the days of cheap subsidized (low fuel tax's/duty) flights are in the end of days. Airlines running on razor thin margins will not survive this and personally, that's a good thing given the that IMHO the overall impact is a false-economy upon the environment. Though that will only see more investment into electric planes, which will have a fair chance with a fair market for such competition. Interesting times ahead, kinda focusing on the positives over the loss of life that will drive such change.

easytiger 7y ago

Airline co2 emissions represent an irrelevant amount compared to the great benefits it provides

bobbychairs 7y ago
Could you back this up with statistics?
- easytiger 7y ago
  https://theicct.org/publications/co2-emissions-commercial-aviation-2018 https://theicct.org/publications/co2-emissions-commercial-av...
baq 7y ago
stratospheric water vapor, on the other hand...
lm28469 7y ago
CO2 isn't everything, what about disrupted air streams or high altitude pollution (NO2, NOx, PM2.5, &c.) ? Surely burning 1L of jet fuel at sea level is not the same as at 15k feet (ozone layer ?) It's very easy to focus on CO2, it's probably the least harmful thing a jet engine will exhaust.
- easytiger 7y ago
  > It's very easy to focus on CO2, it's probably the least harmful thing a jet engine will exhaust. Not when the focus is on global warming