Comments on: Cleaner, healthier air increases global warming https://habitablezone.com/2023/12/25/cleaner-healthier-air-increases-global-warming/ Tue, 07 Apr 2026 04:45:30 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2023/12/25/cleaner-healthier-air-increases-global-warming/#comment-52816 ER Tue, 26 Dec 2023 15:34:59 +0000 https://www.habitablezone.com/?p=102382#comment-52816 The Southern Hemisphere is mostly water, and the Antarctic icecap is miles thick. In the event of a runaway greenhouse phenomenon, these factors would tend to moderate weather and climate in the Southern Ocean just when conditions were becoming intolerable in the Northern land masses. Suddenly, Down Under would be attracting a great deal of unwanted immigration from the North. It is interesting to speculate on what effect this would have on global politics. The Southern Hemisphere is mostly water, and the Antarctic icecap is miles thick. In the event of a runaway greenhouse phenomenon, these factors would tend to moderate weather and climate in the Southern Ocean just when conditions were becoming intolerable in the Northern land masses.

Suddenly, Down Under would be attracting a great deal of unwanted immigration from the North. It is interesting to speculate on what effect this would have on global politics.

]]> By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2023/12/25/cleaner-healthier-air-increases-global-warming/#comment-52815 ER Tue, 26 Dec 2023 15:25:36 +0000 https://www.habitablezone.com/?p=102382#comment-52815 for example, volcanic or forest fire ash in suspension tends to reflect sunlight, having a cooling effect. But if the particles land on snow, they inhibit its ability to reflect sunlight. Also, the fires and volcanism that generate ash also release water and CO2, both of which are greenhouse gases. There is also some debate as to how particulate release will affect cloud cover and precipitation, or other atmospheric chemistry, which may effect AGW in unexpected ways. There are a variety of chemical agents which could be deliberately released into the atmosphere to directly (by reflection) or indirectly (by encouraging cloud formation) affect the earth's albedo, but they have never been tested properly. They might turn out to have precisely the opposite of the intended effect. Even if some of these interventions work in the short term, its hard to predict what new problems they might introduce in the long run. Perhaps it is best not to rely on such measures, we really don't know if they will hurt or help. Of course, if the situation becomes desperate, it may be necessary to just take a chance. A general nuclear war might be useful; the massive fires lit by a thermonuclear exchange might precipitate a nuclear winter, which would solve the AGW problem, but present us with a host of new ones. Back when Carl Sagan was warning us about that I remember our Neocon friends were terrified that fears of nuclear winter were threatening our military posture, but I suspect that as AGW fears becomes more widespread, they might suddenly change their minds about that. What I consider the "worst case scenario" would be a breakdown in heat transport by ocean currents caused by AGW that might cause localized cooling while global warming increased over the planet as a whole. For example, a disruption of the Gulf Stream could plunge Europe into a little ice age while Asia, the New World and Africa would be overheating catastrophically. A similar effect could occur on the north Pacific coast of North America. It will be hard to come up with useful strategies to deal with climate change if some regions tend to benefit from it. for example, volcanic or forest fire ash in suspension tends to reflect sunlight, having a cooling effect. But if the particles land on snow, they inhibit its ability to reflect sunlight. Also, the fires and volcanism that generate ash also release water and CO2, both of which are greenhouse gases. There is also some debate as to how particulate release will affect cloud cover and precipitation, or other atmospheric chemistry, which may effect AGW in unexpected ways. There are a variety of chemical agents which could be deliberately released into the atmosphere to directly (by reflection) or indirectly (by encouraging cloud formation) affect the earth’s albedo, but they have never been tested properly. They might turn out to have precisely the opposite of the intended effect. Even if some of these interventions work in the short term, its hard to predict what new problems they might introduce in the long run. Perhaps it is best not to rely on such measures, we really don’t know if they will hurt or help.

Of course, if the situation becomes desperate, it may be necessary to just take a chance. A general nuclear war might be useful; the massive fires lit by a thermonuclear exchange might precipitate a nuclear winter, which would solve the AGW problem, but present us with a host of new ones. Back when Carl Sagan was warning us about that I remember our Neocon friends were terrified that fears of nuclear winter were threatening our military posture,
but I suspect that as AGW fears becomes more widespread, they might suddenly
change their minds about that.

What I consider the “worst case scenario” would be a breakdown in heat transport by ocean currents caused by AGW that might cause localized cooling while global warming increased over the planet as a whole. For example, a disruption of the Gulf Stream could plunge Europe into a little ice age while Asia, the New World and Africa would be overheating catastrophically. A similar effect could occur on the north Pacific coast of North America. It will be hard to come up with useful strategies to deal with climate change if some regions tend to benefit from it.

]]>