Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[St. Phatty]

tell us where the magnetic field derives. from an electrical current.


"I'm not always a dick... "

you've demonstrated a propensity for being one. i drink cheap beer, what's your deal.

The Magma knows.

You can even calculate the direction of current flow in the magma, using the right hand rule.

Probably from west to east - a thousand miles down.

Regardless of what I remember from physics classes 20 or 40 years ago, a basic electro-statics text & a basic geophysics text have more info.


MIT Open University even has classes in those 2 subjects online.

for people who want MOAR infomation.

 

[trichrider]

The Magma knows.

You can even calculate the direction of current flow in the magma, using the right hand rule.

Probably from west to east - a thousand miles down.

Regardless of what I remember from physics classes 20 or 40 years ago, a basic electro-statics text & a basic geophysics text have more info.


MIT Open University even has classes in those 2 subjects online.

for people who want MOAR infomation.

yeah that^
energy in, heat out. heat being the result of the work being done by the conversion of energy.

well done.
i am of the opinion that high and low pressure terrestrial weather systems follow this very rule.

northern hemisphere high pressure is rotation of energy in, low pressure rotation is energy out, opposite condition in southern hemisphere.



Dispersive Alfvén wave control of O+ ion outflow and energy densities in the inner magnetosphere

A.J. Hull
C.C. Chaston
J.W. Bonnell
J.R. Wygant
C.A. Kletzing
G.D. Reeves
A. Gerrard



First published: 24 July 2019
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083808

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019GL083808


Abstract

The relationship between dispersive Alfvén waves (DAWs), magnetospheric activity and O+ ion outflow/energy density is examined using measurements from the Van Allen Probes. We show that correlated DAW activity and O+ outflow/energization is a characteristic feature of the inner magnetosphere during active conditions and during storms persists for several hours over large L‐shell and azimuthal ranges of the plasma sheet. Though enhanced during substorm and storm active periods, these correlated features are most intense during geomagnetic storms. Comparisons show a linear relationship between DAW electric (and magnetic) field energy density and outflowing O+ energy. Statistical measurements from a large number of storms also reveal a linear relationship between DAW energy density and gross enhancements in energetic O+ energy densities. These observations support the notion that DAWs play an important role in the energization of O+ ions into and within the inner magnetosphere.

Plain Language Summary

Geomagnetic storms are major disturbances in the Earth's magnetosphere, during which the particle content and pressure in the magnetosphere increase considerably. Much of the pressure increase is due to singly charged oxygen ions that come from the ionosphere. How this happens is not clear. Analyzing satellite observations we found evidence suggesting that a particular type of low frequency electromagnetic wave called a dispersive Alfvén wave may be playing a key role. These waves are found to be more prevalent and intense in the magnetosphere during storms. Oxygen ion energies are shown to increase with increasing intensities of these waves. The oxygen ion contribution to pressure also increases in association with intensified wave activity. These observations support the notion that the waves energize and heat oxygen ions into and within the magnetosphere over extended periods of time, which leads to significant magnetospheric pressure increases.


https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2019GL083808


you have sci-hub if you'd like to read the entire paper.
and one more:



Geoelectric field evaluation during the September, 2017 Geomagnetic Storm: MA.I.GIC. model

M. Piersanti
S. Di Matteo
B.A. Carter
J. Currie
G. D'Angelo



First published: 27 July 2019
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019SW002202

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1029/2019SW002202


Abstract

The space environment near Earth is constantly subjected to changes in the solar wind flow generated at the Sun. Examples of this variability are the occurrence of powerful solar disturbances, such as coronal mass ejections (CMEs). The impact of CMEs on the Earth's magnetosphere perturbs the geomagnetic field causing the occurrence of geomagnetic storms. Such extremely variable geomagnetic fields trigger geomagnetic effects measurable not only in the geospace but also in the ionosphere, upper atmosphere, and on the ground. For example, during extreme events, rapidly changing geomagnetic fields generate intense geomagnetically induced currents (GICs). In recent years, GIC impact on the power networks at middle and low latitudes has attracted attention due to the expansion of large‐scale power networks into these regions. This paper presents a new model, called MA.I.GIC. (Magnetosphere ‐ Ionosphere ‐ Ground Induced Current), to derive the geoelectric field used to determine the magnitude of GICs. In addition, we discuss the results of the MA.I.GIC. model applied to the September 2017 Geomagnetic Storm with particular focus on the two sudden impulses occurring on September 6 and 7, 2017, and the two main phases on September 7 and 8, 2017.


https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2019SW002202


anybody need to stop and pee?

 

[TychoMonolyth]

https://truthout.org/articles/the-cheapest-way-to-save-the-planet-grows-like-a-weed/

New research estimates that a worldwide planting programme could remove two-thirds of all the emissions that have been pumped into the atmosphere by human activities, a figure the scientists describe as “mind-blowing”.

 

[St. Phatty]

People talk about CO2 increasing the heat retention of the atmosphere.

WELL, the basic formulae of combustion

CxHy + O2 ==> CO2 + H2O + HEAT

for combustion of wood -

CxWhatever (Lignin etc., dry wood is 40% to 50% carbon by weight)


CxWhatever + O2 ==> CO2 + HEAT


And the Earth, and it's atmosphere is basically a semi-closed system.

All that heat from all that combustion does not get radiated out into space, it stays right here in our Habitat.


You would expect the average temperature to rise.

One caveman with a fire would affect neither global CO2 levels or temperatures.

But if we all together burn enough carbon material to literally raise global CO2 levels, there's enough burning going on to also generate some noticeable heat. That extra heat mixes in with normal extremely variable weather so of course it will still get cold.

It was cold enough at Squaw Valley this year that they had snow in July ! ... something like that.


Remember the Cannabis augmentation levels of 389 ppm CO2 suggested by Ed Rosenthal in his 1980's grow books ?

So now we're at 414 ppm-ish.

I wonder what he suggests now.

 

[moose eater]

Remember the Cannabis augmentation levels of 389 ppm CO2 suggested by Ed Rosenthal in his 1980's grow books ?

So now we're at 414 ppm-ish.

I wonder what he suggests now.

My off-cuff guess is that he'd recommend you not waste your money on CO2 generators, and, if growing indoors, simply open your windows; especially if in a legal state, and under the plant count limits.

I prefer the indoor loop I have, with my HRV intake vents dumping warmed incoming air near the intake to my shop, and my shop exhausting near the HRV exhaust vents.

Everything being Yin & Yang, my plants are likely a lot happier (for now, anyway) with our changing climate than most humans may be.

I'll go ask them..

 

[moose eater]

Ed might also recommend that you plant more plants to combat the current (slight) excesses in CO2 levels..

When plants eat too much, do they get obese?

And after reading the thread a while back about various pests dying at substantially increased levels of CO2, there's yet another benefit in the whole thing!! Of course, angry spider mites might be even -more- destructive. (YIKES!!)

 

[igrowone]

latest greenland melt spike

latest greenland melt spike

the latest from the far north
this is what 30+ billion tons of ice loss looks like in a plot
impressive comes to mind

 

[St. Phatty]

Ed might also recommend that you plant more plants to combat the current (slight) excesses in CO2 levels..

When plants eat too much, do they get obese?

The obese version of a plant might be what the BLM guy warned me about when I bought tree seedlings from them.

I was talking about giving the trees compost etc. He said that's not a good idea.

i.e. what happens when the plant gets big and I am not there to water it ? it will tend to die, and then it's another pile of flammable fuel.

 

[moose eater]

The obese version of a plant might be what the BLM guy warned me about when I bought tree seedlings from them.

I was talking about giving the trees compost etc. He said that's not a good idea.

i.e. what happens when the plant gets big and I am not there to water it ? it will tend to die, and then it's another pile of flammable fuel.

I certainly HOPE mine are flammable!! That's the whole point, isn't it??!!

(*Sorry for the distractions, guys).

 

[armedoldhippy]

scientists say that poison ivy is getting stronger as a result of extra CO2, and rice is losing a % of its nutrients ditto. shame it did not work the other way around.

 

[trichrider]

the latest from the far north
this is what 30+ billion tons of ice loss looks like in a plot
impressive comes to mind

is it that impressive?

Delingpole: Greenland Ice Melt Shock – The Terrifying Truth!

Mario Tama/Getty James Delingpole4 Aug 2019470 3:17
Greenland just lost 11 billion tons of ice melted in one day because of this shocking weather event known as ‘summer’.

CBS News‘s resident climate expert Ted Scambos [loving the poetry of that first syllable in his surname!] thinks this is worrying and unusual; so does the Washington Post, which declares it “one of its greatest melting events ever recorded”; so too does renowned Canadian alarmist Bill McKibben.

As Greenland’s heat wave peaks tomorrow, rate of melting is expected to be highest ever recorded. This is ungoodhttps://t.co/5JT3oS42kF
— Bill McKibben (@billmckibben) July 31, 2019
​

So too does presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar, Senator for Minnesota:

The climate crisis is happening NOW. I’ve been to Greenland & seen this ice sheet. We need action, not denial: More than 11 billion U.S. tons of ice lost to oceans by melt on Wednesday alone, creating July net mass ice loss of 217 billion U.S. tons… https://t.co/a8ocvjIDmE
— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) August 3, 2019
​

If you’re not scared yet, you really should be.
Do you not realise that if the Greenland ice sheet goes on melting at this extraordinary rate, then within 12,500 years HALF of it will be gone?
Yes, you read that right. In 12,500 years – that’s about twice as far ahead into the future as we are now from the world’s earliest civilisation, Sumer, in 4500 BC – the Greenland ice sheet could be half gone, with almost incalculable consequences for those of us who are still alive.
We have Willis Eschenbach to thank for this timely warning. He has been doing the math at Watts Up With That? and this is his finding:

Here’s one way of looking at that. We can ask, IF Greenland were to continue losing ice mass at a rate of 103 billion tonnes per year, how long would it take to melt say half of the ice sheet? Not all of it, mind you, but half of it. (Note that I am NOT saying that extending a current trend is a way to estimate the future evolution of the ice sheet—I’m merely using it as a way to compare large numbers.)
To answer our question if 103 billion tonnes lost per year is a big number, we have to compare the annual ice mass loss to the amount of ice in the Greenland ice sheet. The Greenland ice sheet contains about 2.6E+15 (2,600,000,000,000,000) tonnes of water in the form of snow and ice.
So IF the Greenland ice sheet were to lose 103 billion tonnes per year into the indefinite future, it would take about twelve thousand five hundred years to lose half of it …
And even if the loss were to jump to ten times the long-term average, it would still take twelve hundred years to melt half the ice on the Greenland ice sheet. Even my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandchildren won’t live long enough to see that.
​

Paul Homewood isn’t much impressed with the panic-mongering either.

The ice sheet surface mass balance is running well above that of 2012:

https://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/

And there is no mention of the fact that the ice sheet grew substantially last year, and also the year before:

The simple fact is that the Greenland ice sheet melts every summer, particularly when the sun shines. That’s what it does. And it grows back again in winter as the snow falls. Indeed, if it did not melt, it would carry on growing year after year.
​

 

[TychoMonolyth]

[iframe1]v5cCmPZmHPM[/iframe1]

 

[SuperMac]

as Chuck D. says, "Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it."

 

[White Beard]

is it that impressive?

Delingpole: Greenland Ice Melt Shock – The Terrifying Truth!

View ImageMario Tama/Getty James Delingpole4 Aug 2019470 3:17
Greenland just lost 11 billion tons of ice melted in one day because of this shocking weather event known as ‘summer’.

CBS News‘s resident climate expert Ted Scambos [loving the poetry of that first syllable in his surname!] thinks this is worrying and unusual; so does the Washington Post, which declares it “one of its greatest melting events ever recorded”; so too does renowned Canadian alarmist Bill McKibben.

As Greenland’s heat wave peaks tomorrow, rate of melting is expected to be highest ever recorded. This is ungoodhttps://t.co/5JT3oS42kF
— Bill McKibben (@billmckibben) July 31, 2019
​

So too does presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar, Senator for Minnesota:

The climate crisis is happening NOW. I’ve been to Greenland & seen this ice sheet. We need action, not denial: More than 11 billion U.S. tons of ice lost to oceans by melt on Wednesday alone, creating July net mass ice loss of 217 billion U.S. tons… https://t.co/a8ocvjIDmE
— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) August 3, 2019
​

If you’re not scared yet, you really should be.
Do you not realise that if the Greenland ice sheet goes on melting at this extraordinary rate, then within 12,500 years HALF of it will be gone?
Yes, you read that right. In 12,500 years – that’s about twice as far ahead into the future as we are now from the world’s earliest civilisation, Sumer, in 4500 BC – the Greenland ice sheet could be half gone, with almost incalculable consequences for those of us who are still alive.
We have Willis Eschenbach to thank for this timely warning. He has been doing the math at Watts Up With That? and this is his finding:

Here’s one way of looking at that. We can ask, IF Greenland were to continue losing ice mass at a rate of 103 billion tonnes per year, how long would it take to melt say half of the ice sheet? Not all of it, mind you, but half of it. (Note that I am NOT saying that extending a current trend is a way to estimate the future evolution of the ice sheet—I’m merely using it as a way to compare large numbers.)
To answer our question if 103 billion tonnes lost per year is a big number, we have to compare the annual ice mass loss to the amount of ice in the Greenland ice sheet. The Greenland ice sheet contains about 2.6E+15 (2,600,000,000,000,000) tonnes of water in the form of snow and ice.
So IF the Greenland ice sheet were to lose 103 billion tonnes per year into the indefinite future, it would take about twelve thousand five hundred years to lose half of it …
And even if the loss were to jump to ten times the long-term average, it would still take twelve hundred years to melt half the ice on the Greenland ice sheet. Even my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandchildren won’t live long enough to see that.
​

Paul Homewood isn’t much impressed with the panic-mongering either.

The ice sheet surface mass balance is running well above that of 2012:
[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/]View Image[/URL]
https://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/

And there is no mention of the fact that the ice sheet grew substantially last year, and also the year before:
[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/]View Image[/URL]
The simple fact is that the Greenland ice sheet melts every summer, particularly when the sun shines. That’s what it does. And it grows back again in winter as the snow falls. Indeed, if it did not melt, it would carry on growing year after year.
​

What a perfectly scurrilous hit-piece...you have hit your mark!

 

[TychoMonolyth]

 

[Phaeton]

Greenland ice melt over the years

Greenland ice melt over the years

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/19/9239

A lot depends on what source the study uses for conclusions.

Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
Published before Trump, a definite plus.

Too many pages to reduce other than to say it disagrees with the other guys links, and has a good pedigree to do it with.

Posting links this complex is awfully silly, not a habit on my part. I just get disgusted with deception at times.

 

[dddaver]

As an educated, trained, experienced weather forecaster I can say this with no wild-ass speculation what-so-ever, I think I should buy a row boat

 

[St. Phatty]

scientists say that poison ivy is getting stronger as a result of extra CO2, and rice is losing a % of its nutrients ditto. shame it did not work the other way around.

Sort of glad we don't smoke Poison Ivy.

Since Cannabis increases output with increased CO2, I would expect most other plants to respond in similar ways.

Wonder if that would work on Trump ? OH GOD, that was a Speaker's Corner type comment. Please don't ban me.

 

[trichrider]

snowing in the arctic and Greenland right now.
and has been for a few days, cooler temperatures have made their way down the west coast.
no west coast temperature above 70F right now.


no temperature above 60F in Greenland and all are tempered by ocean vicinity. most of Greenland ice mass indicates below freezing temperature right now. the only melting taking place is at the coastal perimeter.


https://www.windy.com/-Temperature-temp?temp,67.668,-44.363,6,m:fyiaePL


don't get your panties wet.

 

[St. Phatty]

snowing in the arctic and Greenland right now.
and has been for a few days, cooler temperatures have made their way down the west coast.
no west coast temperature above 70F right now.

That sounds great.

I know people are leaving California & Oregon in some cases because they are tired of the smoke.

But where can they go ?

Actually, I like Iceland. They're trying to re-develop their forests.

Sounds like a fun job, planting millions, maybe billions, of trees.

OH AND THERE'S A CANNABIS PLANT