Black soot, not CO2, melting Himalayan glaciers

From Slashdot:

The Himalayas, home to some 10,000 glaciers, are the main source of
replenishment to lakes, streams, and some of the continent's mightiest
rivers, on which millions of people depend for their water supplies.

Since the 1960s, the acreage covered by Himalayan glaciers has
declined by more than 20 percent with a rate of warming twice the global
average over the past 30 years. Now Live Science reports that tiny
particles of pollution known as 'black carbon' -- and not heat-trapping
greenhouse gases -- may be causing much of the rapid melting of glaciers
in the Himalayas.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/091214-black-carbon-himalaya-glacier.html

'Tibet's glaciers are retreating at an alarming rate,' says James
Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New
York City. 'Black soot is probably responsible for as much as half of
the glacial melt, and greenhouse gases are responsible for the rest.'

The circulation of the atmosphere in the region causes much of the
soot-laden air to 'pile up' against the Himalayas. The soot mixes with
other dust from nearby deserts, creating a massive brown cloud visible
from space

http://www.nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/himalayan_glaciers_h.jpg

that absorbs incoming solar radiation. As this layer heats up in the
Himalayan foothills, it rises and enhances the seasonal northward flow
of humid monsoon winds, forcing moisture and hot air up the slopes of
the mountain range.

SO WHAT....black soot are from coal burning etc. anyway.

"Thad Floryan" wrote in message
...
From Slashdot:

The Himalayas, home to some 10,000 glaciers, are the main source of
replenishment to lakes, streams, and some of the continent's mightiest
rivers, on which millions of people depend for their water supplies.

Since the 1960s, the acreage covered by Himalayan glaciers has
declined by more than 20 percent with a rate of warming twice the global
average over the past 30 years. Now Live Science reports that tiny
particles of pollution known as 'black carbon' -- and not heat-trapping
greenhouse gases -- may be causing much of the rapid melting of glaciers
in the Himalayas.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/091214-black-carbon-himalaya-glacier.html

'Tibet's glaciers are retreating at an alarming rate,' says James
Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New
York City. 'Black soot is probably responsible for as much as half of
the glacial melt, and greenhouse gases are responsible for the rest.'

The circulation of the atmosphere in the region causes much of the
soot-laden air to 'pile up' against the Himalayas. The soot mixes with
other dust from nearby deserts, creating a massive brown cloud visible
from space

http://www.nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/himalayan_glaciers_h.jpg

that absorbs incoming solar radiation. As this layer heats up in the
Himalayan foothills, it rises and enhances the seasonal northward flow
of humid monsoon winds, forcing moisture and hot air up the slopes of
the mountain range.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 05:53:06 -0800, Thad Floryan
wrote:

Since the 1960s, the acreage covered by Himalayan glaciers has
declined by more than 20 percent with a rate of warming twice the global
average over the past 30 years. Now Live Science reports that tiny
particles of pollution known as 'black carbon' -- and not heat-trapping
greenhouse gases -- may be causing much of the rapid melting of glaciers
in the Himalayas.

Which could be good news, since soot particles have a short lifetime in
the atmosphere, making control much easier. Unfortunately, the same
behavior that causes CO2 driven warming is responsible for the soot, so
in all likelihood any fixes will be too little, too late.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

mta wrote:
SO WHAT....black soot are from coal burning etc. anyway.


It's Chinese soot, so no problem there. Not like
they are going to stop anytime soon...........

--
AM

http://sctuser.home.comcast.net

http://www.novac.com

On Dec 21, 9:30 am, "mta" wrote:
SO WHAT....black soot are from coal burning etc. anyway.

If the soot is what is causing the Himalayan glaciers to recede, then
the CO2 (from any source) must be much less harmful than has been
claimed.


"Thad Floryan" wrote in message

...

From Slashdot:

The Himalayas, home to some 10,000 glaciers, are the main source of
replenishment to lakes, streams, and some of the continent's mightiest
rivers, on which millions of people depend for their water supplies.

Since the 1960s, the acreage covered by Himalayan glaciers has
declined by more than 20 percent with a rate of warming twice the global
average over the past 30 years. Now Live Science reports that tiny
particles of pollution known as 'black carbon' -- and not heat-trapping
greenhouse gases -- may be causing much of the rapid melting of glaciers
in the Himalayas.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/091214-black-carbon-himalaya-g...

'Tibet's glaciers are retreating at an alarming rate,' says James
Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New
York City. 'Black soot is probably responsible for as much as half of
the glacial melt, and greenhouse gases are responsible for the rest.'

The circulation of the atmosphere in the region causes much of the
soot-laden air to 'pile up' against the Himalayas. The soot mixes with
other dust from nearby deserts, creating a massive brown cloud visible
from space

http://www.nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/himalayan_glaciers_h.jpg

that absorbs incoming solar radiation. As this layer heats up in the
Himalayan foothills, it rises and enhances the seasonal northward flow
of humid monsoon winds, forcing moisture and hot air up the slopes of
the mountain range.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:14:16 -0800 (PST), wrote:

If the soot is what is causing the Himalayan glaciers to recede, then
the CO2 (from any source) must be much less harmful than has been
claimed.

Non sequitur.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Dec 21, 8:11*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:14:16 -0800 (PST), wrote:
If the soot is what is causing the Himalayan glaciers to recede, then
the CO2 (from any source) must be much less harmful than has been
claimed.

Non sequitur.

No. Desperation. :-)

On Dec 21, 3:21 pm, "Chris.B" wrote:
On Dec 21, 8:11 pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:14:16 -0800 (PST), wrote:
If the soot is what is causing the Himalayan glaciers to recede, then
the CO2 (from any source) must be much less harmful than has been
claimed.

Non sequitur.

No. Desperation. :-)

No, at all. Just common sense.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:26:00 -0800 (PST), wrote:

No, at all. Just common sense.

An expression that you have no business using.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Dec 22, 12:24 am, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:26:00 -0800 (PST), wrote:
No, at all. Just common sense.

An expression that you have no business using.

Common sense, or any sense at all, seems to have nothing to do with
you.