Volcanic Ash is now heat seeking

[Ero-plano]

According to Olivia Wirth on the radio this morning, Propeller Aircraft are less susceptible to Volcanic Ash encounters than Jet engines because Jet engines are hotter and the Volcanic Ash is attracted to the heat in the engine.
Wow has she considered teaching Aeronautics at University, she is so smart.

[ThePaperBoy]

Just read through my old science text books and it turns out it's a similar physics theory as to why her head repels hair brushes.




My money is on this thread being locked by dinner time.

[The Green Goblin]

ROFL!

Show 'em how good you are girl!

P.S She looked quite professional on the morning show this morning. Perhaps she reads pprune :p

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

Yeah, she's going to take fashion advice from a pack of petty nitpickers like you lot! Uh huh... :ok:....:hmm:

[teresa green]

I thought I might watch parliament this afternoon for some light entertainment, and to see what sort of carbon tax this volcano will have to pay, but alas the entertainment was too light and the volcano seems to have escaped any penalty. As for Olivia, I keep asking exactly whose niece is she?:hmm:

[Thats what she said]

You're onto something here TG

I read that each half-decent volcano eruptions adds about the same carbon into the air as humans have for the last 100 years.

[tourismman]

Absolutely and i wondered when someone would mention the Volcano eruptions.
Blowing all that hot air into the atmosphere .No it wasnt Canberra this time or was it ???:hmm:

[stewser89]

thats what she said.

Where did you pull that figure from?

From Volcanic Gases and Climate Change Overview (http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php)
Do the Earth’s volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? Research findings indicate that the answer to this frequently asked question is a clear and unequivocal, “No.” Human activities, responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions in 2010 (Friedlingstein et al., 2010), release greater than 130 times more CO2 annually than all the world’s degassing subaerial and submarine volcanoes (Gerlach, 2011).

[Aim Point]

TG, I don't know whose niece she is, but she is married to an Irishman, might be a connection there somehow?? ;)

[Thats what she said]

Hi Stew

It was in a piece I read on Krakatoa many years back. It indicated that the eruption of Krakatoa spewed more CO2 into the air than the entire emissions of man since we started lighting fires as cavemen. Can't talk to its accuracy, but it went on to talk about the "average eruption" etc.

Looks like the scientists can't agree on anything.

UPDATE- Just found it. An online posting from a professor - Looks like I got the volcano wrong, but the sentiments are the same.

Professor Ian Pilmer – Professor of Mining Geology, University of Adelaide and noted author:

I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in its entire 40 MILLION YEARS on earth. Yes folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it.

[startingout]

So a turbo-prop isn't jet based at all and the fact that I cruise at +-738C means the engine is cold because of my props?:ugh:

[Angle of Attack]

The problem with facts.. sigh, from the US Geological Survey talking about the emissions of Volcanic eruptions averaged over the last 2000 years QUOTE

This seems like a huge amount of CO2, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/)) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO2 tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO2 is large, the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value.

How many times do I need to :ugh: because of vested interest people scared of losing jobs over their high carbon generating jobs.

[Thats what she said]

Think I might just join you AA

:ugh:

[fender]

:ugh: I always wondered when we will start paying for the air we breathe.

[HotDog]

I heard Julia is going to charge Chile carbon tax for the pollution caused by the eruption. Qantas and Jetstar are the star witnesses.

[gobbledock]

Wirthless looks like she has just been spat out of an errupting volcano.

[moreflaps]

"This seems like a huge amount of CO2, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO2 tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO2 is large, the global fossil fuel CO2 emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO2 not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value."

Can this be true? There are 6.7 billion people on earth. Therefore the average fossil fuel consumption must be 4 tons per person per year. This would be equivalent to ~4700 L of diesel... Damn, all those underdeveloped countries must be driving miles... or could this be another example of creative accounting on the part of the green loonies ('cos they actually have NO idea how much comes from volcanoes 'cos most have never been measured and we don't even know how many there are)?

Cheers

[43Inches]

I think the correct numbers are around 35 billion tonnes produced by human activities in total of which fossil fuel usage accounts for around 8 billion tonnes.

Looks like the scientists can't agree on anything.

Pilmer refers to greenhouse gas emmisions (includes CFC etc) whilst the USGS refers to CO2 emmisions only.

[RATpin]

moreflaps,agree.As my father was fond of saying,"It's a spratt to catch a mackerel"

[Old Fella]

Has anyone bothered to consider that even if Australia were to close down every single Co2 emitting piece of equipment we would have, at absolute best, less than 2% of Global emission reduction. How in hell's name will putting a tax on Co2, aimed at reducing Australia's 2000 emission level by 5%, have any measurable impact on TOTAL GLOBAL EMISSIONS? This tax is just another Millennium Bug type sham. If our incompetent government were in any way really wanting to reduce global emissions they would stop exporting coal to some of the worlds leading polluters. We keep hearing that we are, per capita, the highest polluters in the world. So what, we still contribute less than 2% of TOTAL GLOBAL EMISSIONS. Carbon Tax equals a hit to the wallet, that is all.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[CelticRambler]

This would be equivalent to ~4700 L of diesel... Damn, all those underdeveloped countries must be driving miles...

Sounds about right, but it's not all in diesel and it's not the underdeveloped countries. You're forgetting to include all of the fuel needed to generate electricity for Modern Man's traffic lights and road signage, streetlighting, runway lighting, running fridges, freezers, cookers, hot water immersion heaters, etc, floodlighting historic monuments, bedazzling shoppers, gaudy illuminated Christmas decorations ...... You don't get quite so much of that in peri-saharan Africa or rainforested Asia.

[le Pingouin]

moreflaps, RATpin where do you think all the electricity you're happily consuming at your computer comes from? What's the 250 million tonnes of black stuff we export every year?:ugh:

[Compylot]

Carbon Tax equals a hit to the wallet, that is all

Thats fine "old fella", guess it won't be so much of a problem for ya soon eh?

Just leave it for your kids and their grandchildren to sort out :ugh:

[RATpin]

Mods,probably time to shut the thread IMHO,it's seems to now be turning into a believers vs non-believers thread.Apologies for my part in this.

[teresa green]

Comply, I notice you are only twenty. lesson nbr 1 , don't believe everything they tell you.

[stewser89]

I have done a bit of quick goggling and would treat anything that Ian Plimer says about climate change.
From the Guardian website he states On page 413 of the book he repeats the old canard that "Volcanoes produce more CO2 than the world's cars and industries combined

Therefore it is about CO2 and not greenhouse gases. When questioned about the discrepancy.

Plimer's response was that the USGS is only talking about terrestrial volcanoes and has not incorporated CO2 produced by undersea eruptions at mid-ocean ridges. "85% of the world's volcanoes we neither see nor measure," he said. "They leak out huge amounts of carbon dioxide... That does not come into the USGS figures nor does it come into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's figures.

Err yes it does
Let me bring but up the quote from the other page

Do the Earth’s volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? Research findings indicate that the answer to this frequently asked question is a clear and unequivocal, “No.” Human activities, responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions in 2010 (Friedlingstein et al., 2010), release an amount of CO2 that dwarfs the annual CO2 emissions of all the world’s degassing sub-aerial and submarine volcanoes (

From the USGS the bolding is mine

Im outta here