Remember me
▼ Content

Change of earth surface and thoughts about its contribution for climate change and weather


Change of earth surface and thoughts about its contribution for climate change and weather19-07-2018 20:16
DeathRabit
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
My thoughts +calculation on data that I found on internet, my calculation can be wrong by base idea is still valid.

Contribution for climate change

Cutting forest to have area to grown crops, and urban is important factor of climate change, and more extreme weather.

Forest 18% Light deflected 28.2% (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) =46,8% rest 53,2% is heat.

Crop Plants 63.2% is heat.

Agricultural land (% of land area) in 1990 reach 39,5% lets assume only 35% is converted from forest

We have 10% more heat converted from sun light per area, now 35% of Land

3.5–7.0kW * daily sun energy per square meter let use 5kw
52 129 000 000 000m2 x 5kW x10% = 26 064,5 TW more heat per each day How much is it a lot lets compare to how much energy we generated in 2015 = 168 519 TW per day 473 TW our change to forest generate 55,1 more energy heat that our entire technical civilization produce.

Contribution for extreme weather

Forest decrease daily temperature variation, compare to plain area less variation more stable weather.

For rainforest temperature is almost constant for day / night cycle and is 26C, and we replace it wit crops where temperature variation is significant.
Higher temperate variation case strong winds and contribute toward stronger Hurricanes.

Urban area is 5% of land area lets look how simply paint colour can contribute.



Full version on reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/climatechange/comments/907d97/change_of_earth_surface_and_its_contribution_for/
19-07-2018 22:32
still learning
★★☆☆☆
(206)
DeathRabit wrote:
..... (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) =46,8%.....

.....3.5–7.0kW * daily sun energy per square meter let use 5kw....



Couple of things to start:

That 46.8% seems way too high. If you are trying to come up with photosynthetic efficiency of plants, it is way too high. That 46.8 is looks like the right number for the part of sunlight that is considered photosynthetically inactive, is not of the right wavelength to be utilized by the plant. there are different ways of calculating photosynthetic efficiency, depends a lot on exactly what is meant by the term, but sunlight to stored energy is on the maybe 2% maximum. Try the wikipedia entry for "photosynthetic efficiency."

Energy is not measured in kilowatts. Kilowatt-hours sure, but not kilowatts. Do you pay an electricity bill? You pay for the electrical energy delivered and it is measured in kilowatt-hours.

Hurricanes? They get started and grow over tropical oceans. Landfall eventually dissipates them. Hard to imagine land use changes having much effect.
19-07-2018 23:34
DeathRabit
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
still learning wrote:
DeathRabit wrote:
..... (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) =46,8%.....

.....3.5–7.0kW * daily sun energy per square meter let use 5kw....



Couple of things to start:

That 46.8% seems way too high. If you are trying to come up with photosynthetic efficiency of plants, it is way too high. That 46.8 is looks like the right number for the part of sunlight that is considered photosynthetically inactive, is not of the right wavelength to be utilized by the plant. there are different ways of calculating photosynthetic efficiency, depends a lot on exactly what is meant by the term, but sunlight to stored energy is on the maybe 2% maximum. Try the wikipedia entry for "photosynthetic efficiency."

Energy is not measured in kilowatts. Kilowatt-hours sure, but not kilowatts. Do you pay an electricity bill? You pay for the electrical energy delivered and it is measured in kilowatt-hours.

Hurricanes? They get started and grow over tropical oceans. Landfall eventually dissipates them. Hard to imagine land use changes having much effect.


I checked many sites and 28.2% solar energy absorber by chlorophyll is in ideal environment. Plants use most energy to sustain itself not to make biomass.

18% Light deflected + 28.2% (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) = 46,8%

and All calculation data is in KWh I forgot about h.

About land contribution if before change you have stable temperature 26C and later variation from 10C to 40C this will generate wind when previously we do not have this effect multiply x 10% planet surface. + addition forest forcing wind current more up from grunt and decrease winds speed because simply when wind pass by trees losing energy for shaking them.
20-07-2018 07:02
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
DeathRabit wrote:
My thoughts +calculation on data that I found on internet, my calculation can be wrong by base idea is still valid.

Contribution for climate change

Cutting forest to have area to grown crops, and urban is important factor of climate change, and more extreme weather.

Forest 18% Light deflected 28.2% (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) =46,8% rest 53,2% is heat.

Crop Plants 63.2% is heat.

Agricultural land (% of land area) in 1990 reach 39,5% lets assume only 35% is converted from forest

We have 10% more heat converted from sun light per area, now 35% of Land

3.5–7.0kW * daily sun energy per square meter let use 5kw
52 129 000 000 000m2 x 5kW x10% = 26 064,5 TW more heat per each day How much is it a lot lets compare to how much energy we generated in 2015 = 168 519 TW per day 473 TW our change to forest generate 55,1 more energy heat that our entire technical civilization produce.

Contribution for extreme weather

Forest decrease daily temperature variation, compare to plain area less variation more stable weather.

For rainforest temperature is almost constant for day / night cycle and is 26C, and we replace it wit crops where temperature variation is significant.
Higher temperate variation case strong winds and contribute toward stronger Hurricanes.

Urban area is 5% of land area lets look how simply paint colour can contribute.



Full version on reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/climatechange/comments/907d97/change_of_earth_surface_and_its_contribution_for/

The numbers are again random numbers.

As far as the base idea is concerned, this is nothing new. The Stefan-Boltzmann law already discusses this, although you are using the wrong terminology. It is light that is reflected, not heat.

Warmer buildings also dissipate more heat. This is the other side of the same equation.

The big problem with the whole idea is that it is not possible to measure the emissivity (or albedo) of Earth. We don't have enough instrumentation to do it.

Further, you are assuming a cloudless sky. Clouds make a big difference, and they move quite rapidly.


The Parrot Killer
20-07-2018 07:12
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
still learning wrote:
DeathRabit wrote:
..... (sunlight energy collected by chlorophyll) =46,8%.....

.....3.5–7.0kW * daily sun energy per square meter let use 5kw....



Couple of things to start:

That 46.8% seems way too high. If you are trying to come up with photosynthetic efficiency of plants, it is way too high. That 46.8 is looks like the right number for the part of sunlight that is considered photosynthetically inactive, is not of the right wavelength to be utilized by the plant. there are different ways of calculating photosynthetic efficiency, depends a lot on exactly what is meant by the term, but sunlight to stored energy is on the maybe 2% maximum. Try the wikipedia entry for "photosynthetic efficiency."

Energy is not measured in kilowatts.

No, it is measured in joules. Power is measured in watts. One watt is one joule per second.
still learning wrote:
Kilowatt-hours sure, but not kilowatts.

Nope. Joules. For example, one BTU is 1055 joules.
still learning wrote:
Do you pay an electricity bill? You pay for the electrical energy delivered and it is measured in kilowatt-hours.

Because you are using a certain amount of power for one hour, or in other words, one thousand joules per second for one hour.
still learning wrote:
Hurricanes? They get started and grow over tropical oceans. Landfall eventually dissipates them. Hard to imagine land use changes having much effect.

You are correct. Hurricanes need a violent temperature difference and moisture to get started and to continue to grow. Take the moisture source away and they dissipate.

Tornadoes are much smaller. All they need is moisture drifting in from a nearby sea and the violent temperature difference.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate Change of earth surface and thoughts about its contribution for climate change and weather:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Important space and weather related events of 2018!708-10-2018 18:07
The 100 Year Weather Forecast814-06-2018 11:03
"Freakishly Warm" Arctic Weather Has Scientists Reconsidering Worst-Case Scenarios on Climate1104-06-2018 18:50
Jennifer Francis: Crazy Weather and the Arctic Meltdown1726-05-2018 23:39
How are Canadians physically adapted to cold weather in winter?431-03-2018 00:08
Articles
Appendix B - Calculating The Economic Costs of Extreme Weather Events
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact