Sulfur Dioxide

[skookerasbil]

About 99% of the sulfur dioxide in air comes from human sources. The main source of sulfur dioxide in the air is industrial activity that processes materials that contain sulfur, eg the generation of electricity from coal, oil or gas that contains sulfur. Some mineral ores also contain sulfur, and sulfur dioxide is released when they are processed. In addition, industrial activities that burn fossil fuels containing sulfur can be important sources of sulfur dioxide. Sulfur dioxide is also present in motor vehicle emissions. In the past, motor vehicle exhaust was an important, but not the main source of sulfur dioxide in air. However, this is no longer the case.

I have a feeling this is what we should be talking about instead of global warming/cooling.

I have a feeling this shit causes Alzheimers or Cancer or BOTH! Where are the bees? Could it be this shit?

Well......gotta understand that the whole global warming crap is nothing more than people perpetuating the established narrative at all costs. These AGW climate crusaders don't give a flying fuck about the environment........plainly evident in that they don't contribute to any other environment threads EXCEPT global warming crap. Must perpetuate the ruse..........MUST perpetuate the ruse.



Most people who get exposed to this >>>>> The Green Agenda ......are able to connect the dots and realize the snow job that has been going on for 30 years now.

Sounds like right wing propoganda. Can I guess you lean right when you vote? What are your feelings on Michael Moore? How about Ann Coulter?

Nah......just isn't the conventional wisdom on this shit. I only hang around this forum to educate the curious who wander in here looking for something outside the matrix. Actually, all you have to do is take a gander at some of the quotes and if you still embrace the climate crusader quest, well, then I cant help you!!! Some people are desperate to embrace the matrix no matter what.......confronting shit you've believed in for years and years and then facing the truth........a shock to the psyche. Most people don't want to go there.......most want to remain in the comfy zone.

 

[sealybobo]

About 99% of the sulfur dioxide in air comes from human sources.

Yes, about 78% of that being from my farts after an omelette.
Jesus, they stink.

National Climate Assessment: Report details impacts of global warming on the U.S.

Spin?

 

[sealybobo]

Well......gotta understand that the whole global warming crap is nothing more than people perpetuating the established narrative at all costs. These AGW climate crusaders don't give a flying fuck about the environment........plainly evident in that they don't contribute to any other environment threads EXCEPT global warming crap. Must perpetuate the ruse..........MUST perpetuate the ruse.



Most people who get exposed to this >>>>> The Green Agenda ......are able to connect the dots and realize the snow job that has been going on for 30 years now.

Sounds like right wing propoganda. Can I guess you lean right when you vote? What are your feelings on Michael Moore? How about Ann Coulter?

Nah......just isn't the conventional wisdom on this shit. I only hang around this forum to educate the curious who wander in here looking for something outside the matrix. Actually, all you have to do is take a gander at some of the quotes and if you still embrace the climate crusader quest, wll, then I cant help you!!!

One last question. Do you believe in Jesus?

 

[itfitzme]

--------

...
"Emission rates of SO2 from an active volcano range from <20 tonnes/day to >10 million tonnes/day according to the style of volcanic activity and type and volume of magma involved. For example, the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo on 15 June 1991 expelled 3-5 km3 of dacite magma and injected about 20 million metric tons of SO2 into the stratosphere. The sulfur aerosols resulted in a 0.5-0.6°C cooling of the Earth's surface in the Northern Hemisphere. The sulfate aerosols also accelerated chemical reactions that, together with the increased stratospheric chlorine levels from human-made chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) pollution, destroyed ozone and led to some of the lowest ozone levels ever observed in the atmosphere.

At Kilauea Volcano, the recent effusive eruption of about 0.0005 km3/day (500,000 m3) of basalt magma releases about 2,000 tonnes of SO2 into the lower troposphere. Downwind from the vent, acid rain and air pollution is a persistent health problem when the volcano is erupting."

Volcanic Gases and Their Effects

Global Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Home Page

Yeah, your confusing yourself because you stop thinking once you've gotten an interpretation that suits your postion. This IS confirmation bias.

See, volcanos aren't constantly active. Your own post makes this clear. " For example, the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo on 15 June 1991 expelled 3-5 km3 of dacite magma and injected about 20 million metric tons of SO2 into the stratosphere. " That reads as an isolated event while man made sources are continuous.

American Lung Association

Where does sulfur dioxide come from?
Each year manmade sources in the U.S. emit 15 million tons of sulfur dioxide. The largest sources of sulfur dioxide emissions are electricity generation, industrial boilers, and other industrial processes such as petroleum refining and metal processing. Diesel engines are another major source, including old buses and trucks, locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment.

Federal Standards - Sulphur Dioxide - American Lung Association

Wikipedia



"Sulfur dioxide is a noticeable component in the atmosphere, especially following volcanic eruptions.[21] According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (as presented by the 2002 World Almanac or in chart form[22]), the following amount of sulfur dioxide was released in the U.S. per year:

Year SO2
1970 31,161,000 short tons (28.3 Mt)
1980 25,905,000 short tons (23.5 Mt)
1990 23,678,000 short tons (21.5 Mt)
1996 18,859,000 short tons (17.1 Mt)
1997 19,363,000 short tons (17.6 Mt)
1998 19,491,000 short tons (17.7 Mt)
1999 18,867,000 short tons (17.1 Mt)"


"As of 2006, China was the world's largest sulfur dioxide polluter, with 2005 emissions estimated to be 25,490,000 short tons (23.1 Mt). This amount represents a 27% increase since 2000, and is roughly comparable with U.S. emissions in 1980."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutant

So, we've got the US emitting 15 to 30 million tons PER YEAR, with China emitting an equivalent amount PER YEAR. This is double the amount of "the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo"

I'm not immediately seeing the that 97% figure but we can add the individual events and see how accurate that is.

You do understand the concept of "units"?

 

[Crick]

Do NOT hold your breath.

 

[itfitzme]

Yes, but if you care to look at the map I provided those are all current volcanic emissions. They produce orders of magnitude more SO2 than human emissions.

"Proved"? Really? You think you've proved something with a picture identifying where volcanoes are located?

No wonder you're having so much difficulty understanding the science

 

[itfitzme]

What I found annoying, in researching SO2, is the lack of side by side comparison of natural and man made emmsions. Man made sources are brocken down but it is generally unclear if the statistics for percentage are for all sources or just the man made sources.

Wikipedia uses the term "primary source" bu the context leaves open the question of what it means by "primary". "Primary" doesn't necessarily mean "largest". If it means "largest", why not just say "largest" ?

EPA

"Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is one of a group of highly reactive gasses known as “oxides of sulfur.” The largest sources of SO2 emissions are from fossil fuel combustion at power plants (73%) and other industrial facilities (20%). Smaller sources of SO2 emissions include industrial processes such as extracting metal from ore, and the burning of high sulfur containing fuels by locomotives, large ships, and non-road equipment. SO2 is linked with a number of adverse effects on the respiratory system."

Sulfur Dioxide | Air & Radiation | US EPA

[/b]

Wikipedia


"On both Venus and Mars, its primary source, like on Earth, is believed to be volcanic. "

"Sulfur dioxide is a noticeable component in the atmosphere, especially following volcanic eruptions.[21] According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (as presented by the 2002 World Almanac or in chart form[22]), the following amount of sulfur dioxide was released in the U.S. per year:

Year SO2
1970 31,161,000 short tons (28.3 Mt)
1980 25,905,000 short tons (23.5 Mt)
1990 23,678,000 short tons (21.5 Mt)
1996 18,859,000 short tons (17.1 Mt)
1997 19,363,000 short tons (17.6 Mt)
1998 19,491,000 short tons (17.7 Mt)
1999 18,867,000 short tons (17.1 Mt)"


"As of 2006, China was the world's largest sulfur dioxide polluter, with 2005 emissions estimated to be 25,490,000 short tons (23.1 Mt). This amount represents a 27% increase since 2000, and is roughly comparable with U.S. emissions in 1980."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutant

Australia Department of Environment



About 99% of the sulfur dioxide in air comes from human sources. The main source of sulfur dioxide in the air is industrial activity that processes materials that contain sulfur, eg the generation of electricity from coal, oil or gas that contains sulfur.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) - Air quality fact sheet

USGS

"Emission rates of SO2 from an active volcano range from <20 tonnes/day to >10 million tonnes/day according to the style of volcanic activity and type and volume of magma involved. For example, the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo on 15 June 1991 expelled 3-5 km3 of dacite magma and injected about 20 million metric tons of SO2 into the stratosphere."

Volcanic Gases and Their Effects

American Lung Association

Where does sulfur dioxide come from?
Each year manmade sources in the U.S. emit 15 million tons of sulfur dioxide. The largest sources of sulfur dioxide emissions are electricity generation, industrial boilers, and other industrial processes such as petroleum refining and metal processing. Diesel engines are another major source, including old buses and trucks, locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment.

Federal Standards - Sulphur Dioxide - American Lung Association

The Skeptical Scientist

Figure 2: Global sulfur dioxide emissions by source (PNNL).

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

 

[Kosh]

Remember, 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by human activities. It's been think tanks funded by fossil fuel interests and Republican politicians that have made climate change a political issue. Scientists typically have neither a liberal nor conservative agenda in their research; they simply try to understand reality as it is. Deniers, on the other hand, reject that, turning their backs on reality if it disagrees with their predisposed ideology.

Climate change denial: After global warming report, deniers deny.

So you use a known far left wing blog site for your "facts"..

Go figure that one.

 

[itfitzme]

Have they given up on CO2?

Swapping out the C for the S?

How does SO2 "swap out" for CO2?

Really, go look up what SO2 does. Also, read the thread to see what is about.

Your comment couldn't possibly be more meaningless.

 

[itfitzme]

Have they given up on CO2?

Swapping out the C for the S?

Something like that as once upon a time 99% of the CO2 was created by humans according to the AGW lore. This slowly changed to 60% human activities and 40% natural. However the reality is that humans only create 3% of the CO2. Which means 97% natural and 3% humans. Empirical proof that the AGW cult wants to dispute real science.

The difference is what they are discussing is considered an aerosol which is known for cooling and not warming. Which is why it not very well understood. Most of the trillions of AGW dollars has been focused on CO2.

So this subject will not be truly researched until the AGW cult will allow the monies to discover what actually does control climate, instead of spending trillions on implicating humans via CO2.

Which all just demonstrate a complete lack of reading comprehension on your part. The convo has nothing to do with AWG. It started as a question about SO2 and Alzheimer's disease.

So, now I can see why your comments re science are so useless. You've provided empirical evidence of no reading comprehention. Apparently, you look at the words and read what you want it to say.

Wow!

 

[itfitzme]

Models, models, models. And not an actual measurement anywhere to be found.....

How many times, with how many sources, do you have to be shown wrong before it sinks into your head?

It'll never happen. Straight up, a thematic analysis makes it apparent it's an emotionally driven problem for him. His immediate response was about assigning "blame", " Oh, so man's to blame, again". not objective measures. And he followed directly into an "excuse". Volcanos do it too, so, "blah blah blah". Then, it's a picture showing volcanos "doing it too" that is "proof" that they are "to blame"

 

[itfitzme]

This thread has nothing to do with AGW. Go read the OP. Sulfur dioxide is NOT an aerosol, it is a gas. Like several of your friends, your chemistry is weak.

Actually it does as the AGW cult does not understand what they post as you just demonstrated. It has everything to with AGW since they seem to want to control what is and what is not science.

Although NASA disagrees with your comments:

NASA - Atmospheric Aerosols: What Are They, and Why Are They So Important

Are you now claiming that NASA is lying?

Huh?

The OP said, " have a feeling this is what we should be talking about instead of global warming/cooling"

So, what the f are YOU talking about?

 

[Crick]

This thread has nothing to do with AGW. Go read the OP. Sulfur dioxide is NOT an aerosol, it is a gas. Like several of your friends, your chemistry is weak.

Actually it does as the AGW cult does not understand what they post as you just demonstrated. It has everything to with AGW since they seem to want to control what is and what is not science.

Although NASA disagrees with your comments:

NASA - Atmospheric Aerosols: What Are They, and Why Are They So Important

Are you now claiming that NASA is lying?

H2SO4 forms aerosols (liquid or solid particles in suspension). SO2 is a GAS. Like oxygen or nitrogen or even carbon dioxide. It is not a significant greenhouse gas if, for no other reason, it's atmospheric levels are currently only about 1 Part per BILLION.

 

[mamooth]

All SO2 is not created equal. Not many people live downwind from active volcanoes. Very many people do live downwind from human industrial activity. Hence, human industrial activity is mainly what affects people.

As far as global dimming goes, all sources of SO2 cause it. Most of the SO2 gets washed out of the troposphere regularly and replaced just as regularly, so the dimming is fairly constant. It's only when a supervolcano blasts it into the stratosphere that it will linger for years and cause a big global dimming event.

 

[itfitzme]

That wiki article is poorly written. It seems to switch between volcanic and man made mid paragraph and without warning.

 

[itfitzme]

Any one notice that this doesn't make sense?

"<20 tonnes/day to >10 million tonnes/day"

Typo, I'm sure. Perhaps rewriting this way

10 million tonnes/day < x <20 tonnes/day

Which means that

1,000,000 < 2

 

[skookerasbil]

Remember, 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by human activities. It's been think tanks funded by fossil fuel interests and Republican politicians that have made climate change a political issue. Scientists typically have neither a liberal nor conservative agenda in their research; they simply try to understand reality as it is. Deniers, on the other hand, reject that, turning their backs on reality if it disagrees with their predisposed ideology.

Climate change denial: After global warming report, deniers deny.

The lament of a matrix dweller.


Bottom line......renewables are far too expensive and not at all reliable. Its political because costs matter.......but not to the climate k00ks. In the real world, to everybody else, they matter. Its political because political leaders cant stick the folks with massive energy costs via renewables.......which is why Crap and Tax legislation is permanently in the shitter.

One last thing........anybody who thinks that AGW scientists are apolitical have genetic links to people who raced to Jonestown back in the 70's. I cant help you.........



" 5 Fatal Flaws of Solar " ( from todays REALCLEARENERGY ) >>>> http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/five_fatal_flaws_of_solar_energy.html

 

[Crick]

In one post Skoookersshole made the following three statements:

Its political because costs matter.......but not to the climate k00ks.

Its political because political leaders cant stick the folks with massive energy costs via renewables

One last thing........anybody who thinks that AGW scientists are apolitical have genetic links to people who raced to Jonestown back in the 70's.

Do you think there's any chance we could convince him to make up his mind?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wait, is the Death Worshiping AGWCult now saying that SO2 ate the Global Warming?

 

[Crick]

Wait! Has Crusader Frank learned to read?

Apparently not.