Fester,

You touched on a good point on p.8 when you said: "I can't help but wonder weather the ocean fertilisation from the bush fire smoke has affected eastern Australia's rainfall."

I reckon this week's Cyclone Damiem in the northwest and heavy rains and floods in the east in the wake of the extreme series of heat waves of 2019/20 that gave rise to the catastrophic bush fires are both the consequence of the latter. The heat that parched the continent would have also been heating the water off our coast providing all the water vapour and latent heat to produce cyclones and storms.

I suppose this is the climate from now on: catastrophic long term heat waves immediately followed by cyclones and heavy rains all of which reek damage and havoc on us. And it just gets worse with increasing amounts of greenhouse gas emissions that result in continued global warming.

I wonder if this constant destructive weather will force insurance companies out of business leaving millions without financial protection for their properties and businesses. First the extreme heat wave brings a bush to burn your house down; if your house wasn't burned down then a week later a flood carries it into the sea. And guess what: you couldn't get insurance coverage because all the insurance companies went out of business.

Hi Mr O,

There is also the possibility that rain resulted from smoke fertilizing the ocean, with plankton growth causing it to trap more heat in the surface so increasing evaporation, and enhancing evaporation and cloud formation further with sulphur aerosols. Without scientific research we are just guessing. If it is case it raises the possibility that ocean fertilisation could be used to influence rainfall.

What the scientists have determined is that the oceans sequester 75-80% of fossil fuel carbon emissions, so I cannot understand the objections of climate catastrophists to better understand the process.

Cheers

Fester,

The oceans hold about 40% of the total CO2 emitted from all sources not 75-80%. The colder the water the more CO2 it can hold; think of your can of cold coke how fizzy it is when opened but left out to warm it will lose its CO2 becoming flat. Same with the oceans when warmed up they release some of their CO2 back into the atmosphere adding to a further greenhouse effect causing further warming of the oceans. And the more the oceans warm the more of its CO2 it releases in the atmosphere.

I think we can make a very sound proposition that the heat producing the warmer oceans especially around the Equator where cyclones are found is the result of global warming. The same global warming that produced the extreme hot and dry 2019/20 season which resulted in the catastrophic bush fires.

PS Did you know that the North Sea is the oceans' kidney for filtering CO2 from the atmosphere? For some unexplained reasoned it is where most of the atmospheric CO2 is absorbed into the world's oceans.

Thanks Mr O. Ultimately ocean carbon sequestration is at least 80% of the total. e.g.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2013/07/03/how-much-co2-can-the-oceans-take-up/

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/CarbonCycle

I am aware that ocean CO2 absorption varies geographically, but I did not know that most was absorbed in the North Sea. You would think nutrient rich ocean currents a factor, but it would be useful to know why.

Cheers

So are we finally at the point where we can stop accusing mankind of causing GW, and accept that it is the planets natural M.O.
We are warming, (pun intended) to the fact that the planet is going through one of it's warming phases, all by itself, and we had nothing to do with it.
I want to make this clear so that those more vulnerable and naive or innocent of mind and heart can stop panicking over whether or not they are going to die.
Just as an aside, we actually DO need more CO2, not sure how much, no-one knows, but it will help in re-greening a lot of lands that were once green, to be green again.
Now that is something the GREENS CAN DO, and that is stop trying to be scientists or even politicians, as they could not run their finger up their own you know what.
But instead use the only thing they are supposedly any good at, and that is, to coming up with affordable, simple solutions to help green the earth where it was once green, but currently not so.
Now this is a most noble and lauded cause, if they want to ever be remembered as a life saving cult and not a doomsday cult.

A question, Mr O.

You pointed out that the natural world absorbs about half of the carbon dioxide produced by fossil fuel burning. Is it the case that when half the amount of fossil fuel or less was burnt, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels did not change? If not, then why has the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the natural world been increasing?

Cheers