Dear Russell,
You are comparing apples and oranges, or apples and something that is
not even fruit. Are you doing this on purpose to fool readers or did
you not even read the papers and understand what was done?
Here are the differences:
1. TTAPS looked at three scenarios of global nuclear war, and our
scenario was only 100 Hiroshima size weapons, with a total explosive
power of 1.5 MT (which could produce 5 Tg of smoke). So the scenarios
differ by factors of 67 to 6,667 in terms of explosive power and about
100 in terms of smoke generated for the TTAPS baseline case. Why would
you expect the response to be the same?
2. The TTAPS model had no heat capacity at the surface, so it was a
model of the response in a continental interior. I think what you
plotted was our global average response. The globe is 70% ocean. So
the global average response would be more than10 times smaller than the
middle of a continent.
Do you think anyone will be fooled by your figure? Wouldn't you be
surprised if the response did not differ by factors of 100 to 1000?
Alan
Alan Robock, Professor II (Distinguished Professor)
Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program
Associate Director, Center for Environmental Prediction
Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751
Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644
14 College Farm Road E-mail: [email protected]
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock
On 9/26/2012 6:32 PM, Russell Seitz wrote:
Here are the time-temperature curves of the 1983 'nuclear winter '
model, and those of Robock et al. 2007 , superimposed on the same scale:
http://s1098.photobucket.com/albums/g370/RussellSeitz/?action=view¤t=TTAPSROBOCK.jpg
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/jfeEpqIpJ0gJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
