HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hannegan@hyperion.gsfc.nasa.gov (Bryan Hannegan)
Subject: Back of the envelope calculations of oceanic CO2
Organization: Code 916, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:34:17 GMT

Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids,sci.environment 
Subject: Back of the envelope oceanic CO2 calculations
Followup-To: sci.geo.fluids
Organization: Code 916, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Hello everyone. Today in Chem class we discussed Henry's Law which relates
the vapour pressure of a gas to the amount that would dissolve in a fluid
solvent for a specific concentration and temperature. For kicks and giggles,
I came back and tried to calculate the amount of CO2 in the oceans, given
that the density was 1 kg/m3 (yep, just pure water) and the volume of the 
ocean was 1.35 x 10^15 m3 (Biogeochemistry, Schlesinger, 1992). I assumed a
CO2 concentration of 380 ppm, for a partial pressure of 0.288 Torr at a 
standard temperature of 298 K and pressure 1 atm. For CO2, the Henry's LAw
constant was 1.25 x 10^6 Torr in pure water (no data on seawater since it
is variable due to saline content), and Henry's Law goes like this:

     partial pressure (CO2)= Henry's Const. x mole fraction (CO2)

Furthermore, the mole fraction was defined as :  # moles CO2/ (# moles CO2  
                                                             + # moles H2O)

Working it all out, the answer I came up with was 1.52 x 10^5 metric tons.
Now recalling that the flux of CO2 into and out of the oceans is a bit 
larger than that... I'm curious as to whether this calculation is way off 
as a result of the lack of variance in temperature and salinity, or if it 
is at least in the neighborhood.

Anyone have any evidence of total oceanic CO2 content? 

***This is not meant as a legitimate estimate, so don't flame me for this!***
    (I'm just curious as to how good or bad this approximation is... I 
       have a big feeling that it stinks, but want to make sure.)

Bryan Hannegan
hannegan@halo.ps.uci.edu
Dept. of Geosciences, University of CA, Irvine
From: lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Myself)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
Subject: Overpressure Wavefront Analysis
Date: 20 Nov 1992 20:15:06 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Summary: Request for formulae concerning modeling of an Overpressure Wavefront c
Keywords: detonation, explosion, overpressure, wavefront, formulae

  [note - I have previously posted this on rec.pyrotechnics, who suggested I 
    try this group]

  I am looking for formulae / equations / help useful for determining the
form of abnormalities on the surface of an expanding wavefront caused by
a medium-scale detonation.
  In normal english:
    Assuming and 'ideal' chemical detonation, with the explosive undergoing
complete and balanced core ---> surface combustion, in an identical - gradient
atmosphere, the resulting shockwave / overpressure wavefront would be a perfect
sphere. Aside from the explosive itself, the surface of the sphere is deformed
in a real atmosphere by variences in the pressure gradients of the surrounding
atmosphere - 'eddies', or air currents - I need to know if there is a way to
determine what the shape of the deformations in the surface of the shockwave
would be (yes, I know that they would be miniscule, and swamped by the shockwave
itself - that is why I cannot do this empiracly!). I know that this gets very
complex in a rather annoyingly short time, but I need to know if it is possible
to do without a CRAY, even for a small, single or double eddy simulation.
  The things I need specifically are :
      A) Formulae or equations for the fluid dynamics
      B) Suggestions for implementing A in a reasonable manner
      C) Any miscellaneous other help available

    Thank you all in advance, and gratituedes for reading this post,

	Myself (lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu)
	StormWind @ kids MUSH
	VERY amateur visualization programmer
	And many other irreleavant things

P.S. This is completely theoretical, and as far as I can see, does not have any
	scientific value, other than edifying myself. (I can, however, post
	any results that may come up, if enough interest is shown)



-- 
This was brought to you by Myself(lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu) who is all things here.
Head of Synergy Systems, a non-official group of aspiring hackers creating and
distributing software for the common good. Head office:Terra, Sol system. We
Flames accepted-and returned with interest and intelligence compounded.
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids,sci.geo.meteorology
From: zaphiri@watson.ibm.com (Zaphiris Christidis)
Subject: Re: mesoscale forecast model for workstation (SUMMARY)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:38:19 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <BxoEpu.JFG@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, gpetty@rain.atms.purdue.edu (Grant W. Petty) writes:
[...]
> I received a number of responses; the most interesting of which are
> condensed below.
[...]
> From hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu:
>
> The best mesoscale model around now is the The Penn State/NCAR model,
> MM4.  It beats the life out of the second most common model, CSU-RAMS.

This is a very strong statement, to say the least.  Can you substanciate
the above? Have you seen any specific comparisons between these two models?
The above statement, implies that both models were tested, running identical
simulations, and comparisons were carried out, against observed data,
which might have showed that CSU-RAMS was outperformed by MM4. I would
appreciate it, if you can provide us with some references.

On the other hand, I would strongly suggest you look at report 009.5-90.4
of Environment Health and safety (contact Richard Thuillier, the project
manager for EPRI RP2434-6), entitled "The Status of Subregional and
Mesoscale Models for Air Quality and Meteorology", July 1990. There are
comparisons of various Model Capapbilities   (San Jose, MASS,
NCAR/PSU/SUNY, Drexel, CSU-RAMS, ERT CMC/PBL. Los Alamos). Judging solely
on the capabilities of each model, I would conclude that RAMS-CSU is the
most complete, and I would wait for specific numbers, before passing
judgment on an one-on-one shootout.

> It runs on IBM RISC-6000 stations of a variety of flavors.  I believe
> Nelson Seaman at TPSU is the correct contact person.

D. Anderson has been running the MM4 on the NCAR IBM RISC-6000 cluster.

> Harold Brooks                    hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu
> National Severe Storms Laboratory/CIMMS (Norman, OK)



--
Zaphiris Christidis
zaphiri(@watson.ibm.com @yktvmh.bitnet)
From: L.Morland@uk.ac.uea (Les Morland)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
Subject: Postdoctoral postion in sea-ice modelling
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:08:44 GMT
Organization: School of Maths, University of East Anglia
X-Xxdate: Fri, 20 Nov 92 15:09:23 GMT
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7


       UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA AT NORWICH
                   SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS
Postdoctoral Research Associate in Sea Ice Dynamics

Applications are invited for a Senior Research Associate to work on a 
NERC funded project on the dynamics of a large-scale sea ice pack with 
Professor L.W.Morland and Dr J.M.N.T.Gray in association with a group of 
faculty and research associates working on ocean modelling. The project 
is based on a two-dimensional model of the ice pack as an interface 
between atmosphere and ocean, which acts as both a mechanical and a
thermal barrier and has a significant influence on the ocean response to 
atmospheric forcing. The main objective is to couple the ice pack and 
ocean dynamics in a tractable numerical model. The work will involve the 
numerical treatment of systems of partial differential equations 
involving moving boundaries, but also further development of the 
interacting continua description of the ice pack layer involving phase 
change and salt flux.

The post is available for a period of 3 years commencing 1 April 1993, 
and the initial salary will be on the RA1A scale 12638-14962 pounds.
Preference will be given to applicants with  research experience in
theoretical mechanics and numerical methods.

Applications, naming two referees, should be sent to Professor 
L.W.Morland, School of Mathematics, University of East Anglia, Norwich 
NR4 7TJ, UK (Tel. 0603 592932; e-mail L.Morland@uk.ac.uea), by 1st 
February 1993.
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
From: hatay@spot.Colorado.EDU (Ferhat F. Hatay)
Subject: Compressibility 
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:10:06 GMT


I want to derive the energy equation in its full 
glory with true compressibility effects without
an approximation like Boussinesq's.
I am tempted to introduce a Mach number but I don't know
how much sense this would make for geophysical/enviromental
flows. Can you direct me to the proper references?

-- 
Ferhat F. Hatay                        || Disclamer: |||||||||||||||||
Aerospace Engineering Sciences         || I speak for myself unless || 
University of Colorado, Boulder        || otherwise indicated.      ||
e-mail: hatay@spot.colorado.edu        |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.chemistry
From: gpetty@rain.atms.purdue.edu (Grant W. Petty)
Subject: Atmospheric chemistry position (repost)
Organization: Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:18:00 GMT



              ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY FACULTY POSITION

The Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Purdue University
invites applications for a tenure-track faculty position in the area
of Atmospheric Chemistry at the Assistant or beginning Associate
Professor level.  Scientists working in aerosol and cloud chemistry,
photochemistry, biosphere-atmosphere cycling, tracer transport and
related fields are invited to apply.  The department currently has 25
faculty in the areas of atmospheric science, geophysics, geochemistry
and geology and 77 graduate students.  Extensive computational and
experimental facilities are available in the department and through
collaborative arrangements at other sites on campus.

Consideration of applications will begin December 1, 1992 and the
search will continue until the position is filled.  Applications will
be selected on the basis of their demonstrated ability to develop a
high quality research program and to teach effectively at the graduate
and undergraduate levels.  An earned doctorate is required and some
post doctoral experience is desirable.  Applicants should submit a
letter summarizing their research interests, a curriculum vita and the
names of at least three references to:

                Dr. Harshvardhan, Chairman
                Atmospheric Chemistry Faculty Search Committee
                Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
                1397 CIVL Bldg.
                Purdue University
                West Lafayette, IN  47907-1397

Purdue University is an Affirmative Action/Equal Employment
Opportunity Employer.

-- 
Grant W. Petty                                gpetty@rain.atms.purdue.edu
Assistant Prof. of Atmospheric Science        (317) 494-2544
Dept. of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
Purdue University, West Lafayette IN  47907-1397
From: lakerb@rcwusr.bp.com
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
Subject: Re: Overpressure Wavefront Analysis
Date: 22 Nov 92 19:19:01 -0600
Organization: BP Research, Cleveland, OH (USA)

In article <1ek63aINNjt8@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Myself) writes:
>   [note - I have previously posted this on rec.pyrotechnics, who suggested I 
>     try this group]
> 
>   I am looking for formulae / equations / help useful for determining the
> form of abnormalities on the surface of an expanding wavefront caused by
> a medium-scale detonation.
>   In normal english:
>     Assuming and 'ideal' chemical detonation, with the explosive undergoing
> complete and balanced core ---> surface combustion, in an identical - gradient
> atmosphere, the resulting shockwave / overpressure wavefront would be a perfect
> sphere. Aside from the explosive itself, the surface of the sphere is deformed
> in a real atmosphere by variences in the pressure gradients of the surrounding
> atmosphere - 'eddies', or air currents - I need to know if there is a way to
> determine what the shape of the deformations in the surface of the shockwave
> would be (yes, I know that they would be miniscule, and swamped by the shockwave
> itself - that is why I cannot do this empiracly!). I know that this gets very
> complex in a rather annoyingly short time, but I need to know if it is possible
> to do without a CRAY, even for a small, single or double eddy simulation.
>   The things I need specifically are :
>       A) Formulae or equations for the fluid dynamics
>       B) Suggestions for implementing A in a reasonable manner
>       C) Any miscellaneous other help available
> 
>     Thank you all in advance, and gratituedes for reading this post,
> 
> 	Myself (lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu)
> 	StormWind @ kids MUSH
> 	VERY amateur visualization programmer
> 	And many other irreleavant things
> 
> P.S. This is completely theoretical, and as far as I can see, does not have any
> 	scientific value, other than edifying myself. (I can, however, post
> 	any results that may come up, if enough interest is shown)
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> This was brought to you by Myself(lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu) who is all things here.
> Head of Synergy Systems, a non-official group of aspiring hackers creating and
> distributing software for the common good. Head office:Terra, Sol system. We
> Flames accepted-and returned with interest and intelligence compounded.

Suggest you contact the Public Information Officer at the US Bureau of Mines in
Bruceton, Pa.  They have been exploding and modeling explosions for decades.

Another contact is the Christian Mickelsen Institute in Bergen, Norway.

The Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers (16th St??), Washington, DC. have held symposia (published)
containing work on explosion modeling.

The Journal of Hazardous Materials, Journal of Fluid Flow Research, etc. are
other sources.

Rob Lake
BP Research
lake@rcwcl1.dnet.bp.com
From: mccalpin@perelandra.cms.udel.edu (John D. McCalpin)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
Subject: Re: simple 3D GCM
Keywords: Hello,
Date: 18 Nov 92 14:12:49 GMT
Organization: College of Marine Studies, U. Del.

In article <1992Nov17.221414.1552@u.washington.edu> yuri@amath.washington.edu (Yuri Yulaev) writes:
>does anybody know about relyable package for 3D GCM. I don't need
>orography,chemistry, and other tough things: I need something to
>simulate wave propagation in 3D on sphere ( I have now 2D with shallow
>water).  Any info will appreciate. Yuri.

I don't know about reliable, but there is a very simple, freely
distributable 3D GCM in the anonymous ftp area of perelandra.cms.udel.edu
in the directory /models/PrimEqModel/.

It solves the 3D primitive equations in pressure coordinates on the
surface of a sphere.  

I have been unable to contact the author since the model first showed up
on the net several years ago.  His name is R. Saravanan, and he was at
Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University
of Cambridge (England) when the model was released.  If anyone knows
him, I would appreciate learning how to get in contact with him to 
find out if the model has been updated/superceded, etc....
-- 
--
John D. McCalpin                        mccalpin@perelandra.cms.udel.edu
Assistant Professor                     mccalpin@brahms.udel.edu
College of Marine Studies, U. Del.      John.McCalpin@mvs.udel.edu
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
From: yuri@amath.washington.edu (Yuri Yulaev)
Subject: simple 3D GCM
Keywords: 
	Hello,
Organization: University of Washington, Applied Mathematics, Seattle
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:14:14 GMT

does anybody know about relyable package for 3D GCM. I don't need orography,chemistry,
and other tough things: I need something to simulate wave propagation in 3D on sphere
( I have now 2D with shallow water).
Any info will appreciate. Yuri.
Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
From: pwjones@lanl.gov (Phil W. Jones)
Subject: Re: Compressibility
Reply-To: pwjones@lanl.gov
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:47:47 GMT

In article 2255@ucsu.Colorado.EDU, hatay@spot.Colorado.EDU (Ferhat F. Hatay) writes:
> 
> I want to derive the energy equation in its full 
> glory with true compressibility effects without
> an approximation like Boussinesq's.
> I am tempted to introduce a Mach number but I don't know
> how much sense this would make for geophysical/enviromental
> flows. Can you direct me to the proper references?
> 

Many basic fluids texts will at least show you the basic equation
with no approximations.  For a specific example on how to scale
such things, walk down the street a little ways to the JILA reading
room and look up my thesis and theses of Hurlburt, Merryfield, Xie
and all the other students of Juri Toomre who have done fully
compressible convection.

Basically, you do end up scaling velocities with the sound speed
at some point.  If you would rather not resolve acoustic waves,
you might think about doing an anelastic approximation which 
filters out acoustic waves, but still retains other aspects of
compressibility (buoyancy braking, etc.).  There are some 
references to anelastic convection simulations also in my 
thesis.

Good luck,

Phil


---
/----------------------------------------------------------------------\
|  It's hard to keep up with the Joneses.  Douglas Wiley - born 9/4/92 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Philip W. Jones                  Email: pwjones@lanl.gov            |
|  EES-5 MS F665                    Phone: (505)-667-6387              |
|  Los Alamos National Laboratory     FAX: (505)-665-3687              |
|  Los Alamos, NM 87544                                                |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/

Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids
From: hannegan@hyperion.gsfc.nasa.gov (Bryan Hannegan)
Subject: Back of the envelope CO2 redux....
Organization: Department of Geosciences, University of CA, Irvine
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:20:33 GMT

In reference to my earlier post on this subject, I'd like to point out 
a couple of glaring errors on my part that SIGNIFICANTLY affect the result.

1) I had density as 1 kg/m3, actually it should be 10^3 kg/m3.
2) The volume of the ocean was 1.35 x 10^18 g, not 1.35 x 10^15 g.

This would then increase the total by a factor of 10^6, making the result
1.52 x 10^11 metric tonnes, or 152 Gt.     

There are extreme problems with this, which I will point out so as to not
leave stones unturned.

1) Temperature,pressure and density were considered constant at 298K, 1 atm,
and 1 kg/m3 (figures for pure water at critical temperature)
2) Just the dissolving of CO2 gas was used, there were no chemical reactions
taken into account (unlike in Harte, "Consider a Spherical Cow")
3) Based on net response, chemical uptake of CO2 represents more than 90% of
the total CO2 content of the ocean, and we all know that assumption #1 is 
nowhere near reality (but it sure made calculations simple!)

I had read that the yearly flux was on the order of Gt and I thought that was
an usually large amountof flux for an element. Now I understand. 
Thanks for all the assitance and all the help. I hope this spawned some good
thought.

Bryan Hannegan
halo.ps.uci.edu


Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology,comp.databases,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.sys.mac.misc
From: dgwang@eos.ncsu.edu (DING G WANG)
Subject: Script Fonts for Mac help!
Originator: dgwang@c00381-346dan.eos.ncsu.edu
Keywords:  Magellan, JPL
Reply-To: dgwang@eos.ncsu.edu (DING G WANG)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:52:36 GMT


Does anybody know where I can get a Script (Zapfchancery) True Type Font
for my Mac IIsi?

Thanks in advance

Ding
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: ARMAGEDON?
Date: 23 Nov 92 22:20:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.204107.12707@nezsdc.icl.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz (Derek Tearne) writes:
> In article <12977.2b0bcbe3@cpva.saic.com> coycc@cpva.saic.com writes:
> > 
> > I saw a program on tv the other night that discussed the possibility
> >of a global catastrophy in the year 2000. According the program, the
> 
> Anyway everyone knows the world is going to end on april the 1st 2034...

I thought it was Jan 19,2038.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
From: cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
Subject: Re: life, Moon and geology
Organization: Florida State University Geology Dept.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 05:18:56 GMT

In article <21NOV199200212728@pearl.tufts.edu> ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO) writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.130829.19356@spectrum.xerox.com>, chris@eso.mc.xerox.com writes...

>>It is doubtful that the CO2 would have preciptated as carbonate.  Even 
>>today large amounts of calcium carbonate shell/skeletal matter never 
>>makes it to the bottom, dissolving on the way down.  The level below 
>>which the carbonates dissolve is known by a number of names, such as 
>>carbonate compensation depth.

Although the above discussions revolved around the question of how the
CO2 initially very high in Earth's Hadean atmosphere decreased to the
some 200-300 ppm prior to 1600 (it is now about 360 ppm), a paper in
the August Geology by Brad Opdyke and another author from the U. of
Michigan modeled the CO2 during the fluctuations in sealevel between
150K years ago and present. They found that the CO2 levels observed in
the Vostok ice cores could be matched by their estimates in the
reactions of organisms in coastal environments. I believe they took
into account the total interchange in deep ocean and atmosphere as
well. This would seem to imply that the amount of shallow seas is the
important factor. 
Joseph Cain		cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu
cain@fsu.bitnet		scri::cain
From: nin15b63@merrimack.edu (THE WOLF)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: rising sea level & ocean volcanos
Date: 20 Nov 92 20:03:00 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA

> In article <1e734kINN5vh@crcnis1.unl.edu> price@helios.unl.edu (Chad  Price) writes:
>>jmartin@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jason J Martin) writes:
>>
>>>I have a question about the rising sea level......I'm told that the sea level
>>>has risen quite a bit in the past few hundred years.  Could this rise in sea
>>>level have to do with the moving continents?  Could the total amout of ocean
>>>floor be decreasing?  Something like that would cause a rise in sea level.   
>>
>>Global sea level changes seem to be almost
>>entirely the result of the presence/absence/changing volume of the glaciers,
>>and in particular the continental scale glaciers such as Greenland and
>>Antarctica.

I've heard it postulated that the volcanos at the bottom of the ocean are
erupting more, just as those on our surface have been.  These eruptions are
warming the oceans, which are warming the surface/atmosphere.  It might follow
that the warmth would also raise sea level.  

Is it conceivable, if this idea were valid, that there would be enough spewing
of this volcanos to slightly raise sea level still more?

Also, what would folks expect the overall effect of warming a portion of the
ocean which is normally cold to be?  Add in the idea that the volcanos erupting
on the surface should be creating cooler air.  Now consider a train headed at 50
mph toward Cincinatti ...
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Andy Harrington                      | Whatever you can do, or dream you can,
 Computer Geek                        | begin it.  Boldness has genius, power 
 Merrimack College, North Andover, MA | and magic in it.  -  Goethe            
 nin15b63@merrimack.edu               | aharrington@ldbvax.lotus.com         
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------