I had a quick poke around Google and couldn’t find a quick answer …

Since burning hydrocarbons in engines creates CO2 and also water, wouldn’t we be gradually be adding a substantial amount of water into the atmosphere as we drive, fly, and boat around?

Yeah but earth’s surface water is in 3-phase equilibrium (vapour, liquid, ice) and the overall amount of vapour ought theoretically to be controlled by the temperature, right?

Having said that, as the world warms the average vapour pressure above the oceans will increase anyway so you’d expect the total amount of water in the atmosphere to increase.

my two cents

Makes sense, ta.

I’d just like to see some of it falling back to earth.

there’s maybe an increase in sunlight reflected away from earth caused by plane vapor trails, the effect declines as the angle of sunlight is more perpendicular to vapor trails

the water content of the atmosphere is increasing, far as I know, it’s being measured, caused by increased evaporation from oceans mostly, maybe, i’d need go back and read whatever again, and I did that a while back

the atmosphere is getting wetter, i’d guess the inadvertent carbon dioxide and methane pump (humans, activity, fossil fuel burn) way offsets the small amount of water more directly produced from burning fossil fuels (no immediate helpful change to albedo)

in the end you’ll be left praying the right sorts of clouds form, at the right time of the day, and soon enough, and become part of the structure, or enough structure is maintained, in the weather systems, and climate system

it’ll all come down to clouds, those fluffy amorphous things humans have no control over

dv said:

Yeah but earth’s surface water is in 3-phase equilibrium (vapour, liquid, ice) and the overall amount of vapour ought theoretically to be controlled by the temperature, right?

Having said that, as the world warms the average vapour pressure above the oceans will increase anyway so you’d expect the total amount of water in the atmosphere to increase.

my two cents

The water vapour feedback is a substantial part of the projected warming effect, as the pseudo-skeptics are always keen to point out.

Also human H20 output is a very small proportion of the total H2O entering the atmosphere from evaporation etc.

roughbarked said:

I’d just like to see some of it falling back to earth.

It’s guuna do just that round these parts this week, Mr Barked.

Even more so on the coast.

Woodie said:

roughbarked said:

I’d just like to see some of it falling back to earth.

It’s guuna do just that round these parts this week, Mr Barked.

Even more so on the coast.

rubs hands
Dams are about a quarter full, more I want more.

Peak Warming Man said:

Woodie said:

roughbarked said:

I’d just like to see some of it falling back to earth.

It’s guuna do just that round these parts this week, Mr Barked.

Even more so on the coast.

rubs hands
Dams are about a quarter full, more I want more.

You’re about here, Mr Man?

transition said:

there’s maybe an increase in sunlight reflected away from earth caused by plane vapor trails, the effect declines as the angle of sunlight is more perpendicular to vapor trails

the water content of the atmosphere is increasing, far as I know, it’s being measured, caused by increased evaporation from oceans mostly, maybe, i’d need go back and read whatever again, and I did that a while back

the atmosphere is getting wetter, i’d guess the inadvertent carbon dioxide and methane pump (humans, activity, fossil fuel burn) way offsets the small amount of water more directly produced from burning fossil fuels (no immediate helpful change to albedo)

in the end you’ll be left praying the right sorts of clouds form, at the right time of the day, and soon enough, and become part of the structure, or enough structure is maintained, in the weather systems, and climate system

it’ll all come down to clouds, those fluffy amorphous things humans have no control over

rereading re vapor trails

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_albedo
“The cloud albedo increases with the total water content or depth of the cloud and with the solar zenith angle. The variation of albedo with zenith angle is most rapid when the sun is near the horizon, and least when the sun is overhead. Absorption of solar radiation by plane-parallel clouds decreases with increasing zenith angle because radiation that is reflected to space at the higher zenith angles penetrates less deeply into the cloud and is therefore less likely to be absorbed”

and this, which i’ll do later
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo
“Cloud albedo has substantial influence over atmospheric temperatures. Different types of clouds exhibit different reflectivity, theoretically ranging in albedo from a minimum of near 0 to a maximum approaching 0.8. “On any given day, about half of Earth is covered by clouds, which reflect more sunlight than land and water. Clouds keep Earth cool by reflecting sunlight, but they can also serve as blankets to trap warmth.”

Albedo and climate in some areas are affected by artificial clouds, such as those created by the contrails of heavy commercial airliner traffic. A study following the burning of the Kuwaiti oil fields during Iraqi occupation showed that temperatures under the burning oil fires were as much as 10 °C colder than temperatures several miles away under clear skies”

Spiny Norman said:

I had a quick poke around Google and couldn’t find a quick answer …

Since burning hydrocarbons in engines creates CO2 and also water, wouldn’t we be gradually be adding a substantial amount of water into the atmosphere as we drive, fly, and boat around?

Every chemical put into the atmosphere has a different residence time in the atmosphere.

For instance,
OH released into the atmosphere only survives fo 2 seconds before being destroyed.
NO3 about 8 seconds
Propane about 2 hours
NOx about 1 day
Peroxide ditto
SO2 about 3 days
Ozone released at the surface about 15 days
Carbon monoxide about 150 days
Methane about 15 years
CFCs about 100 years

Supplemental question.

If the atmosphere isn’t getting wetter, (Ta, DV) how much of the increase in sea level are we causing from the generation of H2O from burning hydrocarbons?

Spiny Norman said:

Supplemental question.

If the atmosphere isn’t getting wetter, (Ta, DV) how much of the increase in sea level are we causing from the generation of H2O from burning hydrocarbons?

Exactly half way between bugger all and zero, I’d say.

Spiny Norman said:

Supplemental question.

If the atmosphere isn’t getting wetter, (Ta, DV) how much of the increase in sea level are we causing from the generation of H2O from burning hydrocarbons?

Answering that properly would be a bit more work than I feel like doing on a Sunday arvo :-) but let’s put it this way…

About 1.4 trillion barrels of oil have been consumed in all history, and about 800 billion tonnes of coal, very roughly.

A barrel of crude (159 L) will produce about 330 litres of water.
There’s not much hydrogen in coal, let’s say … 4% average? So a tonne of coal will something like 360 litres of water on combustion.

All of this adds up to about .74 * 10 ^ 14 L of water. There are other fossil fuels but historically those are the big two. Let’s round it up to 10^15 L to cover gas and so on.

The area of the Earth’s oceans are 361.1 million km², so even if half of all the water vapour produced by burning fossil fuels went into the liquid phase rather than gas or solid, it would raise the water level by 1 millimetre.

dv said:

Spiny Norman said:

Supplemental question.

If the atmosphere isn’t getting wetter, (Ta, DV) how much of the increase in sea level are we causing from the generation of H2O from burning hydrocarbons?

Answering that properly would be a bit more work than I feel like doing on a Sunday arvo :-) but let’s put it this way…

About 1.4 trillion barrels of oil have been consumed in all history, and about 800 billion tonnes of coal, very roughly.

A barrel of crude (159 L) will produce about 330 litres of water.
There’s not much hydrogen in coal, let’s say … 4% average? So a tonne of coal will something like 360 litres of water on combustion.

All of this adds up to about .74 * 10 ^ 14 L of water. There are other fossil fuels but historically those are the big two. Let’s round it up to 10^15 L to cover gas and so on.

The area of the Earth’s oceans are 361.1 million km², so even if half of all the water vapour produced by burning fossil fuels went into the liquid phase rather than gas or solid, it would raise the water level by 1 millimetre.

That much. I’m surprised.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

Spiny Norman said:

Supplemental question.

If the atmosphere isn’t getting wetter, (Ta, DV) how much of the increase in sea level are we causing from the generation of H2O from burning hydrocarbons?

Answering that properly would be a bit more work than I feel like doing on a Sunday arvo :-) but let’s put it this way…

About 1.4 trillion barrels of oil have been consumed in all history, and about 800 billion tonnes of coal, very roughly.

A barrel of crude (159 L) will produce about 330 litres of water.
There’s not much hydrogen in coal, let’s say … 4% average? So a tonne of coal will something like 360 litres of water on combustion.

All of this adds up to about .74 * 10 ^ 14 L of water. There are other fossil fuels but historically those are the big two. Let’s round it up to 10^15 L to cover gas and so on.

The area of the Earth’s oceans are 361.1 million km², so even if half of all the water vapour produced by burning fossil fuels went into the liquid phase rather than gas or solid, it would raise the water level by 1 millimetre.

That much. I’m surprised.

Double my estimate, but I’m not going to argue the point.

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

Answering that properly would be a bit more work than I feel like doing on a Sunday arvo :-) but let’s put it this way…

About 1.4 trillion barrels of oil have been consumed in all history, and about 800 billion tonnes of coal, very roughly.

A barrel of crude (159 L) will produce about 330 litres of water.
There’s not much hydrogen in coal, let’s say … 4% average? So a tonne of coal will something like 360 litres of water on combustion.

All of this adds up to about .74 * 10 ^ 14 L of water. There are other fossil fuels but historically those are the big two. Let’s round it up to 10^15 L to cover gas and so on.

The area of the Earth’s oceans are 361.1 million km², so even if half of all the water vapour produced by burning fossil fuels went into the liquid phase rather than gas or solid, it would raise the water level by 1 millimetre.

That much. I’m surprised.

Double my estimate, but I’m not going to argue the point.

engineer