Nuclear fall in: Why I'm becoming a pro-nuke nut (SciAm)

[Dogmudgeon]

I had originally started this post with a wry remark, but no way will I be able to compete with the collective efforts of a dozen antis with access to a 35-year backlog of wisecracks.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=split-decisionor-nuclear-fall-in-wh-2010-08-16">Nuclear fall in: Why I'm becoming a pro-nuke nut
John Horgan: Cross-Check

My belated education in nuclear energy continues. I just read Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy by Gwyneth Cravens, a petite, energetic novelist and journalist. Cravens contacted me after seeing my chat with Rod Adams, a nuclear-trained Naval officer, on Bloggingheads.tv last May (which I followed up with a post). I recently met Cravens during a tour of the Indian Point nuclear power plant in New York State, which she arranged. I'm feeling a lot better about living near Indian Point, less because of what I learned during my tour (although plant employees were quite informative) than because of Power to Save the World.

The 2007 book describes how Cravens morphed from a nuke-fearing greenie who in the 1980s opposed the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island, where she lives, into a proponent who believes that we need nuclear power to save us from global warming and other adverse effects of fossil fuels. Cravens repeats the refrain that the risks of nuclear energy have been exaggerated; nuclear power, both civilian and military, hasn't killed a single person in the U.S. over the past half century. But she fleshes out these statements with surprising (to me) details.

...

—Fifty plant and emergency workers died of acute radiation exposure in the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the U.S.S.R., the worst nuclear accident in history. The explosion contaminated more than 200,000 square kilometers with radioactive fallout, but radiation in parts of this zone is now lower than in Finland and other regions of the world with naturally high radiation. The International Agency for Research on Cancer estimates that radiation releases from Chernobyl caused a slight increase in thyroid cancer but adds that "smoking will cause several thousand times more cancers in the same population." So far, there have been no excess deaths among the 200,000 "liquidators" who helped clean up the mess from Chernobyl compared with controls.

...

I've always had a knee-jerk distrust of nuclear advocates, just as I have of right-wing Congressmen, psychiatric-drug shills and string theorists. But I trust Cravens and the experts she interviewed—including physicists, engineers and epidemiologists—over many years of reporting. If you're agonizing over whether to support nuclear energy, read Cravens's book and see if you find it as persuasive as I do. I also welcome (and expect) challenges to the assertions above.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=split-decisionor-nuclear-fall-in-wh-2010-08-16">Read the whole article at Scientific American Online.

Same here: Dialog (always) welcomed, ridicule (probably) ignored.

--d!

[Confusious]

1. Nuclear waste may become less of a problem

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2009/01/27/nuclear_hybrid/

[Tikki]

2. And yet those who live with nuke waste see solutions...

and timetables and disposal very problematic.
Guess it has to do with where you live and if you care about the health of others.

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kplu/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1675812/KPLU.Local.News/Blue.Ribbon.Commission.On.Nuclear.Waste.Tours.Hanford

There are so many of these articles, I never know where to start.



Tikki

[bananas]

3. He's not a scientist - why is he writing for "Scientific American"?

They can't find real scientists anymore?
"He received a B.A. in English from Columbia University's School of General Studies in 1982 and an M.S. from Columbia's School of Journalism in 1983."

[Dogmudgeon]

9. Because he's a science journalist, and SciAm publishes science journalism

John Horgan's column, in particular, is opinion. That you disagree with him does not invalidate his work.

I strongly doubt that you would be so demanding of formal scientific bona fides if the article disapproved of nuclear energy, as other pieces in Scientific American have done.

--d!

[bananas]

36. Oh, so this is an "opinion" by a "journalist"

Scientific American does include article written by actual scientists.
I've posted a few, such as this one last year:

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x214707

Scientific American: A Plan to Power 100 Percent of the Planet with Renewables

From the November 2009 Scientific American Magazine:

A Plan to Power 100 Percent of the Planet with Renewables

Wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world's energy, eliminating all fossil fuels. Here's how
By Mark Z. Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi

Key Concepts
* Supplies of wind and solar energy on accessible land dwarf the energy consumed by people around the globe.
* The authors’ plan calls for 3.8 million large wind turbines, 90,000 solar plants, and numerous geothermal, tidal and rooftop photovoltaic installations worldwide.
* The cost of generating and transmitting power would be less than the projected cost per kilowatt-hour for fossil-fuel and nuclear power.
* Shortages of a few specialty materials, along with lack of political will, loom as the greatest obstacles.

In December leaders from around the world will meet in Copenhagen to try to agree on cutting back greenhouse gas emissions for decades to come. The most effective step to implement that goal would be a massive shift away from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy sources. If leaders can have confidence that such a transformation is possible, they might commit to an historic agreement. We think they can.

<snip>

More to Explore
* Infographic: Powering a Green Planet: Sustainable Energy, Made Interactive
* PDF: Download the Full Paper from paper by Jacobson and Delucchi

The "Infographic" has video interviews and other multimedia features.
Althought the main article is behind a pay wall, the Infographic and PDF are free to non-subscribers.

Unfortunately, the article is now only available to subscribers,
although IIRC one of the authors has it freely available on his website as a pdf,
without the videos and multimedia features.

[bananas]

37. "Old Consultant Welcomes New Sucker" - Hill & Knowlton is hiring "Nuclear Nayirahs"

Maybe Hogan should write about the sleazy PR campaign being run by the nuclear industry - after all, he's probably targeted by them. Or is he on their payroll already? The nuclear industry has destroyed it's credibility by hiring Hill & Knowlton. You can't trust the nuclear industry.

http://www.prwatch.org/node/8679

Old Consultant Welcomes New Sucker

Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, November 5, 2009

The Philadelphia Inquirer is the latest news outlet to fail to disclose the fact that Patrick Moore, a former Greenpeace activist turned PR consultant, is on the nuclear industry payroll. A recent 690-word opinion column by Moore, titled "Old foes welcome clean fuel," promotes nuclear power as a "solution" to global warming. At the foot of the column, the biographical note states that Moore "co-chairs the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASEnergy), which promotes the economic and environmental benefits of nuclear power as part of a green energy economy." What it doesn't state is that CASEnergy is a front group created by Hill & Knowlton for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the peak lobby group for the U.S. nuclear industry. Just over three years ago, shortly after Moore's "coalition" was launched, Hill and Knowlton's Frank Mankiewicz insisted in a letter to the Columbia Journalism Review that Moore “has been completely transparent about funding sources and relationships with the Nuclear Energy Institute and the public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton."

edit to add: some information from an old thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x109843

Hill & Knowlton's 50 Year Fudge

http://www.prwatch.org/node/6356

Hill & Knowlton's 50 Year Fudge
Submitted by Bob Burton on Mon, 08/20/2007 - 21:25.

Some PR executives take citizens for complete idiots.

<snip>


Turbineguy Response to Original message
1. Wasn't Hill and Knowlton the PR firm

that sold us GW1 with the incubator story?


bananas Response to Reply #1
2. Yes - "Nurse Nayirah" was in reality the Kuwait ambassador's daughter

She was protected by diplomatic immunity as she lied before Congress on live TV.


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hill_%26_Knowlton

<snip>

Desert Storm

In 1990, H&K went to work for the government of Kuwait, organizing PR in support of the war with Iraq. During the Nayirah affair in the first Gulf war, Victoria Clarke was General Manager of Hill & Knowlton's Washington, DC office. (Clarke would later become Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs for the George W. Bush administration.)

<snip>


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_babies-from-incubators_hoax_and_war_in_the_Persian_Gulf

<snip>

Hill & Knowlton, then the world's largest PR firm, served as mastermind for the Kuwaiti campaign. Its activities alone would have constituted the largest foreign-funded campaign ever aimed at manipulating American public opinion. By law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act should have exposed this propaganda campaign to the American people, but the Justice Department chose not to enforce it. Nine days after Saddam's army marched into Kuwait, the Emir's government agreed to fund a contract under which Hill & Knowlton would represent Citizens for a Free Kuwait, a classic PR front group designed to hide the real role of the Kuwaiti government and its collusion with the Bush administration. Over the next six months, the Kuwaiti government channeled $11.9 million dollars to Citizens for a Free Kuwait, whose only other funding totalled $17,861 from 78 individuals. Virtually all of CFK's budget - $10.8 million - went to Hill & Knowlton in the form of fees.

<snip>

In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on October 10 came from a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah. According to the Caucus, Nayirah's full name was being kept confidential to prevent Iraqi reprisals against her family in occupied Kuwait. Sobbing, she described what she had seen with her own eyes in a hospital in Kuwait City. Her written testimony was passed out in a media kit prepared by Citizens for a Free Kuwait. "I volunteered at the al-Addan hospital," Nayirah said. "While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where . . . babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die."

Three months passed between Nayirah's testimony and the start of the war. During those months, the story of babies torn from their incubators was repeated over and over again. President Bush told the story. It was recited as fact in Congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. "Of all the accusations made against the dictator," MacArthur observed, "none had more impact on American public opinion than the one about Iraqi soldiers removing 312 babies from their incubators and leaving them to die on the cold hospital floors of Kuwait City."

At the Human Rights Caucus, however, Hill & Knowlton and Congressman Lantos had failed to reveal that Nayirah was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait's Ambassador to the US, who sat listening in the hearing room during her testimony. The Caucus also failed to reveal that H&K vice-president Lauri Fitz-Pegado had coached Nayirah in what even the Kuwaitis' own investigators later confirmed was false testimony.

<snip>


http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/17/1530239

Weapons of Mass Deception co-author John Stauber takes a look at how a new Jessica Lynch-related book is being promoted by the PR specialist infamous for coaching "Nayirah," the Kuwaiti girl, in the later-debunked 1990 testimony to Congress that she'd seen Iraqi soldiers murdering Kuwaiti babies.

<snip>


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah

"Nurse Nayirah" was a creation of public relations firm Hill & Knowlton for promoting the 1991 Gulf War.

Fifteen-year-old "Nayirah" (Nijirah al-Sabah, daughter of Saud bin Nasir Al-Sabah Kuwait ambassador to US) testified before the United States Congress in October 1990 that she was a refugee volunteering in the maternity ward of Al Adan hospital in Kuwait City, and that during the occupation by Iraq she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers dumping Kuwaiti infants out of their incubators "on the cold floor to die," and then leaving with the machines.

<snip>

Home Box Office (HBO) presented Nayirah's story as truth in their 2002 Live From Baghdad. Under pressure, HBO eventually added after the final credits that the incubator "allegations were never substantiated."<1> Despite that, media watchdog groups still complained that HBO was perpetuating the original hoax.<2>

<snip>

[jpak]

4. "hasn't killed a single person in the U.S. over the past half century."

Civilian and military uranium workers know differently.

That's why the US government has shelled out billions in claims by thousands of former nuclear fuel cycle workers - for morbidity and death caused by radiation exposure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_Exposure_Compensation_Act

Cravens is an idiot

yup

[jailthecrooks]

5. Coal miners know different

I guess you don't know that the death rate among coal workers is far higher than nuclear workers. OSHA statistics matter.

[kristopher]

7. I guess you don't know what the available options actually are...

"Coal or nuclear" is a completely false choice framed that way for the benefit of the uninformed by the nuclear industry. This peer reviewed paper is a look at the actual choices and how they stack up...

Abstract here: http://www.rsc.org/publishing/journals/EE/article.asp?doi=b809990c

Full article for download here: http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/revsolglobwarmairpol.htm


Energy Environ. Sci., 2009, 2, 148 - 173, DOI: 10.1039/b809990c

Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security

Mark Z. Jacobson

Abstract
This paper reviews and ranks major proposed energy-related solutions to global warming, air pollution mortality, and energy security while considering other impacts of the proposed solutions, such as on water supply, land use, wildlife, resource availability, thermal pollution, water chemical pollution, nuclear proliferation, and undernutrition.

Nine electric power sources and two liquid fuel options are considered. The electricity sources include solar-photovoltaics (PV), concentrated solar power (CSP), wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, wave, tidal, nuclear, and coal with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. The liquid fuel options include corn-ethanol (E85) and cellulosic-E85. To place the electric and liquid fuel sources on an equal footing, we examine their comparative abilities to address the problems mentioned by powering new-technology vehicles, including battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs), and flex-fuel vehicles run on E85.

Twelve combinations of energy source-vehicle type are considered. Upon ranking and weighting each combination with respect to each of 11 impact categories, four clear divisions of ranking, or tiers, emerge.

Tier 1 (highest-ranked) includes wind-BEVs and wind-HFCVs.
Tier 2 includes CSP-BEVs, geothermal-BEVs, PV-BEVs, tidal-BEVs, and wave-BEVs.
Tier 3 includes hydro-BEVs, nuclear-BEVs, and CCS-BEVs.
Tier 4 includes corn- and cellulosic-E85.

Wind-BEVs ranked first in seven out of 11 categories, including the two most important, mortality and climate damage reduction. Although HFCVs are much less efficient than BEVs, wind-HFCVs are still very clean and were ranked second among all combinations.

Tier 2 options provide significant benefits and are recommended.

Tier 3 options are less desirable. However, hydroelectricity, which was ranked ahead of coal-CCS and nuclear with respect to climate and health, is an excellent load balancer, thus recommended.

The Tier 4 combinations (cellulosic- and corn-E85) were ranked lowest overall and with respect to climate, air pollution, land use, wildlife damage, and chemical waste. Cellulosic-E85 ranked lower than corn-E85 overall, primarily due to its potentially larger land footprint based on new data and its higher upstream air pollution emissions than corn-E85.

Whereas cellulosic-E85 may cause the greatest average human mortality, nuclear-BEVs cause the greatest upper-limit mortality risk due to the expansion of plutonium separation and uranium enrichment in nuclear energy facilities worldwide. Wind-BEVs and CSP-BEVs cause the least mortality.

The footprint area of wind-BEVs is 2–6 orders of magnitude less than that of any other option. Because of their low footprint and pollution, wind-BEVs cause the least wildlife loss.

The largest consumer of water is corn-E85. The smallest are wind-, tidal-, and wave-BEVs.

The US could theoretically replace all 2007 onroad vehicles with BEVs powered by 73000–144000 5 MW wind turbines, less than the 300000 airplanes the US produced during World War II, reducing US CO2 by 32.5–32.7% and nearly eliminating 15000/yr vehicle-related air pollution deaths in 2020.

In sum, use of wind, CSP, geothermal, tidal, PV, wave, and hydro to provide electricity for BEVs and HFCVs and, by extension, electricity for the residential, industrial, and commercial sectors, will result in the most benefit among the options considered. The combination of these technologies should be advanced as a solution to global warming, air pollution, and energy security. Coal-CCS and nuclear offer less benefit thus represent an opportunity cost loss, and the biofuel options provide no certain benefit and the greatest negative impacts.

[Dogmudgeon]

10. Your Magic Bullet is STILL wrong

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE">Scandinavian and British experts on the abuse of Peer Review in political rhetoric.

--d!

[phantom power]

11. :rofl:

:patriot:

[XemaSab]

14. Well played

:D

[kristopher]

19. You are still unabashedly pushing nuclear industry talking points...

Jacobson's peer reviewed analysis is solid and rates nuclear power as a third rate solution to climate change, pollution and energy security needs.

There is no comparable peer reviewed analysis with contradictory findings.

[Confusious]

22. Now you have to say it's peer reviewed

Reminds me of a guy who had to say 'I am not gay, I never have been gay'

We all know how that turned out.

[kristopher]

23. Riiiiiiiight...

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/vita/

[Confusious]

26. Exactly right.

Including nuclear war in the cost of nuclear energy. Might as well include the costs of conventional war in the making of steel.

Just because one has a degree doesn't mean they're more honest or won't try to make a name for themselves with the ignorant by wrapping bullshit people want to hear in a pseudo-scientific argument. i.e. Andrew Wakefield.

Do you want a cracker with that?

[kristopher]

29. List of publications for Jacobson

Ph. D. Thesis

Jacobson M. Z. (1994) Developing, coupling, and applying a gas, aerosol, transport, and radiation model to study urban and regional air pollution. Ph. D. Thesis, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, 436 pp.

Books

Jacobson, M. Z., Fundamentals of Atmospheric Modeling. Cambridge University Press, New York, 656 pp., 1999.
Jacobson, M. Z., Fundamentals of Atmospheric Modeling, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, New York, 813 pp., 2005
Jacobson, M. Z., Atmospheric Pollution: History, Science, and Regulation, Cambridge University Press, New York, 399 pp., 2002.


Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles as First Author

1. Jacobson, M. Z., and R. P. Turco, SMVGEAR: A sparse-matrix, vectorized Gear code for atmospheric models, Atmos. Environ., 28A, 273-284, 1994.

2. Jacobson, M. Z., R. P. Turco, E. J. Jensen, and O. B. Toon, Modeling coagulation among particles of different composition and size, Atmos. Environ., 28A, 1327–1338, 1994.

3. Jacobson, M. Z., and R. P. Turco, Simulating condensational growth, evaporation, and coagulationof aerosols using a combined moving and stationary size grid, Aerosol Sci. and Technol., 22, 73 –- 92, 1995.

4. Jacobson, M. Z., Computation of global photochemistry with SMVGEAR II. Atmos. Environ., 29A , 2541-2546, 1995.

5. Jacobson, M. Z., A. Tabazadeh, and R. P. Turco, Simulating equilibrium within aerosols and non-equilibrium between gases and aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 9079–-9091, 1996.

6. Jacobson, M. Z., R. Lu, R. P. Turco, and O. B. Toon, Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part I: Gas-phase simulations, Atmos. Environ., 30B, 1939 –- 1963, 1996.

7. Jacobson, M. Z., Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part II: Aerosol module structure and design, Atmos. Environ., 31A, 131 –- 144, 1997.

8. Jacobson, M. Z., Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part III: Aerosol-phase simulations, Atmos. Environ., 31A, 587 –- 608, 1997.

9. Jacobson, M. Z., Numerical techniques to solve condensational and dissolutional growth equations when growth is coupled to reversible reactions, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 27, 491–-498, 1997.

10. Jacobson, M. Z., Improvement of SMVGEAR II on vector and scalar machines through absolute error tolerance control. Atmos. Environ., 32, 791 –- 796, 1998.

11. Jacobson, M. Z., Studying the effects of aerosols on vertical photolysis rate coefficient and temperature profiles over an urban airshed, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 10,593-10,604, 1998.

12. Jacobson, M. Z., Isolating nitrated and aromatic aerosols and nitrated aromatic gases as sources of ultraviolet light absorption, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 3527-3542, 1999.

13. Jacobson, M.Z., Studying the effects of soil moisture on ozone, temperatures, and winds in Los Angeles, J. Appl. Meteorol., 38, 607, 616, 1999.

14. Jacobson, M. Z., Studying the effects of calcium and magnesium on size-distributed nitrate and ammonium with EQUISOLV II, Atmos. Environ., 33, 3635-3649, 1999.

15. Jacobson, M. Z., A physically-based treatment of elemental carbon optics: Implications for global direct forcing of aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 217-220, 2000.

16. Jacobson, M. Z., Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 1551-1568, 2001.

17. Jacobson, M. Z., Strong radiative heating due to the mixing state of black carbon in atmospheric aerosols, Nature, 409, 695-697, 2001.

18. Jacobson, M. Z., GATOR-GCMM: A global through urban scale air pollution and weather forecast model. 1. Model design and treatment of subgrid soil, vegetation, roads, rooftops, water, sea ice, and snow., J. Geophys. Res., 106, 5385-5402, 2001.

19. Jacobson, M. Z., GATOR-GCMM: 2. A study of day- and nighttime ozone layers aloft, ozone in national parks, and weather during the SARMAP Field Campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 5403-5420, 2001.

20. Jacobson, M. Z., and G. M. Masters, Exploiting wind versus coal, Science, 293, 1438-1438, 2001.

21. Jacobson, M. Z., Analysis of aerosol interactions with numerical techniques for solving coagulation, nucleation, condensation, dissolution, and reversible chemistry among multiple size distributions, J. Geophys. Res., 107 (D19), 4366, doi:10.1029/ 2001JD002044, 2002.

22. Jacobson, M. Z., Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon plus organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, J. Geophys. Res., 107, (D19), 4410, doi:10.1029/ 2001JD001376, 2002.

23. Jacobson, M. Z., Development of mixed-phase clouds from multiple aerosol size distributions and the effect of the clouds on aerosol removal, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D8), 425, doi:10 1029/2002JD002691, 2004.

24. Jacobson, M. Z., J. H. Seinfeld, G. R. Carmichael, and D.G. Streets, The effect on photochemical smog of converting the U.S. fleet of gasoline vehicles to modern diesel vehicles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L02116, doi:10.1029/2003GL018448, 2004.

25. Jacobson, M.Z., and J.H. Seinfeld, Evolution of nanoparticle size and mixing state near the point of emission, Atmos. Environ., 38, 1839-1850, 2004

26. Jacobson, M. Z., The short-term cooling but long-term global warming due to biomass burning, J. Climate, 17, 2909-2926, 2004.

27. Jacobson, M.Z., The climate response of fossil-fuel and biofuel soot, accounting for soot’s feedback to snow and sea ice albedo and emissivity, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D21201, doi:10.1029/2004JD004945, 2004.

28. Jacobson, M.Z., A solution to the problem of nonequilibrium acid/base gas-particle transfer at long time step, Aerosol Sci. Technol, 39, 92-103, 2005.

29. Jacobson, M.Z., A refined method of parameterizing absorption coefficients among multiple gases simultaneously from line-by-line data, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 506-517, 2005

30. Jacobson, M.Z., Studying ocean acidification with conservative, stable numerical schemes for nonequilibrium air-ocean exchange and ocean equilibrium chemistry, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D07302, doi:10.1029/2004JD005220, 2005.

31. Jacobson, M.Z., W.G. Colella, and D.M. Golden, Cleaning the air and improving health with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, Science , in press, 2005.

32. Jacobson, M.Z., D.B. Kittelson, and W.F. Watts, Enhanced coagulation due to evaporation and its effect on nanoparticle evolution, Environmental Science and Technology, 39 , 9486-9492, 2005.

33. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of absorption by soot inclusions within clouds and precipitation on global climate, J. Phys. Chem . A , 110, 6860-6873, 2006.

34. Jacobson, M.Z., and Y.J. Kaufmann, Aerosol reduction of the wind, Geophys. Res. Lett ., 33 , L24814, doi:10.1029/2006GL027838, 2006.

35. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of ethanol (E85) versus gasoline vehicles on cancer and mortality in the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol ., 10.1021/es062085v, 2007.

36. Jacobson, M.Z., Y.J. Kaufmann, Y. Rudich, Examining feedbacks of aerosols to urban climate with a model that treats 3-D clouds with aerosol inclusions, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24205, doi:10.1029/2007JD008922, 2007.

37. Jacobson, M.Z., On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality, Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L03809, doi:10.1029/2007GL031101, 2008,

38. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of wind-powered hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on stratospheric ozone and global climate, Geophys. Res. Lett., in press, 2008.

39. Jacobson, M.Z., The short-term effects of agriculture on air pollution and climate in California, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D23101, doi:10.1029/2008JD010689, in press, 2008.

40. Jacobson, M.Z., Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Energy & Environmental Science, 2, 148-173, doi:10.1039/b809990c, 2009

41. Jacobson, M.Z., and D.G. Streets, The influence of future anthropogenic emissions on climate, natural emissions, and air quality, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D08118, doi:10.1029/2008JD011476, 2009

42. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of biofuels vs. other new vehicle technologies on air pollution, global warming, land use, and water, Int. J. Biotechnology, 11, 14-59, 2009.

43. Jacobson, M.Z., and M.A. Delucci, A path to sustainable energy by 2030, Scientific American, November 2009 (cover story).

44. Jacobson, M.Z., The enhancement of local air pollution by urban CO2 domes, Environ. Sci. Technol., doi:10.1021/es903018m, 2010.

45. Jacobson, M.Z., Short-term effects of controlling fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, J. Geophys.Res., in press, 2010.

46. Jacobson, M.Z., and D.L. Ginnebaugh, The global-through-urban nested 3-D simulation of air pollution with a 13,600-reaction photochemical mechanism, J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2010.

Additional Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles (Alphabetical)

47. Archer, C. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, Spatial and temporal distributions of U.S. winds and wind power at 80 m derived from measurements , J. Geophys. Res ., 108 ( D9 ) 4289, doi:10.1029/2002JD002076, 2003 .

48. Archer, C. L., M.Z. Jacobson, and F.L. Ludwig, The Santa Cruz eddy. Part I: Observations and statistics, Mon. Wea. Rev., 133 , 767-782, 2005 .

49. Archer, C. L. and M.Z. Jacobson, The Santa Cruz eddy. Part II: Mechanisms of formation, Mon. Wea. Rev ., 133 , 767-782 , 2005.

50. Archer, C.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, Evaluation of global wind power, J. Geophys. Res, 110 , D12110, doi:10.1029/2004JD005462, 2005 .

51. Archer, C.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, Supplying baseload power and reducing transmission requirements by interconnecting wind farms, J. Applied Meteorol. and Climatology, 46, 1701-1717, doi:10.1175/2007JAMC1538.1, 2007, www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/winds/.

52. Barth, M. C., S. Sillman, R. Hudman, M. Z. Jacobson, C.-H. Kim, A. Monod, and J. Liang, Summary of the cloud chemistry modeling intercomparison: Photochemical box model simulation, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D7) doi: 10.1029/2002JD002673, 2003.

53. Carmichael, G. R., D. Streets, G. Calori, H. Ueda, M. Amann, M. Z. Jacobson and J. E. Hansen, Changing trends in sulfur emissions in Asia: Implications for acid deposition, air pollution, and climate, Environmental Sci. Technol., 36, 4707-4713, 2002.

54. Chen, Y., S. Mills, J. Street, D. Golan, A. Post, M.Z. Jacobson, A. Paytan, Estimates of atmospheric dry deposition and associated input of nutrients to Gulf of Aqaba seawater, J. Geophys. Res ., 112 , D04309, doi:10.1029/2006JD007858, 2007.

55. Colella, W.G., M.Z. Jacobson, and D.M. Golden, Switching to a U.S. hydrogen fuel cell vehicle fleet: The resultant change in emissions, energy use, and global warming gases, J. Power Sources , 150, 150-181, 2005.

56. Delitsky, M. L., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Nitrogen ion clusters in Triton's atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 17, 1725-1728, 1990.

57. Drdla, K., A. Tabazadeh, R. P. Turco, M. Z. Jacobson, J. E. Dye, C. Twohy, and D. Baumgardner, Analysis of the physical state of one Arctic polar stratospheric cloud based on observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 2475-2478, 1994.

58. Dvorak, M., D.L. Archer, and M.Z. Jacobson, California offshore wind energy potential, Renewable Energy, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.022, 2009.

59. Edgerton, S.A., M.C. MacCracken, M.Z. Jacobson, A. Ayala, C.E. Whitman, and M.C. Trexler, Critical review discussion: Prospects for future climate change and the reasons for early action, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 58, 1386-1400, 2008.

60. Elliott, S., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Tests on combined projection / forward differencing integration for stiff photochemical family systems at long time step, Computers Chem., 17, 91‹102, 1993.

61. Elliott, S., M. Shen, C. Y. J. Kao, R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, A streamlined family photochemistry module reproduces major nonlinearities in the global tropospheric ozone system, Computers Chem., 20, 235-259, 1996.

62. Elliott , S., C.-Y. J. Kao, F. Gifford, S. Barr, M. Shen, R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Free tropospheric ozone production after deep convection of dispersing tropical urban plumes, Atmos. Environ., 30A, 4263-4274, 1996.

63. Freedman, F. R., and M. Z. Jacobson, Transport-dissipation analytical solutions to the E-ε turbulence model and their role in predictions of the neutral ABL, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 102, 117-138, 2002.

64. Freedman, F., and M. Z. Jacobson, Modification of the standard ε-equation for the stable ABL through enforced consistency with Monin-Obukhov similarity theory, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 106, 383-410, 2003.

65. Fridlind, A. M., and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of gas-aerosol equilibrium and aerosol pH in the remote marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACE 1), J. Geophys. Res., 105, 17,325-17,340, 2002.

66. Fridlind, A. M., M. Z. Jacobson, V. -M. Kerminen, R. E. Hillamo, V. Ricard, and J.-L Jaffrezo, Gas/aerosol partitioning in the Arctic: Comparison of size-resolved equilibrium model results with data, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 19,891-19,904, 2000

67. Fridlind, A. M., and M. Z. Jacobson, Point and column aerosol radiative closure during ACE 1: Effects of particle shape and size, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D3) doi:10.1029/2001JD001553, 2003.

68. Ginnebaugh, D.L., J. Liang, and M.Z. Jacobson, Examining the Temperature Dependence of Ethanol (E85) versus Gasoline Emissions on Air Pollution with a Largely-Explicit Chemical Mechanism, Atmos. Environ., in press, 2009.

69. Hu, X.-M, Y. Zhang, M.Z. Jacobson, and C.K. Chan, Evaluation and improvement of gas/particle mass transfer treatments for aerosol simulation and forecast, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D11208, doi:10.1029/2007JD009588, 2008.

70. Jiang, Q., J.D. Doyle, T. Haack, M.J. Dvorak, C.L. Archer, and M.Z. Jacobson, Exploring wind energy potential off the California coast, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L20819, doi:10.1029/2008GL034674, 2008.

71. Kempton, W., C.L. Archer, A. Dhanju, R.W. Garvine, and M.Z. Jacobson, Large CO2 reductions via offshore wind power matched to inherent storage in energy end-uses, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L02817, doi:10.1029/2006GL028016, 2007.

72. Ketefian, G.S., and M.Z. Jacobson, A mass, energy, vorticity, and potential enstrophy conserving boundary treatment scheme for the shallow water equations, J. Comp. Phys., 228, 1-32, doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.08.009, 2009.

73. Kreidenweis, S. M., C. Walcek, G. Feingold, W. Gong, M. Z. Jacobson, C.-H. Kim, X. Liu, J. E.Penner, A. Nenes and J. H. Seinfeld, Modification of aerosol mass and size distribution due to aqueous-phase SO2 oxidation in clouds: Comparisons of several models, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D7) doi:10.1029/2002JD002697, 2003.

74. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of sulfur dioxide oxidation pathways over a range of liquid water contents, pHs, and temperatures, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 13,749-13,769, 1999.

75. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, Comparison of a 4000-reaction chemical mechanism with the Carbon Bond IV and an adjusted Carbon Bond IV-EX mechanism using SMVGEAR II., Atmos. Environ., 34, 3015-3026, 2000.

76. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, Effects of subgrid mixing on ozone production in a chemical model: Dilution may reduce bulk ozone production efficiency, Atmos. Environ., 34, 2975-2982, 2000.

77. Lu, R., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, An integrated air pollution modeling system for urban and regional scales. Part I: Structure and performance, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 6063-6080, 1997.

78. Lu, R., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, An integrated air pollution modeling system for urban and regional scales. Part II: Simulations for SCAQS 1987, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 6081-6098, 1997.

79. Ma, Jianzhong, J. Tang, S.-M. Li, and M. Z. Jacobson, Size distributions of ionic aerosols measured at Waliguan Observatory: Implication for nitrate gas-to-particle transfer processes in the free troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 108, (D17) 4541, doi:10.1029/2002JD003356, 2003.

80. Moya, M., S. N. Pandis, and M. Z. Jacobson, Is the size distribution of urban aerosols determined by thermodynamic equilibrium? An application to Southern California, Atmos. Environ., 36, 2349-2365, 2001.

81. Naiman, A.D., S.K. Lele, J.T. Wilkerson, and M.Z. Jacobson, Parameterization of subgrid aircraft emission plumes for use in large-scale atmospheric simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2551-2560, 2010.

82. Sta. Maria, M.R.V., and M.Z. Jacobson, Investigating the effect of large wind farms on energy in the atmosphere, Energies, 2, 816-836, doi:10.3390/en20400816, 2009. (link to www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/2/4/816/pdf)

83. Streets, D. G., K. Jiang, X. Hu, J. E. Sinton, X.-Q. Zhang, D. Xu, M. Z. Jacobson, and J. E. Hansen, Recent reductions in China's greenhouse gas emissions, Science, 294, 1835-1836, 2001.

84. Stuart, A. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, A time-scale investigation of volatile chemical retention during hydrometeor freezing: 1. Non-rime freezing and dry-growth riming without spreading, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D6), 4178, doi:10.1029/2001JD001408, 2002.

85. Stuart, A. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, Volatile chemical retention during dry-growth riming: A model. J. Geophys. Res., 109 , D07305, doi:10.1029/2003JD004197, 2004.

86. Stuart, A.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, A numerical model of the partitioning of trace chemical solutes during drop freezing, J. Atmos. Chem ., in press, 2005

87. Tabazadeh, A., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, A model for studying the composition and chemical effects of stratospheric aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 12,897 - 12,914, 1994.

88. Tabazadeh, A., R. P. Turco, K. Drdla, and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of Type I polar stratospheric cloud formation, Geophys. Res. Let., 21, 1619-1622,1994.

89. Tabazadeh, A., M. Z. Jacobson, H. B. Singh, O. B. Toon, J. S. Lin, B. Chatfield, A. N. Thakur, R. W. Talbot, and J. E. Dibb Nitric acid scavenging by mineral and biomass burning aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 4185-4188, 1998.

90. Zhang, Y., C. Seigneur, J. H. Seinfeld, M. Z. Jacobson, and F. Binkowski, Simulation of aerosol dynamics: A comparative review of algorithms used in air quality models, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 31, 487-514, 1999.

91. Zhang, Y., C. Seigneur, J. H. Seinfeld, M. Jacobson, S. L. Clegg, and F. Binkowski, A comparative review of inorganic aerosol thermodynamic equilibrium modules: Similarities, differences, and their likely causes, Atmos. Environ., 34, 117-137, 2000.

92. Zhang, Y., B. Pun, K. Vijayaraghavan, S.-Y. Wu, C. Seigneur, S. Pandis, M. Jacobson, A. Nenes, and J. H. Seinfeld, Development and application of the model of aerosol dynamics, reaction, ionization, and dissolution (MADRID), J. Geophys. Res., 109 (D1), D01202, doi:10.1029/2003JD003501, 2004.

93. Zhang, Y., X.-Y. Wen, K. Wang, K. Vijayaraghavan, and M.Z. Jacobson, Probing into regional 03 and PM pollution in the U.S., Part II. An examination of formation mechanisms through a process analysis technique and sensitivity study, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D22304, doi:10.1029/2009JD011898, 2009.

94. Zhang, Y., X. Wen, K. Wang, K. Vijayaraghavan, and M.Z. Jacobson, Probing into regional O3 and particulate matter pollution in the United States: 2. An examination of formation mechanisms through a process analysis technique and sensitivity study, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D22305, doi:1029/2009JD011900, 2009.

95. Zhang, Y., P. Liu, X.-H. Liu, B. Pun, C. Seigneur, M. Z. Jacobson, W. Wang, Fine scale modeling of wintertime aerosol mass, number, and size distributions in Central California, J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2010.

Invited Keynote Talks at Conferences / Workshops and Distinguished Lectures

1. Testing the impact of interactively coupling a meteorological model to an air quality model. Measurements and Modeling in Environmental Pollution Conference, Madrid, Spain, April 22 - 24, 1997.

2. Examining the causes and effects of downward ultraviolet irradiance reductions in Los Angeles., Environsoft 98 Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, Nov. 10 - 12, 1998.

3. Computational design of a global-through-urban scale air pollution / weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, 8th Supercomputer Workshop, Tsukuba, Japan, September 18-20, 2000.

4. Control of black carbon, the most efficient method of controlling global warming, Air Pollution Modeling and Simulation conference, Paris, France, April 9-13, 2001.

5. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, Workshop on Climate and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, December 3-5, 2001.

6. Current and future effects of black carbon on climate, Sixth ETH Conference on Nanoparticle Measurement, Zurich, Switzerland, August 19th-21st, 2002.

7. Addressing global warming through a large-scale wind/hydrogen program, Symposium on Environmental and Occupational Safety, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, November 6-7, 2003.

8. Advances in computer modeling of air pollution and climate, Third Canadian Workshop on Air Quality, Quebec City, Canada, March 24-26, 2004.

9. The climate response of soot, accounting for its feedback to snow and sea ice albedo and emissivity, Distinguished Lecture Series, Laboratory for Atmospheres at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, November 18, 2004.

10. Hydrogen and Wind Apollo Project, Symposium on converting existing city vehicles to utilize renewable hydrogen power, Foothill College, California, Dec. 9, 2005.

11. Effects on health and pollution of converting to hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and feasibility of wind-hydrogen, Second HyCARE symposium, Laxenburg, Austria, Dec. 19-20, 2005.

12. Global climate change: Aerosol versus greenhouse gas causes and the feasibility of a large-scale wind-energy solution, Distinguished Lecture Series, Centre for Global Change Science, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, February 21, 2005.

13. Fossil-fuel soot's contribution to global warming, 2 nd International Conference on Global Warming and the Next Ice Age, Santa Fe, New Mexico, July 17-21, 2005.

14. The relative effects of greenhouse gases, absorbing aerosol particles, and scattering aerosol particles on global climate, Joint Session of the Atmospheric Chemistry and Atmospheric Aerosol Workshops, Telluride, Colorado, July 30-August 6, 2006.

15. Air quality impacts of biofuels, Woods Institute Biofuels Workshop, Stanford University, Dec. 5-6, 2006.

16. The role of black carbon as a factor in climate change and its impact on public health, Testimony in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, D.C, October 18, 2007.

17. Comparative effects of vehicles technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution, Plenary presentation for EnviroSymp2007, Sustainable Solutions, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, Nov. 5-6, 2007.

18. A true-renewable-energy solution to global warming, Hon. Al Gore and Mrs. Tipper Gore, and the Alliance for Climate Protection, New York City, New York, January 10, 2008.

19. Global warming health effects and energy solutions. CIRES Distinguished Lecture, CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, Feb 8, 2008.

20. The relative impact of carbon dioxide on air pollution health problems in California versus the rest of the U.S., Testimony in the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Washington, D.C, April 9, 2008.

21. Briefing on the effects of carbon dioxide on air pollution mortality, American Meteorological Society, Washington, D.C., May 16, 2008.

22. Computer modeling of the atmosphere: Identifying causes and effects of and evaluating solutions to global warming, SimBuild Conference, Berkeley, California, July 30, 2008.

23. Effects of biofuels versus new vehicle technologies on air pollution, global warming, and landuse, Biofuels in the Midwest, a Discussion, Chicago, Illinois, September 5-7, 2008.

24. Biofuels in context / Energy solutions, 2008 Science for Nature Symposium, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC, November 19-20, 2008.

25. The effect of locally-emitted CO2 on gases, aerosols, clouds, and health, Aerosol-Cloud-Climate Interactions Symposia, 11th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry, American Meteorological Society, January 11-15, 2009, Phoenix, Arizona.

26. Aerosol Impacts on Climate, Energy, and the Economy, Goldschmidt 2009, Challenges to Our Volatile Planet, Davos, Switzerland, June 22-26, 2009.

27. Environmental Protection Agency Hearing: Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Arlington, Virginia, May 18, 2009.

28 Effects of fossil-fuel and biofuel soot on snow, clouds, and climate and a review of methods of solving the climate problem, German NGO consortium, Berlin, Germany, June 19, 2009.

29. The global and regional climate and air pollution health effects of fossil-fuel versus biofuel soot, 13th ETH Conference on Combustion Generated Nanoparticles, Zurich Switzerland, June 22-24, 2009.

30. Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Aerosol Impacts on Climate, Energy, and the Economy, Goldschmidt 2009, Challenges to Our Volatile Planet, Davos, Switzerland, June 22-26, 2009.

31. A plan for a sustainable future, Council of Scientific Society Presidents, Washington D.C., December 3, 2009.

32. Effects of local CO2 domes on air pollution and health, Clean Power, Health Communities Conference, Oakland, California, February 10, 2010.

33. Ranking of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Ted Conference Debate with Stewart Brand, Long Beach, California, February 11, 2010.

34. A plan for a sustainable future, GeoPower America, San Francisco, California, Febreuary 16, 2010.

35. A plan for a sustainable future, Beyond Zero, Melbourne, Australia, February 21, 2010 (internet presentation).

36. A plan for a sustainable future, European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources, European Parliament Building, Brussels, Belgium, March 22, 2010.

37. A plan for a sustainable future, Press and Information Office of the Federal Government, Berlin, Germany, March 23, 2010.

38. A plan for a sustainable future, Bundestag, German Parliament Building, Berlin, Germany, March 23, 2010.

39. Presentation at 10-year anniversary for Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), Berlin, Germany, March 25, 2010.

40. A plan for a sustainable future, Clean Air Forum, Sydney, Australia, August 19, 2010.

41. A plan for a sustainable future, La Ciudad de Ideas, San Andres Cholula, Pueblo, Mexico, November 11-13, 2010.

Other Invited Talks at Conferences / Workshops Since 1994

1. Simulating the sensitivity of trace gas concentrations to hydrocarbon emissions. American Geophysical Union 1994 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, December 5-9, 1994.

2. Application of a sparse-matrix, vectorized Gear-type code (SMVGEAR) in a new air pollution modeling system, Symposium on Numerical Algorithms for Air Pollution Models in the Third International Congress on Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM), Hamburg, Germany, July 3-7, 1995.

3. Chemical mechanism solver techniques and implementation of mechanism, Workshop on Modeling Chemistry in Clouds and Mesoscale Models, National Center for Atmospheric Research, March 6-8, 2000.

4. Development of a global-through-urban scale nested and coupled air pollution and weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, Institute for Mathematics and its Applications Annual Program, "Reactive flow and Transport Phenomena," U. of Minnesota, March 15-19, 2000.

5. A study of the climate response to natural plus anthropogenic aerosols, Telluride Atmospheric Chemistry Meeting, Telluride, Colorado, August 7-11, 2000.

6. A study of the mixing state of aerosols and the effect of the mixing state on global direct forcing, Workshop on Atmospheric Composition, Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate Change, Aspen Global Change Institute, Aspen, Colorado, August 11-19, 2000.

7. A global-through-urban scale air pollution, weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, Workshop on Atmospheric Composition, Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate Change, Aspen Global Change Institute, Aspen, Colorado, August 11-19, 2000.

8. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS), San Francisco, California, May 28-30, 2001.

9. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, the most effective method slowing global warming, CIESIN/USEPA//Environment Canada workshop, Photoxidants, Particles, and Haze across the Arctic and North Atlantic: Transport, Observations, and Models, Palisades, New York, June 12-15, 2001.

10. Climate change mitigation and aerosols, Climate Change Impacts and Integrated Assessment Workshop VII, Snowmass, CO, July 30 - Aug. 10, 2001.

11. Exploiting the lower cost of wind versus coal and natural gas to address energy shortages, pollution, and the Kyoto Protocol. Economist's Summit: The Role of Renewable Energy in California's Future, Capital Building, Sacramento, California, September 5, 2001.

12. Controlling current and future diesel emissions and other sources of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter as an effective method of slowing global warming, Air Pollution as a Climate Forcing Workshop, East-West Center, Hawaii, April 29-May 3, 2002.

13. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, Regional Workshop on Better Air Quality in Asia and Pacific Rim Cities 2002, Hong Kong, December 16-18, 2002.
Global warming impact of black carbon, Greenhouse Gas Reduction International Technology Symposium, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California, March 11-13, 2003.

14. Climate and air pollution effects of gasoline, hybrid, and diesel vehicles (with and without a trap), Haagen-Smit Symposium, California Air Resources Board, Lake Arrowhead, California, May 6-9, 2003.

15. Causes of and Solutions to Global Warming, American Enterprise Institute Conference on Climate Change, Washington D.C., November 19, 2003.

16. Net climate effects of BC and OC 2: Consideration of multiple climatic effects. Air Quality & Climate Meeting on Black Carbon and Organic Carbon: Science, Inventory and Mitigation, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Atmospheric Programs, Washington, D.C., December 3-4, 2003.

17. The effect of diesel on air pollution and global climate, Workshop on cruise ship operations, Cruise Terminal Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting, Port of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, January 23, 2004.

18. Black carbon effects on global warming and regional climate change, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, Seattle, Washington, February 12-16, 2004.

19. Numerical methods for treating size-resolved SOA formation and evolution among multiple size distributions in atmospheric models, Organic Speciation in Atmospheric Aerosol Research, Las Vegas, Nevada, April 5-7, 2004.

20. Black Carbon Effects on Climate with Different Emissions and Model Treatments, Aerosol Black Carbon and Climate Change: Emissions Workshop, San Diego, California, October 13-14, 2004.

21. The effect of particles on global and California climate, Interncontinental Transport and Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Workshop, Chapel Hill, NC, October 21-22, 2004.

22. The effects of aerosols on California climate, MODIS Science Team Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, March 22-24, 2005

23. Regional effect of aerosols on winds, precipitation, and climate, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

24. Global windpower and its potential effect on the hydrogen economy, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

25. Role of aerosols in regional climate: A research frontier, Second Annual Climate Change Research Conference, California Energy Commission and First Scientific Conference, West Coast Governor's Global Warming Initiative, Sacramento, California, Sept. 14-16, 2005.

26. Apollo Project for Wind Energy and Wind-Hydrogen, J.P. Morgan Public Power and Gas Conference, New York, May 11-12, 2005.

27. The effects of aerosols on wind speed, temperatures, and water supply in California, Atmospheric Chemistry Workshop, Telluride, Colorado, July 30-August 6, 2006.

28. Numerical study of the effects of aerosols and irrigation on snow, rain, and regional climate in California, California Energy Commission, Sept. 13-15, 2006.

29. Effects of future emissions and a changed climate on urban air quality, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 20-22, 2007.

30. Effects of black carbon on climate. Symposium on protecting health and slowing global warming through reductions in non-Kyoto pollutants, Sacramento, California, March 29, 2007.

31. The Macro Perspective of Wind Power in the USA, From Local to Global: The Rhode Island Model for Harnessing Wind Power Worldwide, Roger Williams University School of Architecture, Art and Historic Preservation, April 19-20, 2007.

32. Comparing wind and other energy sources for addressing climate and air pollution, From Local to Global: The Rhode Island Model for Harnessing Wind Power Worldwide, Roger Williams University School of Architecture, Art and Historic Preservation, April 19-20, 2007.

33. Wind and rainfall reduction by aerosol particles, Aerosols - properties, processes, climate, Agapi Beach, Crete, April 22-24, 2007.

34. Potential of the wind energy sector, The Haagen-Smit Symposium, Aptos, California, May 14-17, 2007.

35. Extreme global warming and local cooling due to aerosol particles, American Geophysical Union Spring Joint Assembly, Acapulco, Mexico, May 22-25, 2007.

36. Comparative effects of vehicle fuels and technologies on air pollution and climate, Controlling Global Warming and Local Air Pollution - South Coast Air Quality Management District Technical Forum, Diamond Bar, California, June 28, 2007.

37. Effects of black carbon and other non-Kyoto pollutants on climate, Meeting of the California Air Resources Board Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee (ETAAC), Bechtel Conference Center, Stanford University, September 7, 2007.

38. Energy solutions to air pollution and climate change in California (coauthors, M. Dvorak, C.L. Archer, and G. Hoste), Fourth Annual California Climate Change Conference, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, Sept. 10-13, 2007.

39. Effects of future emissions and a changed climate on urban air quality, Impacts of Climate Change on Air Quality in the Pacific Southwest, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, California, October 11, 2007.

40. Examination of proposed strategies for addressing global warming and air pollution. Forum on Alternative Fuels for the Transportation Sector, California State Bar Association, Yosemite, California, Oct. 19-21, 2007.

41. Comparative effects of vehicle technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution. On the Road to Bali: Strengthening the Transatlantic Climate Cooperation, German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the Heinrich Boell Foundation, San Francisco, California, Nov. 16, 2007.

42. The effects on health and climate of ethanol versus other vehicle technologies and fuels, Institute of Medicine’s Roundtable on Environmental Health, Sciences, Research, and Medicine workshop on Environmental Health, Energy, and Transportation: Bringing Health to the Fuel Mixture, National Academies Auditorium, Washington, D.C., Nov. 30, 2007.

43. A solution to the problem of nonequilibrium acid/base gas-particle transfer at long time step. International Aerosol Modeling Algorithms (IAMA) Conference, Davis, California, Dec. 6, 2007.

44. Comparative effects of ethanol (E85), gasoline, and wind-powered electric vehicles on cancer, mortality, climate-relevant emissions, and land requirements in the United States, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 10-14, 2007.

45. Energy and Climate Change Symposium – “The Road to Renewables,” Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Los Angeles, California, Jan. 18, 2008.

46. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Ottawa, Canada, Mar. 25-26, 2008.

47. Effects of local versus global carbon dioxide emissions on local air quality and health, Environmental Protection Agency Division 9 symposium, Stanford University, Stanford, California, May 6, 2008.

48. The effects of ethanol vehicles on air quality and health, Frontiers Meeting on the Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation, Wellcome Trust, London, May 27, 2008 (connected remotely).

49. Air pollution effects of and a comparison of energy solutions to global warming, Critical Review panel, Air & Waste Management Association Annual Meeting, Portland, Oregon, June 25, 2008.

50. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Oct. 22-23, 2008.

51. Evaluation of proposed solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Session on Environmental Consequences of the Changing Global Food System, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 15-19, 2008.

52. Examining effects of black carbon on climate and how to mitigate them through different transportation options, International Council on Clean Transportation, London, UK, Jan. 5-6, 2009.

53. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Palm Springs, California, Feb. 26-27, 2008.

54. Effects of hydrogen on climate and ozone, Department of Energy, Washington, DC, May 19, 2009.

55. Quantifying the effects of aircraft on climate with a model that treats the subgrid evolution of contrails from all commercial flights worldwide, Aviation Emissions Characterization Roadmap Meeting, Washington, DC, June 9, 2009.

56. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Microsoft Research Workshop, Redmond, Washington, July 13, 2009.

57. The comparative effects of fossil fuel soot, biofuel soot, and gasses, and methane on regional and global climate, Arctic ice, and human health, 6th Annual PIER Climate Change Conference, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, Sept. 9, 2009.

58. Solutions to global warming, air pollution, energy security, The true costs of coal: Health solutions for the low carbon economy, Washington DC, October 15-16, 2009.

59. Assessing the impact of aviation on climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, Oct. 22, 2009.

60. Effects of soot on climate, National Association of Clean Air Agencies, Internet conference, November 17, 2009.

61. Development and application of algorithms that simulate the evolution of subgrid contrails from individual aircraft to quantify the global climate effects all commercial aviation, (Jacobson, M.Z., J.T. Wilkerson, A.D. Naiman, S.K. Lele), International Aerosol Modeling Algorithms (IAMA) Conference, Davis, California, Dec. 9-11, 2009.

62. Relative effects of fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 14-18, 2009.

63. Relative effects of fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, Environmental Protection Agency Short-Lived Climate Forcing agent workshop, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, March 3, 2010.

64. Presentation in Brussels at EEAC Energy Working Group: Scenarios and policies for decarbonization, Brussels, Belgium, March 22, 2010.

65. Assessing the impact of aviation on climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Internet presentation), March 24, 2010.

66. TBA, 7th California Wind Energy Collaborative Forum, Davis, California, June 7, 2010.

67. Aeorsol-Cloud-Climate Interactions Symposia, 13th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry, American Meteorological Society, January 23-27, 2011, Seattle, Washington

Invited Seminar Talks Outside of Stanford University Since 1994

1. A gas, aerosol, transport, and radiation model for studying urban and regional air pollution, U. C. Berkeley Environmental Engineering Seminar Series, Berkeley, California, October 7, 1994.

2. Coupling global-scale meteorological and chemical models, Stanford Research Institute Atmospheric Chemistry Group Meeting, Menlo Park, California, February 10, 1995.

3. Numerical simulations of the transport and transformations of air pollutants in an urban airshed, Dept. of Meteorology, San Jose State University, San Jose, California, March 2, 1995.

4. Simulation pollution buildup in the Los Angeles basin with a coupled air quality - meteorology model. Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab, May 7, 1996.

5. Coupling chemical, radiative, and meteorological models in a study of global air pollution, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, March 22, 1995.

6. Air pollution modeling. 3-hour seminar, Dept of Meteorology, San Jose State University, May 15, 1996.

7. Studying the feedback effects of aerosols on air temperatures and gas concentrations with an air pollution model. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, March 17, 1997.

8. Effects of Aerosols and Soil Moisture on Gas Concentrations and Temperatures in Los Angeles, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, May 1, 1997.

9. Aerosol effects on air pollution, Department of Meteorology, San Jose State University, May 1, 1997.

10. UV absorption by particles and its effects on ozone in polluted air, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, April 16, 1998.

11. The effects of absorption by organics and other particulate components on UV irradiance and ozone in Los Angeles, Systems Applications, Inc., San Rafael, CA, August 19, 1998.

12. Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, February 18, 1999.

13. Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, Department of Oceanography, University of Washington, February 25, 1999.

14. Studying the effects of soil moisture on ozone, temperatures, and winds in Los Angeles, Dept. of Meteorology, San Jose State University, March 16, 1999.

15. Examining the causes and effects of ultraviolet radiation reductions in Los Angeles, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, April 1, 1999.

16. Revised estimates of the global direct radiative forcing of aerosols due to a physically-based treatment of elemental carbon optics, Dept. of Geology & Geophysics, University of California, Berkeley, December 8, 1999.

17. Examining the climate response to anthropogenic and natural aerosols, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, March 30, 2000.

18. Studying effects of the large scale on air pollution and weather in Northern California during SARMAP with a global-through-urban scale air pollution/weather forecast model, Environmental Engineering Seminar Series, U. C. Davis, April 10, 2000.

19. Justification for the control of black carbon, the second-leading cause of near-surface global warming, Environmental Chemistry Seminar Series, U. C. Riverside, November 21, 2000.

20. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, La Jolla, February, 2001.

21. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado, April 18, 2001.

22. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, Rutgers University, New Jersey, March 29, 2002.

23. Black carbon, energy, and global warming, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland, August 21, 2002.

24. Black carbon and global warming, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Advisory Council Technical Committee Meeting, San Francisco, California, August 27, 2002.

25. The short-term cooling and long-term global warming due to biomass burning, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, November 12, 2002.

26. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, Maryland, March 26, 2003.

27. Climate and air pollution issues related to black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Cummins Science and Technology Advisory Committee meeting, Indianapolis, Indiana, July 9, 2003.

28. Climate and air pollution effects of black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, November 6, 2003.

29. Wind energy and climate, Cabrillo College, Aptos, California, November 13, 2003.

30. Climate and air pollution effects of black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Department of Atmospheric Science, University of California, Los Angeles, February 18, 2004.

31. Climate and air pollution effects of diesel vehicles, and the impact of particle traps and NOx filters, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, March 12, 2004.

32. Effects of anthropogenic aerosol particles on California climate, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, October 28, 2004.

33. Diesel effects on climate and air pollution, Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (STEP), Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, Nov. 1, 2004.

34. Enhanced coagulation due to evaporation and Van der Waals forces and its effect on nanoparticle evolution, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, March 2, 2005.

35. The global and regional climate effects of black carbon and other particle components, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, April 14, 2005.

36. The effects of aerosols on global warming and regional climate, Sonoma State University, May 12, 2005.

37. The effects of aerosols on California and Los Angeles climate, North Carolina State University, October 3, 2005.

38. The relative effects of greenhouse gases, absorbing aerosol particles, and scattering aerosol particles on global climate, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, October 4, 2005.

39. Climate Change, Hurricanes, and Energy, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, Florida, Oct. 27, 2005.

40. Global warming and hurricanes, Stanford Alumni Association, Portland, Oregon, November 5, 2005.

41. Addressing climate change with wind energy, Stanford University/University of British Columbia alumni associations meeting, Palo Alto, California, February 16, 2006.

42. Cleaning the air and improving health with hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, March 22, 2006.

43. New Energy, Merrill Lynch, New York City, New York, March 23, 2006.

44. Effects of E85 on air pollution in Los Angeles and the United States, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, July 26, 2006

45. Causes of and a wind-energy solution to global warming, Lockheed Martin/Advanced Technology Center colloquium, Palo Alto, California, November 9, 2006.
46. University of Wyoming / Stroock Forum on Energy Futures: Global changes that challenge Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, November 15, 2006.

47. Comparative methods of addressing climate-relevant emissions and air pollution from vehicles, Environmental Defense, Oakland, California, May 30, 2007.

48. Evaluation of proposed solutions to global warming, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Technical Committee, San Francisco, California, Aug. 6, 2007.

49. Comparative effects of vehicle technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, Nov. 13, 2007.

50. Causes of and proposed solutions to global warming and air pollution, Hewlett-Packard Labs, Palo Alto, California, January 24, 2008.

51. A renewable-energy solution to global warming, U. Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, March 27, 2008.

52. On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality, Lockheed Martin/Advanced Technology Center colloquium, Palo Alto, California, May 8, 2008.

53. Evaluation of proposed energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, February 3, 2009.

54. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Webcast to the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC), February 10, 2009.

55. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Geology & Geophysics Colloquium, Yale University, February 18, 2009.

56. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air polllution, and energy security, Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) colloquium, Palo Alto, California, March 5, 2009.

57. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Graduate Symposium in Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, University of California at Los Angeles, April 21, 2009.

58. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, IEEE Power Electronics Society, Santa Clara, California, April 23, 2009.

59. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Singularity University, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA, July 15, 2009.

60. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Electric Auto Association, Palo Alto, California, July 18, 2009.

61. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Earth and Ocean Sciences Seminar Series, Duke University, November 6, 2009.

62. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Environmental Engineering Fall 2009 Seminar Series, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, U.C. Berkeley, November 13, 2009.

63. A plan for a sustainable future, Clean Tech Forum, Campbell, California, December 8, 2009.

64. A plan for a sustainable future, DECCW Department, Sydney, Australia, August 20, 2010.

65. TBA, Modesto Area Partners in Science, Modesto, California, 2010.

Invited Seminar Talks at Stanford University

1. Computer simulations of urban and regional air pollution, Stanford University School of Engineering Sunrise Breakfast Club, Stanford, California, March 14, 1995.

2. Similarities and differences between global and urban air pollution models, Stanford University, Institute for International Studies, Environmental Policy Forum, November 13, 1995.

3. The role and treatment of clouds in atmospheric models, EE 350 Radioscience Seminar, Stanford University, Feb. 11, 1998.

4. Optimization of a Gear solver for use in 3-D air pollution studies, Computer Information Systems Seminar Series, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, May 10, 1999.

5. Studying ozone layers aloft and ozone in national parks with a global-through-urban-scale air pollution weather forecast model, Fluid Mechanics Seminar, Stanford University, May 8, 2001.

6. Effects of energy use on global warming, Robinson Environmental Theme House Seminar, Stanford University, Nov. 19, 2002.

7. Relative effects of diesel versus gasoline vehicles on climate and air pollution, Petroleum Engineering Seminar Series, Stanford University, Feb. 25, 2003.

8. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, EE 350 Radioscience Seminar, Stanford University, March 5, 2003.

9. Climate, air pollution, and energy, University Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) University Relations Committee Meeting, Stanford University, April 15, 2003.

10. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through a large-scale wind/hydrogen program. Robinson Environmental Theme House Seminar, Stanford University, February 24, 2004.

11. The climate and air pollution effects of aerosols, Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, November 10, 2004.

12. Effects on air pollution and health of switching to hydrogen fuel cells in all U.S. onroad vehicles, Global Climate and Energy Project Advisory Committee Meeting, March 28, 2005.

13. The effects on air pollution and health of converting all U.S. vehicles to hydrogen fuel cell or hybrid vehicles, Global Climate and Energy Project Technical Symposium, June 15, 2005.

14. Energy and Climate Change, Stanford Institute for the Environment Energy Committee Seminar Series, November 9, 2005.

15. Greenhouse gases versus soot causes of global warming, and a wind energy solution, Geological and Earth Science seminar series, March 16, 2006.

16. The wind factor: How to stop global warming, Engineering Day, School of Engineering and Engineering Alumni Relations Program, July 15, 2006.

17. Comparison of the health and climate impacts of using large-scale wind-hydrogen or wind-batter versus ethanol (E85), diesel, biodiesel, and gasoline in modern vehicles, Wood’s Institute for the Environment Energy Seminar Series, Oct. 4, 2006.

18. Causes of and a solution to global warming, Energy Resources Engineering Seminar Series, Nov. 28, 2006.

19. Wind versus biofuels for addressing climate, health, and energy, SLAC Colloquium, Jan. 29, 2007.

20. Effects of ethanol (E85) versus gasoline on cancer and mortality in the United States, Management Science and Engineering Seminar Series, April 30, 2007.

21. Causes of and solutions to global warming, Intensive English and Academic Orientation program, Stanford University, July 24, 2007.

22. Global warming and its energy solutions, Classes Without Quizzes, Stanford University Reunion Homecoming, Oct. 12, 2007.

23. Air pollution impacts of and renewable energy solutions to climate change, Fluid Mechanics Seminar, Stanford University, January 29, 2008.

24. Presentation to Vestas Wind Systems, School of Engineering, Stanford University, March 20, 2008.

25. Review of proposed solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, The Energy Seminar, Woods Institute for the Environment, October 1, 2008.

26. Briefing to John Fluke and energy specialists, School of Engineering, Stanford University, October 8, 2008.

27. Briefing to Senator Jeff Bingaman, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee of Energy and Natural Resources, on “Low Carbon Energy Supplies,” Stanford University, October 10, 2008.

28. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, China's Environment, Forum for American/Chinese Exchange at Stanford (FACES), Stanford University, February 23, 2009.

29. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Discussion Series on Energy and the Environment, Trancos Lounge, February 24, 2009.

30. Predictions of bio-warfare agent dispersion, Army High Performance Computing Research Center (AHPCRC) Technical Review Meeting, Stanford University, June 10, 2009.

31. TBA, EEES Seminar, Stanford University, May 12, 2010.

Invited Panelist

1. Economist's Summit: The Role of Renewable Energy in California's Future, Capital Building, Sacramento, California, September 5, 2001.

2. Soot, wind, and global warming, Engineering Alumni Relations Panel Meeting, Stanford University, February 26, 2003.

3. Panel discussion on global warming, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

4. Homecoming panel, After Katrina: Global Climate and Energy Issues Hit Home, Stanford University, Thursday, October 20, 2005.

5. Hydrogen discussion panelist. Second HyCARE symposium, Laxenburg, Austria, Dec. 20, 2005.

6. Woods Institute Biofuels Workshop Energy Seminar panelist, Stanford University, Dec. 6, 2006.

7. Panel Discussion on climate change, NASA Ames Research Center, February, 23, 2007.

8. South Coast Air Quality Management District Roundtable Discussion on Controlling Global Warming and Local Air Pollution, Diamond Bar, California, June 28, 2007.

9. Climate Panelist for the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) impacts workshop, Montreal, Canada, Oct. 29-31, 2007.

10. Energy and Climate Change Symposium -- "The Road to Renewables," Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Los Angeles, California, Jan. 18, 2008.

11. Roundtable on Local Approaches to Climate Action, Dept. of Anthropology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, Feb. 13, 2008.

12. Panel on Advanced Energy Research, Woods/Precourt Affiliate Conference, Stanford University, September 12, 2008.

13. Press conference for Environmental Consequences of the Changing Global Food System, American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, December 18, 2008.

14. Horn Lecture panel discussion on energy, School of Earth Sciences, January 20, 2009.

Congressional Testimony

July 12, 2005. Written testimony on a comparison of wind with nuclear energy to the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy and Resource.

October 18, 2007. Oral and written testimony on the role of black carbon as a factor in climate change and its impact on public health. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, D.C.

April 9, 2008. Oral and written testimony on the relative impact of carbon dioxide on air pollution health problems in California versus the rest of the U.S., U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Washington, D.C.

Environmental Protection Agency Testimony

March 5, 2009. Oral testimony invited by the State of California at the Environmental Protection Agency Hearing AMS-FRL-8772-7, California State Motor Vehicle Control Standards; Greenhouse Gas Regulations; Reconsideration of Previous Denial of a Waiver of Preemption, Arlington, Virginia.

Oral testimony at the Environmental Protection Agency Hearing: Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Arlington, Virginia, May 18, 2009.

Documentaries

"Doomsday Tech," History Channel series, Modern Marvels, produced by Scott Goldie and Anthony Lacques, Dec. 28, 2004.

Science advisor, "Global Warming: Are we melting the planet," hosted by Tom Brokaw, Discovery Channel, BBC, NBC News Productions, January, 2006.

Alternative fuels and renewable energy, Discovery Channel Canada, produced by Frances Mackinnon, March 8, 2007; aired March 29, 2007.

Documentary, “The Ethanol Maze,” Nebraska Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Perry Stoner, Producer, December 2007; aired June 19, 2008.

Climate change and air pollution, Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Joy Leighton and Bob Gliner, Stanford, California, June 26, 2009.

Documentary on Renewable Energy, Future Earth/MSNBC, Helen Lambourne, Boulder City, Nevada, July 13, 2009.

Dutch Television Documentary on the Plan for a Sustainable Future, February 12, 2010.

[Confusious]

30. So? a liar is a liar.

Publishing more lies doesn't make it any more true.

Except for people like you.

Nearly forgot: Want a cracker with that?

[Systematic Chaos]

34. Irrelevant list is irrelevant.

[bananas]

70. I didn't realize he co-authored so many papers with Turco and Toon (who worked with Carl Sagan)

I see about a dozen papers there with Turco and/or Toon.
Turco and Toon, of course, are the 'T's in 'TTAPS',
Carl Sagan was the 'S' in 'TTAPS'.
They probably saved us from extinction (and lots of animals, too, for the misanthropes amongst us).

[bananas]

38. Including nuclear war in the costs of nuclear energy is absolutely correct

This has been one of the major deficiencies of other studies.

For example, the Externe authors specifically mention this as a deficiency in their own study: "ExternE recognizes that there are gaps in what the method has quantified. Among those damages currently not included in ExternE estimates are nuclear proliferation, nuclear security, security of energy supply, visual intrusion and risk aversion." http://www.externe.info/faq.html

Now, when authors of an older study specifically identify "gaps" in their study, it's un-scientific to criticize newer studies for filling those gaps.

It's also bizarre to criticize Jacobson for including it because it only amounts to 0-4.1 out of 68-180.1 g-CO2e/kWh.
Of course, he's only considering a small nuclear war; Martin Hellman estimates the failure rate of deterrence for full-scale war at 1% per year, so Jacobson's estimate may be low: www.nuclearrisks.org

[Confusious]

39. He included it as part of the carbon cost.

As in burning cities putting pollutants into the air.

Also, as I'm sure you know, you don't need a reactor to produce a bomb.

My statement stands. His paper is bullshit.

[bananas]

40. You got two out of three right.

Yes, he correctly included it as part of the carbon cost.
Yes, it's from burning cities.
No, his paper isn't bullshit.

Nuclear winter revisited (Jeff Masters' WunderBlog)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x193139

Climatic Consequences of Nuclear Conflict
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/nuclear/

[Confusious]

41. TFB. Nt

[Nederland]

55. You didn't address the point

The point is that you don't need a reactor to produce a bomb. In fact, you don't even need a nuclear weapon to have burning cities. During WWII, far more carbon was released as a result of the conventional bombing of European and Japanese cities than was released by the burning of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (http://www.rense.com/general19/flame.htm). If you want to get really ridiculous, you could argue that the existence of nuclear weapons actually lowers the risk of carbon release from burning cities because nobody wants to start a war when nuclear weapons might be used. The great powers of the world fought each other pretty much continuously for over a thousand years prior to 1945. Since then--nothing.

I'm not actually arguing this point, I'm just pointing out how idiotic the paper is.

[bananas]

27. "Dialog (always) welcomed, ridicule (probably) ignored. "

You are full of shit, as usual.

[Confusious]

12. You never give up with that jacobson crap do you?

Jacobson sez nuclear power is bad!
Jacobson sez solar power is good!
Jacobson sez solar and wind will save us!
Jacobson sez we don't need anything else!
Jacobson sez we don't have to make hard choices!
Jacobson sez we'll all get ponies and rainbows!

[kristopher]

20. the facts are the facts

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=256113&mesg_id=256126

[Confusious]

21. Oh, please we've had this discussion before

His 'facts' are his alone, and you parrot it because it agrees with what you want to believe.

I wonder if you even have voice of your own. You can't seem to do anything but cut and paste his tripe.

Legit sceintists who pull the crap he did in his studies would lose everything, but since he's not one, he can go on spouting bullshit.

[kristopher]

24. You know even less about "legit" science than you do about energy...

...if that is possible.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/vita/

[Confusious]

25. From someone who spent "years in academia" and doesn't have a science degree

Including nuclear war in the cost of nuclear energy. Might as well include the costs of conventional war in the making of steel. That's not "science" that's propaganda, which you seem to have a problem telling the difference.

I have a degree in electronics and spent years watching the development of solar cells. I know they're not the silver bullet you think they are. years and years and they eek out a 5%-10% increase in the power they put out, which was minuscule to start with.

I've also been watching the nuclear industry since college. I wrote a paper on nuclear power in my english class in college, and changed a few minds.

I worked for an actual company that did research and development, or to put it another way so you'll understand it: science.

Do you want a cracker with that?

[kristopher]

28. ROFL..

List of publications for Jacobson:

Ph. D. Thesis
Jacobson M. Z. (1994) Developing, coupling, and applying a gas, aerosol, transport, and radiation model to study urban and regional air pollution. Ph. D. Thesis, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, 436 pp.

Books

Jacobson, M. Z., Fundamentals of Atmospheric Modeling. Cambridge University Press, New York, 656 pp., 1999.
Jacobson, M. Z., Fundamentals of Atmospheric Modeling, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, New York, 813 pp., 2005
Jacobson, M. Z., Atmospheric Pollution: History, Science, and Regulation, Cambridge University Press, New York, 399 pp., 2002.


Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles as First Author

1. Jacobson, M. Z., and R. P. Turco, SMVGEAR: A sparse-matrix, vectorized Gear code for atmospheric models, Atmos. Environ., 28A, 273-284, 1994.

2. Jacobson, M. Z., R. P. Turco, E. J. Jensen, and O. B. Toon, Modeling coagulation among particles of different composition and size, Atmos. Environ., 28A, 1327–1338, 1994.

3. Jacobson, M. Z., and R. P. Turco, Simulating condensational growth, evaporation, and coagulationof aerosols using a combined moving and stationary size grid, Aerosol Sci. and Technol., 22, 73 –- 92, 1995.

4. Jacobson, M. Z., Computation of global photochemistry with SMVGEAR II. Atmos. Environ., 29A , 2541-2546, 1995.

5. Jacobson, M. Z., A. Tabazadeh, and R. P. Turco, Simulating equilibrium within aerosols and non-equilibrium between gases and aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 9079–-9091, 1996.

6. Jacobson, M. Z., R. Lu, R. P. Turco, and O. B. Toon, Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part I: Gas-phase simulations, Atmos. Environ., 30B, 1939 –- 1963, 1996.

7. Jacobson, M. Z., Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part II: Aerosol module structure and design, Atmos. Environ., 31A, 131 –- 144, 1997.

8. Jacobson, M. Z., Development and application of a new air pollution modeling system. Part III: Aerosol-phase simulations, Atmos. Environ., 31A, 587 –- 608, 1997.

9. Jacobson, M. Z., Numerical techniques to solve condensational and dissolutional growth equations when growth is coupled to reversible reactions, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 27, 491–-498, 1997.

10. Jacobson, M. Z., Improvement of SMVGEAR II on vector and scalar machines through absolute error tolerance control. Atmos. Environ., 32, 791 –- 796, 1998.

11. Jacobson, M. Z., Studying the effects of aerosols on vertical photolysis rate coefficient and temperature profiles over an urban airshed, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 10,593-10,604, 1998.

12. Jacobson, M. Z., Isolating nitrated and aromatic aerosols and nitrated aromatic gases as sources of ultraviolet light absorption, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 3527-3542, 1999.

13. Jacobson, M.Z., Studying the effects of soil moisture on ozone, temperatures, and winds in Los Angeles, J. Appl. Meteorol., 38, 607, 616, 1999.

14. Jacobson, M. Z., Studying the effects of calcium and magnesium on size-distributed nitrate and ammonium with EQUISOLV II, Atmos. Environ., 33, 3635-3649, 1999.

15. Jacobson, M. Z., A physically-based treatment of elemental carbon optics: Implications for global direct forcing of aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 217-220, 2000.

16. Jacobson, M. Z., Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 1551-1568, 2001.

17. Jacobson, M. Z., Strong radiative heating due to the mixing state of black carbon in atmospheric aerosols, Nature, 409, 695-697, 2001.

18. Jacobson, M. Z., GATOR-GCMM: A global through urban scale air pollution and weather forecast model. 1. Model design and treatment of subgrid soil, vegetation, roads, rooftops, water, sea ice, and snow., J. Geophys. Res., 106, 5385-5402, 2001.

19. Jacobson, M. Z., GATOR-GCMM: 2. A study of day- and nighttime ozone layers aloft, ozone in national parks, and weather during the SARMAP Field Campaign, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 5403-5420, 2001.

20. Jacobson, M. Z., and G. M. Masters, Exploiting wind versus coal, Science, 293, 1438-1438, 2001.

21. Jacobson, M. Z., Analysis of aerosol interactions with numerical techniques for solving coagulation, nucleation, condensation, dissolution, and reversible chemistry among multiple size distributions, J. Geophys. Res., 107 (D19), 4366, doi:10.1029/ 2001JD002044, 2002.

22. Jacobson, M. Z., Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon plus organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, J. Geophys. Res., 107, (D19), 4410, doi:10.1029/ 2001JD001376, 2002.

23. Jacobson, M. Z., Development of mixed-phase clouds from multiple aerosol size distributions and the effect of the clouds on aerosol removal, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D8), 425, doi:10 1029/2002JD002691, 2004.

24. Jacobson, M. Z., J. H. Seinfeld, G. R. Carmichael, and D.G. Streets, The effect on photochemical smog of converting the U.S. fleet of gasoline vehicles to modern diesel vehicles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L02116, doi:10.1029/2003GL018448, 2004.

25. Jacobson, M.Z., and J.H. Seinfeld, Evolution of nanoparticle size and mixing state near the point of emission, Atmos. Environ., 38, 1839-1850, 2004

26. Jacobson, M. Z., The short-term cooling but long-term global warming due to biomass burning, J. Climate, 17, 2909-2926, 2004.

27. Jacobson, M.Z., The climate response of fossil-fuel and biofuel soot, accounting for soot’s feedback to snow and sea ice albedo and emissivity, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D21201, doi:10.1029/2004JD004945, 2004.

28. Jacobson, M.Z., A solution to the problem of nonequilibrium acid/base gas-particle transfer at long time step, Aerosol Sci. Technol, 39, 92-103, 2005.

29. Jacobson, M.Z., A refined method of parameterizing absorption coefficients among multiple gases simultaneously from line-by-line data, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 506-517, 2005

30. Jacobson, M.Z., Studying ocean acidification with conservative, stable numerical schemes for nonequilibrium air-ocean exchange and ocean equilibrium chemistry, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D07302, doi:10.1029/2004JD005220, 2005.

31. Jacobson, M.Z., W.G. Colella, and D.M. Golden, Cleaning the air and improving health with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, Science , in press, 2005.

32. Jacobson, M.Z., D.B. Kittelson, and W.F. Watts, Enhanced coagulation due to evaporation and its effect on nanoparticle evolution, Environmental Science and Technology, 39 , 9486-9492, 2005.

33. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of absorption by soot inclusions within clouds and precipitation on global climate, J. Phys. Chem . A , 110, 6860-6873, 2006.

34. Jacobson, M.Z., and Y.J. Kaufmann, Aerosol reduction of the wind, Geophys. Res. Lett ., 33 , L24814, doi:10.1029/2006GL027838, 2006.

35. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of ethanol (E85) versus gasoline vehicles on cancer and mortality in the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol ., 10.1021/es062085v, 2007.

36. Jacobson, M.Z., Y.J. Kaufmann, Y. Rudich, Examining feedbacks of aerosols to urban climate with a model that treats 3-D clouds with aerosol inclusions, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24205, doi:10.1029/2007JD008922, 2007.

37. Jacobson, M.Z., On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality, Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L03809, doi:10.1029/2007GL031101, 2008,

38. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of wind-powered hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on stratospheric ozone and global climate, Geophys. Res. Lett., in press, 2008.

39. Jacobson, M.Z., The short-term effects of agriculture on air pollution and climate in California, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D23101, doi:10.1029/2008JD010689, in press, 2008.

40. Jacobson, M.Z., Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Energy & Environmental Science, 2, 148-173, doi:10.1039/b809990c, 2009

41. Jacobson, M.Z., and D.G. Streets, The influence of future anthropogenic emissions on climate, natural emissions, and air quality, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D08118, doi:10.1029/2008JD011476, 2009

42. Jacobson, M.Z., Effects of biofuels vs. other new vehicle technologies on air pollution, global warming, land use, and water, Int. J. Biotechnology, 11, 14-59, 2009.

43. Jacobson, M.Z., and M.A. Delucci, A path to sustainable energy by 2030, Scientific American, November 2009 (cover story).

44. Jacobson, M.Z., The enhancement of local air pollution by urban CO2 domes, Environ. Sci. Technol., doi:10.1021/es903018m, 2010.

45. Jacobson, M.Z., Short-term effects of controlling fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, J. Geophys.Res., in press, 2010.

46. Jacobson, M.Z., and D.L. Ginnebaugh, The global-through-urban nested 3-D simulation of air pollution with a 13,600-reaction photochemical mechanism, J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2010.

Additional Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles (Alphabetical)

47. Archer, C. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, Spatial and temporal distributions of U.S. winds and wind power at 80 m derived from measurements , J. Geophys. Res ., 108 ( D9 ) 4289, doi:10.1029/2002JD002076, 2003 .

48. Archer, C. L., M.Z. Jacobson, and F.L. Ludwig, The Santa Cruz eddy. Part I: Observations and statistics, Mon. Wea. Rev., 133 , 767-782, 2005 .

49. Archer, C. L. and M.Z. Jacobson, The Santa Cruz eddy. Part II: Mechanisms of formation, Mon. Wea. Rev ., 133 , 767-782 , 2005.

50. Archer, C.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, Evaluation of global wind power, J. Geophys. Res, 110 , D12110, doi:10.1029/2004JD005462, 2005 .

51. Archer, C.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, Supplying baseload power and reducing transmission requirements by interconnecting wind farms, J. Applied Meteorol. and Climatology, 46, 1701-1717, doi:10.1175/2007JAMC1538.1, 2007, www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/winds/.

52. Barth, M. C., S. Sillman, R. Hudman, M. Z. Jacobson, C.-H. Kim, A. Monod, and J. Liang, Summary of the cloud chemistry modeling intercomparison: Photochemical box model simulation, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D7) doi: 10.1029/2002JD002673, 2003.

53. Carmichael, G. R., D. Streets, G. Calori, H. Ueda, M. Amann, M. Z. Jacobson and J. E. Hansen, Changing trends in sulfur emissions in Asia: Implications for acid deposition, air pollution, and climate, Environmental Sci. Technol., 36, 4707-4713, 2002.

54. Chen, Y., S. Mills, J. Street, D. Golan, A. Post, M.Z. Jacobson, A. Paytan, Estimates of atmospheric dry deposition and associated input of nutrients to Gulf of Aqaba seawater, J. Geophys. Res ., 112 , D04309, doi:10.1029/2006JD007858, 2007.

55. Colella, W.G., M.Z. Jacobson, and D.M. Golden, Switching to a U.S. hydrogen fuel cell vehicle fleet: The resultant change in emissions, energy use, and global warming gases, J. Power Sources , 150, 150-181, 2005.

56. Delitsky, M. L., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Nitrogen ion clusters in Triton's atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 17, 1725-1728, 1990.

57. Drdla, K., A. Tabazadeh, R. P. Turco, M. Z. Jacobson, J. E. Dye, C. Twohy, and D. Baumgardner, Analysis of the physical state of one Arctic polar stratospheric cloud based on observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 2475-2478, 1994.

58. Dvorak, M., D.L. Archer, and M.Z. Jacobson, California offshore wind energy potential, Renewable Energy, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.022, 2009.

59. Edgerton, S.A., M.C. MacCracken, M.Z. Jacobson, A. Ayala, C.E. Whitman, and M.C. Trexler, Critical review discussion: Prospects for future climate change and the reasons for early action, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 58, 1386-1400, 2008.

60. Elliott, S., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Tests on combined projection / forward differencing integration for stiff photochemical family systems at long time step, Computers Chem., 17, 91‹102, 1993.

61. Elliott, S., M. Shen, C. Y. J. Kao, R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, A streamlined family photochemistry module reproduces major nonlinearities in the global tropospheric ozone system, Computers Chem., 20, 235-259, 1996.

62. Elliott , S., C.-Y. J. Kao, F. Gifford, S. Barr, M. Shen, R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, Free tropospheric ozone production after deep convection of dispersing tropical urban plumes, Atmos. Environ., 30A, 4263-4274, 1996.

63. Freedman, F. R., and M. Z. Jacobson, Transport-dissipation analytical solutions to the E-ε turbulence model and their role in predictions of the neutral ABL, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 102, 117-138, 2002.

64. Freedman, F., and M. Z. Jacobson, Modification of the standard ε-equation for the stable ABL through enforced consistency with Monin-Obukhov similarity theory, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 106, 383-410, 2003.

65. Fridlind, A. M., and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of gas-aerosol equilibrium and aerosol pH in the remote marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACE 1), J. Geophys. Res., 105, 17,325-17,340, 2002.

66. Fridlind, A. M., M. Z. Jacobson, V. -M. Kerminen, R. E. Hillamo, V. Ricard, and J.-L Jaffrezo, Gas/aerosol partitioning in the Arctic: Comparison of size-resolved equilibrium model results with data, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 19,891-19,904, 2000

67. Fridlind, A. M., and M. Z. Jacobson, Point and column aerosol radiative closure during ACE 1: Effects of particle shape and size, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D3) doi:10.1029/2001JD001553, 2003.

68. Ginnebaugh, D.L., J. Liang, and M.Z. Jacobson, Examining the Temperature Dependence of Ethanol (E85) versus Gasoline Emissions on Air Pollution with a Largely-Explicit Chemical Mechanism, Atmos. Environ., in press, 2009.

69. Hu, X.-M, Y. Zhang, M.Z. Jacobson, and C.K. Chan, Evaluation and improvement of gas/particle mass transfer treatments for aerosol simulation and forecast, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D11208, doi:10.1029/2007JD009588, 2008.

70. Jiang, Q., J.D. Doyle, T. Haack, M.J. Dvorak, C.L. Archer, and M.Z. Jacobson, Exploring wind energy potential off the California coast, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L20819, doi:10.1029/2008GL034674, 2008.

71. Kempton, W., C.L. Archer, A. Dhanju, R.W. Garvine, and M.Z. Jacobson, Large CO2 reductions via offshore wind power matched to inherent storage in energy end-uses, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L02817, doi:10.1029/2006GL028016, 2007.

72. Ketefian, G.S., and M.Z. Jacobson, A mass, energy, vorticity, and potential enstrophy conserving boundary treatment scheme for the shallow water equations, J. Comp. Phys., 228, 1-32, doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.08.009, 2009.

73. Kreidenweis, S. M., C. Walcek, G. Feingold, W. Gong, M. Z. Jacobson, C.-H. Kim, X. Liu, J. E.Penner, A. Nenes and J. H. Seinfeld, Modification of aerosol mass and size distribution due to aqueous-phase SO2 oxidation in clouds: Comparisons of several models, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D7) doi:10.1029/2002JD002697, 2003.

74. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of sulfur dioxide oxidation pathways over a range of liquid water contents, pHs, and temperatures, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 13,749-13,769, 1999.

75. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, Comparison of a 4000-reaction chemical mechanism with the Carbon Bond IV and an adjusted Carbon Bond IV-EX mechanism using SMVGEAR II., Atmos. Environ., 34, 3015-3026, 2000.

76. Liang, J., and M. Z. Jacobson, Effects of subgrid mixing on ozone production in a chemical model: Dilution may reduce bulk ozone production efficiency, Atmos. Environ., 34, 2975-2982, 2000.

77. Lu, R., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, An integrated air pollution modeling system for urban and regional scales. Part I: Structure and performance, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 6063-6080, 1997.

78. Lu, R., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, An integrated air pollution modeling system for urban and regional scales. Part II: Simulations for SCAQS 1987, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 6081-6098, 1997.

79. Ma, Jianzhong, J. Tang, S.-M. Li, and M. Z. Jacobson, Size distributions of ionic aerosols measured at Waliguan Observatory: Implication for nitrate gas-to-particle transfer processes in the free troposphere, J. Geophys. Res., 108, (D17) 4541, doi:10.1029/2002JD003356, 2003.

80. Moya, M., S. N. Pandis, and M. Z. Jacobson, Is the size distribution of urban aerosols determined by thermodynamic equilibrium? An application to Southern California, Atmos. Environ., 36, 2349-2365, 2001.

81. Naiman, A.D., S.K. Lele, J.T. Wilkerson, and M.Z. Jacobson, Parameterization of subgrid aircraft emission plumes for use in large-scale atmospheric simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2551-2560, 2010.

82. Sta. Maria, M.R.V., and M.Z. Jacobson, Investigating the effect of large wind farms on energy in the atmosphere, Energies, 2, 816-836, doi:10.3390/en20400816, 2009. (link to www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/2/4/816/pdf)

83. Streets, D. G., K. Jiang, X. Hu, J. E. Sinton, X.-Q. Zhang, D. Xu, M. Z. Jacobson, and J. E. Hansen, Recent reductions in China's greenhouse gas emissions, Science, 294, 1835-1836, 2001.

84. Stuart, A. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, A time-scale investigation of volatile chemical retention during hydrometeor freezing: 1. Non-rime freezing and dry-growth riming without spreading, J. Geophys. Res., 108 (D6), 4178, doi:10.1029/2001JD001408, 2002.

85. Stuart, A. L., and M. Z. Jacobson, Volatile chemical retention during dry-growth riming: A model. J. Geophys. Res., 109 , D07305, doi:10.1029/2003JD004197, 2004.

86. Stuart, A.L., and M.Z. Jacobson, A numerical model of the partitioning of trace chemical solutes during drop freezing, J. Atmos. Chem ., in press, 2005

87. Tabazadeh, A., R. P. Turco, and M. Z. Jacobson, A model for studying the composition and chemical effects of stratospheric aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 12,897 - 12,914, 1994.

88. Tabazadeh, A., R. P. Turco, K. Drdla, and M. Z. Jacobson, A study of Type I polar stratospheric cloud formation, Geophys. Res. Let., 21, 1619-1622,1994.

89. Tabazadeh, A., M. Z. Jacobson, H. B. Singh, O. B. Toon, J. S. Lin, B. Chatfield, A. N. Thakur, R. W. Talbot, and J. E. Dibb Nitric acid scavenging by mineral and biomass burning aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 4185-4188, 1998.

90. Zhang, Y., C. Seigneur, J. H. Seinfeld, M. Z. Jacobson, and F. Binkowski, Simulation of aerosol dynamics: A comparative review of algorithms used in air quality models, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 31, 487-514, 1999.

91. Zhang, Y., C. Seigneur, J. H. Seinfeld, M. Jacobson, S. L. Clegg, and F. Binkowski, A comparative review of inorganic aerosol thermodynamic equilibrium modules: Similarities, differences, and their likely causes, Atmos. Environ., 34, 117-137, 2000.

92. Zhang, Y., B. Pun, K. Vijayaraghavan, S.-Y. Wu, C. Seigneur, S. Pandis, M. Jacobson, A. Nenes, and J. H. Seinfeld, Development and application of the model of aerosol dynamics, reaction, ionization, and dissolution (MADRID), J. Geophys. Res., 109 (D1), D01202, doi:10.1029/2003JD003501, 2004.

93. Zhang, Y., X.-Y. Wen, K. Wang, K. Vijayaraghavan, and M.Z. Jacobson, Probing into regional 03 and PM pollution in the U.S., Part II. An examination of formation mechanisms through a process analysis technique and sensitivity study, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D22304, doi:10.1029/2009JD011898, 2009.

94. Zhang, Y., X. Wen, K. Wang, K. Vijayaraghavan, and M.Z. Jacobson, Probing into regional O3 and particulate matter pollution in the United States: 2. An examination of formation mechanisms through a process analysis technique and sensitivity study, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D22305, doi:1029/2009JD011900, 2009.

95. Zhang, Y., P. Liu, X.-H. Liu, B. Pun, C. Seigneur, M. Z. Jacobson, W. Wang, Fine scale modeling of wintertime aerosol mass, number, and size distributions in Central California, J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2010.

Invited Keynote Talks at Conferences / Workshops and Distinguished Lectures

1. Testing the impact of interactively coupling a meteorological model to an air quality model. Measurements and Modeling in Environmental Pollution Conference, Madrid, Spain, April 22 - 24, 1997.

2. Examining the causes and effects of downward ultraviolet irradiance reductions in Los Angeles., Environsoft 98 Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, Nov. 10 - 12, 1998.

3. Computational design of a global-through-urban scale air pollution / weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, 8th Supercomputer Workshop, Tsukuba, Japan, September 18-20, 2000.

4. Control of black carbon, the most efficient method of controlling global warming, Air Pollution Modeling and Simulation conference, Paris, France, April 9-13, 2001.

5. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, Workshop on Climate and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, December 3-5, 2001.

6. Current and future effects of black carbon on climate, Sixth ETH Conference on Nanoparticle Measurement, Zurich, Switzerland, August 19th-21st, 2002.

7. Addressing global warming through a large-scale wind/hydrogen program, Symposium on Environmental and Occupational Safety, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, November 6-7, 2003.

8. Advances in computer modeling of air pollution and climate, Third Canadian Workshop on Air Quality, Quebec City, Canada, March 24-26, 2004.

9. The climate response of soot, accounting for its feedback to snow and sea ice albedo and emissivity, Distinguished Lecture Series, Laboratory for Atmospheres at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, November 18, 2004.

10. Hydrogen and Wind Apollo Project, Symposium on converting existing city vehicles to utilize renewable hydrogen power, Foothill College, California, Dec. 9, 2005.

11. Effects on health and pollution of converting to hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and feasibility of wind-hydrogen, Second HyCARE symposium, Laxenburg, Austria, Dec. 19-20, 2005.

12. Global climate change: Aerosol versus greenhouse gas causes and the feasibility of a large-scale wind-energy solution, Distinguished Lecture Series, Centre for Global Change Science, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, February 21, 2005.

13. Fossil-fuel soot's contribution to global warming, 2 nd International Conference on Global Warming and the Next Ice Age, Santa Fe, New Mexico, July 17-21, 2005.

14. The relative effects of greenhouse gases, absorbing aerosol particles, and scattering aerosol particles on global climate, Joint Session of the Atmospheric Chemistry and Atmospheric Aerosol Workshops, Telluride, Colorado, July 30-August 6, 2006.

15. Air quality impacts of biofuels, Woods Institute Biofuels Workshop, Stanford University, Dec. 5-6, 2006.

16. The role of black carbon as a factor in climate change and its impact on public health, Testimony in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, D.C, October 18, 2007.

17. Comparative effects of vehicles technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution, Plenary presentation for EnviroSymp2007, Sustainable Solutions, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, Nov. 5-6, 2007.

18. A true-renewable-energy solution to global warming, Hon. Al Gore and Mrs. Tipper Gore, and the Alliance for Climate Protection, New York City, New York, January 10, 2008.

19. Global warming health effects and energy solutions. CIRES Distinguished Lecture, CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, Feb 8, 2008.

20. The relative impact of carbon dioxide on air pollution health problems in California versus the rest of the U.S., Testimony in the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Washington, D.C, April 9, 2008.

21. Briefing on the effects of carbon dioxide on air pollution mortality, American Meteorological Society, Washington, D.C., May 16, 2008.

22. Computer modeling of the atmosphere: Identifying causes and effects of and evaluating solutions to global warming, SimBuild Conference, Berkeley, California, July 30, 2008.

23. Effects of biofuels versus new vehicle technologies on air pollution, global warming, and landuse, Biofuels in the Midwest, a Discussion, Chicago, Illinois, September 5-7, 2008.

24. Biofuels in context / Energy solutions, 2008 Science for Nature Symposium, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC, November 19-20, 2008.

25. The effect of locally-emitted CO2 on gases, aerosols, clouds, and health, Aerosol-Cloud-Climate Interactions Symposia, 11th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry, American Meteorological Society, January 11-15, 2009, Phoenix, Arizona.

26. Aerosol Impacts on Climate, Energy, and the Economy, Goldschmidt 2009, Challenges to Our Volatile Planet, Davos, Switzerland, June 22-26, 2009.

27. Environmental Protection Agency Hearing: Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Arlington, Virginia, May 18, 2009.

28 Effects of fossil-fuel and biofuel soot on snow, clouds, and climate and a review of methods of solving the climate problem, German NGO consortium, Berlin, Germany, June 19, 2009.

29. The global and regional climate and air pollution health effects of fossil-fuel versus biofuel soot, 13th ETH Conference on Combustion Generated Nanoparticles, Zurich Switzerland, June 22-24, 2009.

30. Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Aerosol Impacts on Climate, Energy, and the Economy, Goldschmidt 2009, Challenges to Our Volatile Planet, Davos, Switzerland, June 22-26, 2009.

31. A plan for a sustainable future, Council of Scientific Society Presidents, Washington D.C., December 3, 2009.

32. Effects of local CO2 domes on air pollution and health, Clean Power, Health Communities Conference, Oakland, California, February 10, 2010.

33. Ranking of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Ted Conference Debate with Stewart Brand, Long Beach, California, February 11, 2010.

34. A plan for a sustainable future, GeoPower America, San Francisco, California, Febreuary 16, 2010.

35. A plan for a sustainable future, Beyond Zero, Melbourne, Australia, February 21, 2010 (internet presentation).

36. A plan for a sustainable future, European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources, European Parliament Building, Brussels, Belgium, March 22, 2010.

37. A plan for a sustainable future, Press and Information Office of the Federal Government, Berlin, Germany, March 23, 2010.

38. A plan for a sustainable future, Bundestag, German Parliament Building, Berlin, Germany, March 23, 2010.

39. Presentation at 10-year anniversary for Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), Berlin, Germany, March 25, 2010.

40. A plan for a sustainable future, Clean Air Forum, Sydney, Australia, August 19, 2010.

41. A plan for a sustainable future, La Ciudad de Ideas, San Andres Cholula, Pueblo, Mexico, November 11-13, 2010.

Other Invited Talks at Conferences / Workshops Since 1994

1. Simulating the sensitivity of trace gas concentrations to hydrocarbon emissions. American Geophysical Union 1994 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, December 5-9, 1994.

2. Application of a sparse-matrix, vectorized Gear-type code (SMVGEAR) in a new air pollution modeling system, Symposium on Numerical Algorithms for Air Pollution Models in the Third International Congress on Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM), Hamburg, Germany, July 3-7, 1995.

3. Chemical mechanism solver techniques and implementation of mechanism, Workshop on Modeling Chemistry in Clouds and Mesoscale Models, National Center for Atmospheric Research, March 6-8, 2000.

4. Development of a global-through-urban scale nested and coupled air pollution and weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, Institute for Mathematics and its Applications Annual Program, "Reactive flow and Transport Phenomena," U. of Minnesota, March 15-19, 2000.

5. A study of the climate response to natural plus anthropogenic aerosols, Telluride Atmospheric Chemistry Meeting, Telluride, Colorado, August 7-11, 2000.

6. A study of the mixing state of aerosols and the effect of the mixing state on global direct forcing, Workshop on Atmospheric Composition, Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate Change, Aspen Global Change Institute, Aspen, Colorado, August 11-19, 2000.

7. A global-through-urban scale air pollution, weather forecast model and application to the SARMAP field campaign, Workshop on Atmospheric Composition, Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate Change, Aspen Global Change Institute, Aspen, Colorado, August 11-19, 2000.

8. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS), San Francisco, California, May 28-30, 2001.

9. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, the most effective method slowing global warming, CIESIN/USEPA//Environment Canada workshop, Photoxidants, Particles, and Haze across the Arctic and North Atlantic: Transport, Observations, and Models, Palisades, New York, June 12-15, 2001.

10. Climate change mitigation and aerosols, Climate Change Impacts and Integrated Assessment Workshop VII, Snowmass, CO, July 30 - Aug. 10, 2001.

11. Exploiting the lower cost of wind versus coal and natural gas to address energy shortages, pollution, and the Kyoto Protocol. Economist's Summit: The Role of Renewable Energy in California's Future, Capital Building, Sacramento, California, September 5, 2001.

12. Controlling current and future diesel emissions and other sources of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter as an effective method of slowing global warming, Air Pollution as a Climate Forcing Workshop, East-West Center, Hawaii, April 29-May 3, 2002.

13. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, Regional Workshop on Better Air Quality in Asia and Pacific Rim Cities 2002, Hong Kong, December 16-18, 2002.
Global warming impact of black carbon, Greenhouse Gas Reduction International Technology Symposium, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California, March 11-13, 2003.

14. Climate and air pollution effects of gasoline, hybrid, and diesel vehicles (with and without a trap), Haagen-Smit Symposium, California Air Resources Board, Lake Arrowhead, California, May 6-9, 2003.

15. Causes of and Solutions to Global Warming, American Enterprise Institute Conference on Climate Change, Washington D.C., November 19, 2003.

16. Net climate effects of BC and OC 2: Consideration of multiple climatic effects. Air Quality & Climate Meeting on Black Carbon and Organic Carbon: Science, Inventory and Mitigation, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Atmospheric Programs, Washington, D.C., December 3-4, 2003.

17. The effect of diesel on air pollution and global climate, Workshop on cruise ship operations, Cruise Terminal Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting, Port of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, January 23, 2004.

18. Black carbon effects on global warming and regional climate change, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, Seattle, Washington, February 12-16, 2004.

19. Numerical methods for treating size-resolved SOA formation and evolution among multiple size distributions in atmospheric models, Organic Speciation in Atmospheric Aerosol Research, Las Vegas, Nevada, April 5-7, 2004.

20. Black Carbon Effects on Climate with Different Emissions and Model Treatments, Aerosol Black Carbon and Climate Change: Emissions Workshop, San Diego, California, October 13-14, 2004.

21. The effect of particles on global and California climate, Interncontinental Transport and Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Workshop, Chapel Hill, NC, October 21-22, 2004.

22. The effects of aerosols on California climate, MODIS Science Team Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, March 22-24, 2005

23. Regional effect of aerosols on winds, precipitation, and climate, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

24. Global windpower and its potential effect on the hydrogen economy, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

25. Role of aerosols in regional climate: A research frontier, Second Annual Climate Change Research Conference, California Energy Commission and First Scientific Conference, West Coast Governor's Global Warming Initiative, Sacramento, California, Sept. 14-16, 2005.

26. Apollo Project for Wind Energy and Wind-Hydrogen, J.P. Morgan Public Power and Gas Conference, New York, May 11-12, 2005.

27. The effects of aerosols on wind speed, temperatures, and water supply in California, Atmospheric Chemistry Workshop, Telluride, Colorado, July 30-August 6, 2006.

28. Numerical study of the effects of aerosols and irrigation on snow, rain, and regional climate in California, California Energy Commission, Sept. 13-15, 2006.

29. Effects of future emissions and a changed climate on urban air quality, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 20-22, 2007.

30. Effects of black carbon on climate. Symposium on protecting health and slowing global warming through reductions in non-Kyoto pollutants, Sacramento, California, March 29, 2007.

31. The Macro Perspective of Wind Power in the USA, From Local to Global: The Rhode Island Model for Harnessing Wind Power Worldwide, Roger Williams University School of Architecture, Art and Historic Preservation, April 19-20, 2007.

32. Comparing wind and other energy sources for addressing climate and air pollution, From Local to Global: The Rhode Island Model for Harnessing Wind Power Worldwide, Roger Williams University School of Architecture, Art and Historic Preservation, April 19-20, 2007.

33. Wind and rainfall reduction by aerosol particles, Aerosols - properties, processes, climate, Agapi Beach, Crete, April 22-24, 2007.

34. Potential of the wind energy sector, The Haagen-Smit Symposium, Aptos, California, May 14-17, 2007.

35. Extreme global warming and local cooling due to aerosol particles, American Geophysical Union Spring Joint Assembly, Acapulco, Mexico, May 22-25, 2007.

36. Comparative effects of vehicle fuels and technologies on air pollution and climate, Controlling Global Warming and Local Air Pollution - South Coast Air Quality Management District Technical Forum, Diamond Bar, California, June 28, 2007.

37. Effects of black carbon and other non-Kyoto pollutants on climate, Meeting of the California Air Resources Board Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee (ETAAC), Bechtel Conference Center, Stanford University, September 7, 2007.

38. Energy solutions to air pollution and climate change in California (coauthors, M. Dvorak, C.L. Archer, and G. Hoste), Fourth Annual California Climate Change Conference, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, Sept. 10-13, 2007.

39. Effects of future emissions and a changed climate on urban air quality, Impacts of Climate Change on Air Quality in the Pacific Southwest, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, California, October 11, 2007.

40. Examination of proposed strategies for addressing global warming and air pollution. Forum on Alternative Fuels for the Transportation Sector, California State Bar Association, Yosemite, California, Oct. 19-21, 2007.

41. Comparative effects of vehicle technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution. On the Road to Bali: Strengthening the Transatlantic Climate Cooperation, German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the Heinrich Boell Foundation, San Francisco, California, Nov. 16, 2007.

42. The effects on health and climate of ethanol versus other vehicle technologies and fuels, Institute of Medicine’s Roundtable on Environmental Health, Sciences, Research, and Medicine workshop on Environmental Health, Energy, and Transportation: Bringing Health to the Fuel Mixture, National Academies Auditorium, Washington, D.C., Nov. 30, 2007.

43. A solution to the problem of nonequilibrium acid/base gas-particle transfer at long time step. International Aerosol Modeling Algorithms (IAMA) Conference, Davis, California, Dec. 6, 2007.

44. Comparative effects of ethanol (E85), gasoline, and wind-powered electric vehicles on cancer, mortality, climate-relevant emissions, and land requirements in the United States, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 10-14, 2007.

45. Energy and Climate Change Symposium – “The Road to Renewables,” Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Los Angeles, California, Jan. 18, 2008.

46. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Ottawa, Canada, Mar. 25-26, 2008.

47. Effects of local versus global carbon dioxide emissions on local air quality and health, Environmental Protection Agency Division 9 symposium, Stanford University, Stanford, California, May 6, 2008.

48. The effects of ethanol vehicles on air quality and health, Frontiers Meeting on the Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation, Wellcome Trust, London, May 27, 2008 (connected remotely).

49. Air pollution effects of and a comparison of energy solutions to global warming, Critical Review panel, Air & Waste Management Association Annual Meeting, Portland, Oregon, June 25, 2008.

50. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Oct. 22-23, 2008.

51. Evaluation of proposed solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Session on Environmental Consequences of the Changing Global Food System, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 15-19, 2008.

52. Examining effects of black carbon on climate and how to mitigate them through different transportation options, International Council on Clean Transportation, London, UK, Jan. 5-6, 2009.

53. Examining the effects of aircraft emissions on contrails and global climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Palm Springs, California, Feb. 26-27, 2008.

54. Effects of hydrogen on climate and ozone, Department of Energy, Washington, DC, May 19, 2009.

55. Quantifying the effects of aircraft on climate with a model that treats the subgrid evolution of contrails from all commercial flights worldwide, Aviation Emissions Characterization Roadmap Meeting, Washington, DC, June 9, 2009.

56. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Microsoft Research Workshop, Redmond, Washington, July 13, 2009.

57. The comparative effects of fossil fuel soot, biofuel soot, and gasses, and methane on regional and global climate, Arctic ice, and human health, 6th Annual PIER Climate Change Conference, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, Sept. 9, 2009.

58. Solutions to global warming, air pollution, energy security, The true costs of coal: Health solutions for the low carbon economy, Washington DC, October 15-16, 2009.

59. Assessing the impact of aviation on climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, Oct. 22, 2009.

60. Effects of soot on climate, National Association of Clean Air Agencies, Internet conference, November 17, 2009.

61. Development and application of algorithms that simulate the evolution of subgrid contrails from individual aircraft to quantify the global climate effects all commercial aviation, (Jacobson, M.Z., J.T. Wilkerson, A.D. Naiman, S.K. Lele), International Aerosol Modeling Algorithms (IAMA) Conference, Davis, California, Dec. 9-11, 2009.

62. Relative effects of fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, San Francisco, California, Dec. 14-18, 2009.

63. Relative effects of fossil-fuel soot, biofuel soot and gases, and methane on climate, Arctic ice, and air pollution health, Environmental Protection Agency Short-Lived Climate Forcing agent workshop, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, March 3, 2010.

64. Presentation in Brussels at EEAC Energy Working Group: Scenarios and policies for decarbonization, Brussels, Belgium, March 22, 2010.

65. Assessing the impact of aviation on climate, FAA/PARTNER Meeting, Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Internet presentation), March 24, 2010.

66. TBA, 7th California Wind Energy Collaborative Forum, Davis, California, June 7, 2010.

67. Aeorsol-Cloud-Climate Interactions Symposia, 13th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry, American Meteorological Society, January 23-27, 2011, Seattle, Washington

Invited Seminar Talks Outside of Stanford University Since 1994

1. A gas, aerosol, transport, and radiation model for studying urban and regional air pollution, U. C. Berkeley Environmental Engineering Seminar Series, Berkeley, California, October 7, 1994.

2. Coupling global-scale meteorological and chemical models, Stanford Research Institute Atmospheric Chemistry Group Meeting, Menlo Park, California, February 10, 1995.

3. Numerical simulations of the transport and transformations of air pollutants in an urban airshed, Dept. of Meteorology, San Jose State University, San Jose, California, March 2, 1995.

4. Simulation pollution buildup in the Los Angeles basin with a coupled air quality - meteorology model. Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab, May 7, 1996.

5. Coupling chemical, radiative, and meteorological models in a study of global air pollution, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, March 22, 1995.

6. Air pollution modeling. 3-hour seminar, Dept of Meteorology, San Jose State University, May 15, 1996.

7. Studying the feedback effects of aerosols on air temperatures and gas concentrations with an air pollution model. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, March 17, 1997.

8. Effects of Aerosols and Soil Moisture on Gas Concentrations and Temperatures in Los Angeles, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, May 1, 1997.

9. Aerosol effects on air pollution, Department of Meteorology, San Jose State University, May 1, 1997.

10. UV absorption by particles and its effects on ozone in polluted air, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, April 16, 1998.

11. The effects of absorption by organics and other particulate components on UV irradiance and ozone in Los Angeles, Systems Applications, Inc., San Rafael, CA, August 19, 1998.

12. Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, February 18, 1999.

13. Global direct radiative forcing due to multicomponent anthropogenic and natural aerosols, Department of Oceanography, University of Washington, February 25, 1999.

14. Studying the effects of soil moisture on ozone, temperatures, and winds in Los Angeles, Dept. of Meteorology, San Jose State University, March 16, 1999.

15. Examining the causes and effects of ultraviolet radiation reductions in Los Angeles, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, April 1, 1999.

16. Revised estimates of the global direct radiative forcing of aerosols due to a physically-based treatment of elemental carbon optics, Dept. of Geology & Geophysics, University of California, Berkeley, December 8, 1999.

17. Examining the climate response to anthropogenic and natural aerosols, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California, March 30, 2000.

18. Studying effects of the large scale on air pollution and weather in Northern California during SARMAP with a global-through-urban scale air pollution/weather forecast model, Environmental Engineering Seminar Series, U. C. Davis, April 10, 2000.

19. Justification for the control of black carbon, the second-leading cause of near-surface global warming, Environmental Chemistry Seminar Series, U. C. Riverside, November 21, 2000.

20. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, La Jolla, February, 2001.

21. Control of black carbon, the most effective means of slowing global warming, NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado, April 18, 2001.

22. Control of fossil-fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming, Rutgers University, New Jersey, March 29, 2002.

23. Black carbon, energy, and global warming, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland, August 21, 2002.

24. Black carbon and global warming, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Advisory Council Technical Committee Meeting, San Francisco, California, August 27, 2002.

25. The short-term cooling and long-term global warming due to biomass burning, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, November 12, 2002.

26. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, Maryland, March 26, 2003.

27. Climate and air pollution issues related to black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Cummins Science and Technology Advisory Committee meeting, Indianapolis, Indiana, July 9, 2003.

28. Climate and air pollution effects of black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, November 6, 2003.

29. Wind energy and climate, Cabrillo College, Aptos, California, November 13, 2003.

30. Climate and air pollution effects of black carbon and modern diesel vehicles, Department of Atmospheric Science, University of California, Los Angeles, February 18, 2004.

31. Climate and air pollution effects of diesel vehicles, and the impact of particle traps and NOx filters, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, March 12, 2004.

32. Effects of anthropogenic aerosol particles on California climate, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, October 28, 2004.

33. Diesel effects on climate and air pollution, Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (STEP), Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, Nov. 1, 2004.

34. Enhanced coagulation due to evaporation and Van der Waals forces and its effect on nanoparticle evolution, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, March 2, 2005.

35. The global and regional climate effects of black carbon and other particle components, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, April 14, 2005.

36. The effects of aerosols on global warming and regional climate, Sonoma State University, May 12, 2005.

37. The effects of aerosols on California and Los Angeles climate, North Carolina State University, October 3, 2005.

38. The relative effects of greenhouse gases, absorbing aerosol particles, and scattering aerosol particles on global climate, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, October 4, 2005.

39. Climate Change, Hurricanes, and Energy, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, Florida, Oct. 27, 2005.

40. Global warming and hurricanes, Stanford Alumni Association, Portland, Oregon, November 5, 2005.

41. Addressing climate change with wind energy, Stanford University/University of British Columbia alumni associations meeting, Palo Alto, California, February 16, 2006.

42. Cleaning the air and improving health with hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, March 22, 2006.

43. New Energy, Merrill Lynch, New York City, New York, March 23, 2006.

44. Effects of E85 on air pollution in Los Angeles and the United States, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California, July 26, 2006

45. Causes of and a wind-energy solution to global warming, Lockheed Martin/Advanced Technology Center colloquium, Palo Alto, California, November 9, 2006.
46. University of Wyoming / Stroock Forum on Energy Futures: Global changes that challenge Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, November 15, 2006.

47. Comparative methods of addressing climate-relevant emissions and air pollution from vehicles, Environmental Defense, Oakland, California, May 30, 2007.

48. Evaluation of proposed solutions to global warming, Bay Area Air Quality Management District Technical Committee, San Francisco, California, Aug. 6, 2007.

49. Comparative effects of vehicle technologies and fuels on climate and air pollution, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, Nov. 13, 2007.

50. Causes of and proposed solutions to global warming and air pollution, Hewlett-Packard Labs, Palo Alto, California, January 24, 2008.

51. A renewable-energy solution to global warming, U. Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, March 27, 2008.

52. On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality, Lockheed Martin/Advanced Technology Center colloquium, Palo Alto, California, May 8, 2008.

53. Evaluation of proposed energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, February 3, 2009.

54. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Webcast to the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC), February 10, 2009.

55. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Geology & Geophysics Colloquium, Yale University, February 18, 2009.

56. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air polllution, and energy security, Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) colloquium, Palo Alto, California, March 5, 2009.

57. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Graduate Symposium in Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, University of California at Los Angeles, April 21, 2009.

58. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, IEEE Power Electronics Society, Santa Clara, California, April 23, 2009.

59. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Singularity University, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA, July 15, 2009.

60. Evaluation of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Electric Auto Association, Palo Alto, California, July 18, 2009.

61. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Earth and Ocean Sciences Seminar Series, Duke University, November 6, 2009.

62. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Environmental Engineering Fall 2009 Seminar Series, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, U.C. Berkeley, November 13, 2009.

63. A plan for a sustainable future, Clean Tech Forum, Campbell, California, December 8, 2009.

64. A plan for a sustainable future, DECCW Department, Sydney, Australia, August 20, 2010.

65. TBA, Modesto Area Partners in Science, Modesto, California, 2010.

Invited Seminar Talks at Stanford University

1. Computer simulations of urban and regional air pollution, Stanford University School of Engineering Sunrise Breakfast Club, Stanford, California, March 14, 1995.

2. Similarities and differences between global and urban air pollution models, Stanford University, Institute for International Studies, Environmental Policy Forum, November 13, 1995.

3. The role and treatment of clouds in atmospheric models, EE 350 Radioscience Seminar, Stanford University, Feb. 11, 1998.

4. Optimization of a Gear solver for use in 3-D air pollution studies, Computer Information Systems Seminar Series, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, May 10, 1999.

5. Studying ozone layers aloft and ozone in national parks with a global-through-urban-scale air pollution weather forecast model, Fluid Mechanics Seminar, Stanford University, May 8, 2001.

6. Effects of energy use on global warming, Robinson Environmental Theme House Seminar, Stanford University, Nov. 19, 2002.

7. Relative effects of diesel versus gasoline vehicles on climate and air pollution, Petroleum Engineering Seminar Series, Stanford University, Feb. 25, 2003.

8. Addressing air quality and climate through soot control, EE 350 Radioscience Seminar, Stanford University, March 5, 2003.

9. Climate, air pollution, and energy, University Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) University Relations Committee Meeting, Stanford University, April 15, 2003.

10. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through a large-scale wind/hydrogen program. Robinson Environmental Theme House Seminar, Stanford University, February 24, 2004.

11. The climate and air pollution effects of aerosols, Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, November 10, 2004.

12. Effects on air pollution and health of switching to hydrogen fuel cells in all U.S. onroad vehicles, Global Climate and Energy Project Advisory Committee Meeting, March 28, 2005.

13. The effects on air pollution and health of converting all U.S. vehicles to hydrogen fuel cell or hybrid vehicles, Global Climate and Energy Project Technical Symposium, June 15, 2005.

14. Energy and Climate Change, Stanford Institute for the Environment Energy Committee Seminar Series, November 9, 2005.

15. Greenhouse gases versus soot causes of global warming, and a wind energy solution, Geological and Earth Science seminar series, March 16, 2006.

16. The wind factor: How to stop global warming, Engineering Day, School of Engineering and Engineering Alumni Relations Program, July 15, 2006.

17. Comparison of the health and climate impacts of using large-scale wind-hydrogen or wind-batter versus ethanol (E85), diesel, biodiesel, and gasoline in modern vehicles, Wood’s Institute for the Environment Energy Seminar Series, Oct. 4, 2006.

18. Causes of and a solution to global warming, Energy Resources Engineering Seminar Series, Nov. 28, 2006.

19. Wind versus biofuels for addressing climate, health, and energy, SLAC Colloquium, Jan. 29, 2007.

20. Effects of ethanol (E85) versus gasoline on cancer and mortality in the United States, Management Science and Engineering Seminar Series, April 30, 2007.

21. Causes of and solutions to global warming, Intensive English and Academic Orientation program, Stanford University, July 24, 2007.

22. Global warming and its energy solutions, Classes Without Quizzes, Stanford University Reunion Homecoming, Oct. 12, 2007.

23. Air pollution impacts of and renewable energy solutions to climate change, Fluid Mechanics Seminar, Stanford University, January 29, 2008.

24. Presentation to Vestas Wind Systems, School of Engineering, Stanford University, March 20, 2008.

25. Review of proposed solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, The Energy Seminar, Woods Institute for the Environment, October 1, 2008.

26. Briefing to John Fluke and energy specialists, School of Engineering, Stanford University, October 8, 2008.

27. Briefing to Senator Jeff Bingaman, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee of Energy and Natural Resources, on “Low Carbon Energy Supplies,” Stanford University, October 10, 2008.

28. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, China's Environment, Forum for American/Chinese Exchange at Stanford (FACES), Stanford University, February 23, 2009.

29. Review of energy solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security, Discussion Series on Energy and the Environment, Trancos Lounge, February 24, 2009.

30. Predictions of bio-warfare agent dispersion, Army High Performance Computing Research Center (AHPCRC) Technical Review Meeting, Stanford University, June 10, 2009.

31. TBA, EEES Seminar, Stanford University, May 12, 2010.

Invited Panelist

1. Economist's Summit: The Role of Renewable Energy in California's Future, Capital Building, Sacramento, California, September 5, 2001.

2. Soot, wind, and global warming, Engineering Alumni Relations Panel Meeting, Stanford University, February 26, 2003.

3. Panel discussion on global warming, 8th International conference of the Israel Society of Ecology and Environmental Quality Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, May 30-June 1, 2005.

4. Homecoming panel, After Katrina: Global Climate and Energy Issues Hit Home, Stanford University, Thursday, October 20, 2005.

5. Hydrogen discussion panelist. Second HyCARE symposium, Laxenburg, Austria, Dec. 20, 2005.

6. Woods Institute Biofuels Workshop Energy Seminar panelist, Stanford University, Dec. 6, 2006.

7. Panel Discussion on climate change, NASA Ames Research Center, February, 23, 2007.

8. South Coast Air Quality Management District Roundtable Discussion on Controlling Global Warming and Local Air Pollution, Diamond Bar, California, June 28, 2007.

9. Climate Panelist for the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) impacts workshop, Montreal, Canada, Oct. 29-31, 2007.

10. Energy and Climate Change Symposium -- "The Road to Renewables," Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Los Angeles, California, Jan. 18, 2008.

11. Roundtable on Local Approaches to Climate Action, Dept. of Anthropology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, Feb. 13, 2008.

12. Panel on Advanced Energy Research, Woods/Precourt Affiliate Conference, Stanford University, September 12, 2008.

13. Press conference for Environmental Consequences of the Changing Global Food System, American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, December 18, 2008.

14. Horn Lecture panel discussion on energy, School of Earth Sciences, January 20, 2009.

Congressional Testimony

July 12, 2005. Written testimony on a comparison of wind with nuclear energy to the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy and Resource.

October 18, 2007. Oral and written testimony on the role of black carbon as a factor in climate change and its impact on public health. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, D.C.

April 9, 2008. Oral and written testimony on the relative impact of carbon dioxide on air pollution health problems in California versus the rest of the U.S., U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Washington, D.C.

Environmental Protection Agency Testimony

March 5, 2009. Oral testimony invited by the State of California at the Environmental Protection Agency Hearing AMS-FRL-8772-7, California State Motor Vehicle Control Standards; Greenhouse Gas Regulations; Reconsideration of Previous Denial of a Waiver of Preemption, Arlington, Virginia.

Oral testimony at the Environmental Protection Agency Hearing: Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Arlington, Virginia, May 18, 2009.

Documentaries

"Doomsday Tech," History Channel series, Modern Marvels, produced by Scott Goldie and Anthony Lacques, Dec. 28, 2004.

Science advisor, "Global Warming: Are we melting the planet," hosted by Tom Brokaw, Discovery Channel, BBC, NBC News Productions, January, 2006.

Alternative fuels and renewable energy, Discovery Channel Canada, produced by Frances Mackinnon, March 8, 2007; aired March 29, 2007.

Documentary, “The Ethanol Maze,” Nebraska Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Perry Stoner, Producer, December 2007; aired June 19, 2008.

Climate change and air pollution, Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Joy Leighton and Bob Gliner, Stanford, California, June 26, 2009.

Documentary on Renewable Energy, Future Earth/MSNBC, Helen Lambourne, Boulder City, Nevada, July 13, 2009.

Dutch Television Documentary on the Plan for a Sustainable Future, February 12, 2010.

[Confusious]

31. So?

Listening to a person with a PHD in english talk about nuclear physics doesn't really mean much. You'll probably come out stupider for it.

But since you don't have a degree in science, you probably wouldn't know the difference and would think you were brilliant for quoting the English PHD about nuclear physics.

Nearly forgot: Want a cracker with that?

[XemaSab]

64. .

[Dead_Parrot]

13. Why didn't you say so before?

Dammit, this changes EVERYTHING!

[jpak]

8. She's still wrong and still an idiot

yup

[bananas]

6. "Nuclear waste can be viewed as a feature, not a bug"

I can't believe he wrote that!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[bananas]

15. Regarding the F4 phantom crash test - the wall was pushed back six feet

In the OP, he says:

Cravens contacted me after seeing my chat with Rod Adams, a nuclear-trained Naval officer, on Bloggingheads.tv last May (which I followed up with a post).

In that post, he says:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=maybe-nuclear-power-isnt-so-bad-aft-2010-05-11

In a test by Sandia National Laboratory, an F4 jet, which is more dense than a commercial airliner, simply vaporized when it struck a reinforced concrete wall. (Some commenters on Adams's blog have questioned the validity of this test.)

The nuclear industry has fooled a lot of people with that video:

http://www.nci.org/02NCI/01/back-27.htm

<snip>

As a letter to the editor of the New York Times by NCI Scientific Director Edwin Lyman, points out, the crash test "proves nothing, since the wall was not attached to the ground and was displaced nearly six feet."

Lyman goes on to quote directly from the Sandia test report: "The major portion of the impact energy went into movement of the target and not in producing structural damage."

<snip>

The nuclear power industry, which closely follows research results of the Sandia National Laboratories, has made no effort to clear up the misimpression left by the film of the test. Indeed, the test is a phony when it is used to demonstrate reactor containment survivability.

<snip>

Here are some other details that dramatically illustrate just how misleading the film of the Sandia test is:

-- The fuel tanks of the Phantom jet were filled with water, not jet fuel (this to permit Sandia to measure the dispersal of the water upon impact and thus project how jet fuel would be dispersed in a crash);

-- The total weight of the Phantom fighter is only about 5% of a 767 jumbo jet;

-- The Phantom's engine weight is only about 1/3d that of a 767 jumbo jet engine (the Nuclear Control Institute has calculated a jumbo jet engine could penetrate six feet of reinforced concrete);

-- The concrete test wall was 12 feet thick, compared with the 3.5-foot-thick concrete containment domes of nuclear power plants.

<snip>

[madokie]

17. The nuclear power industry started off lying to us and will continue to lie to us

I've yet to read any factual evidence supporting nuclear energy and I've been reading and looking for those facts for damn near 60 years.

[Tikki]

18. You are absolutely correct and anyone who believes that we have/are/will not be lied to..

is beyond naive.


Tikki child of the radiant glow...

[NNadir]

32. Really? You've never read factual evidence supporting nuclear energy?

How is that I find that total unsurprising?

One would need to be able to read people like Wigner, Bethe, and Seaborg to understand the support of nuclear energy. Unfortunately none of these guys published on anti-nuke websites or light weight pamphlets.

They all won the Nobel Prize, and everyone of them, throughout their long and productive lives were strong supporters of nuclear energy.

[DrGregory]

33. You haven't looked hard enough

>I've yet to read any factual evidence supporting nuclear energy and I've been reading and >looking for those facts for damn near 60 years.

How about "A Sustainable Energy Future: The Essential Role of Nuclear Energy"

http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdffiles/rpt_sustainableenergyfuture_aug2008.pdf

A white paper signed by the Directors of the 10 National Laboratories on
behalf of their scientific staffs. Note the signature for Lawrence Berkeley -
Dr. Steven Chu, Nobel Prize winner in Physics and our current
Secretary of Energy for President Obama.

Dr Greg

[madokie]

35. Maybe that was a poor choice of words

As I was saying the nuke boys started off by lying to us about the dangers and will continue to lie to us. They've been telling us for years that the waste is no problem and a solution is just around the corner and yet 60 some odd years later the problem is still there. They try to tell us that the coal plants are emitting more radiation than the nuclear plants are and thats a lie, sure there is trace amounts of a lot of minerals etc in coal and coal is not good for us and all that but to try to equate the radiation coming from a coal plant with that from a nuclear plant is an outright lie. We've come close to a major problem on several of our nuclear plants that is constantly played down by the nuclear industry as no big deal. Three Mile Island, Davis-Besse, Vermont Yankee and the list goes on and on. When there is a problem the industry tries their best to play it down as no big deal but when I read about the big deal in Russia I'm not willing to take that chance. Oh I know we don't do it like the Russians do and all that and how we have containment building that are impenetrable but when you look into the test they used to come to that conclusion you see that was a lie too. The wall that they used was thicker and it wasn't anchored down and it was hit with a fighter jet not a big airliner like many of our airlines use. What I'm saying is I don't buy the bullshit that the nuclear power industry dishes out and probably never will. You want to believe it, fine go for it but don't expect me to do the same. I've been reading and paying attention to this nuclear industry for a long long time and I've yet to see an incidence where that industry has leveled with us on anything yet.
Not only that but do a little research about how the Italians are disposing of some of their waste, read about Somalia and the shit that is washing up on shore there and the list goes on. I'm no fool and I was born early in the morning but trust me when I say this, It was not this morning.
otherwise have a great day, I plan too :hi:

[TheWraith]

43. Yep.

"to try to equate the radiation coming from a coal plant with that from a nuclear plant is an outright lie."

You're completely right. It's actually 100 times greater out of the coal plant.

"In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." Our source for this statistic is Dana Christensen, an associate lab director for energy and engineering at Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as 1978 paper in Science authored by J.P. McBride and colleagues, also of ORNL.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste&page=2

Suffice to say the same sort of inconvenient facts exist about most of these statements.

[madokie]

46. And your link "refudiates" what I said?

http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=Mara+Hvistendahl&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Do a little reading on the author of the bullshit you linked to if you will and then tell me that coal plants emit 100 times more radiation as a nuke plant and I'll laugh at you.
As is expected you are comparing apples to oranges. Down at the bottom of the article you linked to is this: (As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via water or dry cask storage) Totally different from what I stated when I said to try to equate the radiation emitted from a coal plant with the radiation emitted from a nuke plant is an outright lie

as I've said on here a hundred times before if I've said it once, the industry as a whole obfuscates and misleads and when that won't work they outright lie.

Now go piss down someone else's leg and tell them its only rain as I'll have no more of it. :hi:

[TheWraith]

47. So you're calling Scientific American magazine liars and unqualified to judge?

Okay. Live in whatever reality suits you, then.

[madokie]

48. I didn't say anything of the sorts

read what I typed and don't try to put letters on my keyboard that I didn't touch. I made myself pretty clear as to what I was talking about in all that I've typed here.
some people....

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrGregory]

51. WRONG!!!

The calculation that the coal emissions are 100X the dose
was done by scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

They also say the DOSE is 100X worse.

The calculation of dose means that the amount of biological
damage is 100X - because that is what is measured by "dose".

Dose involves both calculating how much energy is deposited
in a given mass of tissue - and how much damage is done by
that energy.

The Oak Ridge scientists show that the biological damage due
to the emissions from coal are 100X worse

Dr. Greg

[kristopher]

57. The question and answer is a red herring

You are not being honest and you know it for you know that your attempt to draw this comparison does not deal with critical variables that must be included for the analysis to have validity.

Since you are so eager to belittle the "scholarship" of others I challenge you to prove that you actually practice what you preach by providing the other readers with a critical analysis of the information at the ORNL link in your post.

You are either on the side of the truth or you aren't.

[DrGregory]

58. what's missing??

I AM being honest!! What "critical variables"
are missing? That's the universal cop-out
when some partisan doesn't like the true
answer.

As detailed in the ORNL paper, coal contains
trace amounts of uranium and thorium. However,
we burn such huge amounts - many BILLIONS of
TONS of coal EACH YEAR - that we end up putting
many, many thousands of tons of uranium and thorium
into the atmosphere.

The nuclear power plants can't output that much -
it's more than the sum total of the uranium they
have in their cores. < BTW when they open a reactor [br />to refuel it they don't find it nearly empty because
the uranium has somehow managed to "escape" ]

As for belittling scholarship - you bet - when someone
does such a miserably POOR job of researching what the
consensus of good science is; that miserable scholarship
should be pointed out.

Some nitwits just spew what they want to be true, and
act as if it is objective truth.

Like I always say; Think with your brain and not with
your politics.

Dr. Greg

[kristopher]

59. If that is the extent of your analytic ability then you aren't worth listening to.

The piece you've posted is well known and has glaring deficiencies as a legitimate piece of comparative analysis that strives for the truth. If, as you claim you are interested in legitimate facts vs "politics" and if you have the background you assert, then you MUST be able to discern the weakness in the position you are promoting.

Why are you unwilling to lead the discussion on the shortcomings of the paper?

[DrGregory]

60. BALONEY

I know of no "well known and glaring
deficiencies" in the ORNL paper.

In fact, it has been published in
refereed scientific journals.

Since I can't prove a negative;
why don't you enlighten us as to
what these deficiencies are.

BTW - I know plenty of IDIOT
environmentalists say the paper
has deficiencies because they
don't like its conclusions - so
don't quote those boneheads.

Show me where the American Physical
Society, or the American Institute of
Physics, or the National Academies of
Science and Engineering have issues with
this SUPPOSEDLY flawed paper.

You won't be able to because the
legitimate scientific community
supports Oak Ridge's work.

Dr. Greg

[kristopher]

61. So the paper is perfect?

So far you are much more about appeals to authority than you are about honest discussion. As your unwillingness to address the problems in the paper demonstrates, your position is clearly one that is oriented toward disregarding all information that is contrary to your belief. It is either that or your ability to understand what constitutes a valid analysis is severely impaired.

So come on and give it a shot - provide us with the criticisms of the paper and you can even follow on with your attempt to refute those criticisms. It is basic to high level analysis that a researcher should be able to see the weaknesses of source material; are you unwilling or unable to accomplish that fundamental task?

[DrGregory]

68. If there were...

If there were one thing untrue in the paper;
I would point it out.

However, there is NOTHING untrue or misleading
in the Oak Ridge paper.

All legitimate scientists understand the truth
that is pointed out in the paper.

Dr. Greg

[bananas]

63. Here's one "well-known and glaring deficiency"

The ORNL webpage estimates global releases of radioactivity from coal thru 2040 at 2.7 million curies:

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

Thus, by combining U.S. coal combustion from 1937 (440 million tons) through 1987 (661 million tons) with an estimated total in the year 2040 (2516 million tons), the total expected U.S. radioactivity release to the environment by 2040 can be determined. That total comes from the expected combustion of 111,716 million tons of coal with the release of 477,027,320 millicuries in the United States. Global releases of radioactivity from the predicted combustion of 637,409 million tons of coal would be 2,721,736,430 millicuries.

(1000 millicuries = 1 curie, so 2.7 billion millicuries = 2.7 million curies)

But a quick look at wikipedia reveals that Three Mile Island released 13 million curies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident

... resulting in the release of up to 481 PBq (13 million curies) of radioactive gases ...

So TMI released about 5 times as much radioactivity as all coal burning through 2040.
Gee, if they left that out, I wonder what else they left out?

[DrGregory]

65. Talk about leaving something outl...

Talk about leaving something out - the majority
of the radioactivity of which you speak was
in the form of inert gases.

Evidently you don't understand that inert gases
are not uptaken by the body, and hence do not
give you much dose - which is actual energy
deposition leading to biological damage.

This was thoroughly covered by scientists in
the Rogovin Report. TMI did release some
biologically active radionuclides - namely
Iodine-131; about 15 Curies.

That's why the judge dismissed the lawsuits.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/tmi.html

Dr. Greg

[DrGregory]

69. Read the judge's summary

The judge quotes the Rogovin report which
details that the millions of curies of
inert gas and 15 Curies of I-131 are
responsible for a average dose to the
population of about 1.4 mrem.

That's about ONE DAY'S worth of
natural background radiation.

BIG DEAL!!!

You get LOTS more by spending a day
in Denver; or taking a ride in an
airliner.

That's why it is important to calculate
"DOSE" which is the measure of biological
damage, as did the Oak Ridge scientists.

They quote that coal plants give you
100X the DOSE!!

How much radioactivity in Curies is
only PART of the story; and can be
misleading to the uninformed.

Dr. Greg

[madokie]

62. The good dr knows it all it seems

Shortly he'll be enjoying my ignore bin
Good to see you back Kris :hi:

[DrGregory]

66. Yes

As a Physicist with a US National Laboratory
and a PhD from MIT; then yes I do know more
about this subject than most, if not everyone
here.

Feel free to use the ignore bin if you want
to stay ignorant and uninformed.

Dr. Greg

[bananas]

71. So how did you get the albedo of typical landscape so wrong?

Your statement was laughably wrong:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=256645&mesg_id=256760

DrGregory Tue Aug-24-10 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Correct

<snip>

A typical landscape REFLECTS about 90% of the suns energy. Only
10% is absorbed.

<snip>

If you're here representing the national labs, I want to complain to your boss.
I want to complain to your boss anyway - I've never known anyone from MIT to make a mistake like that.
I hope you're not working on anything dangerous, like nuclear weapons.
What lab do you work for?

[DrGregory]

72. go study some physics

You gave the albedo for visible light.

That's a relatively small component when
it comes to heating.

The albedo in infra-red and lower frequencies
is more important and more along the lines
of the figure I gave.

Only about 10% is directly reflected.
The remaining is re-radiated as per the
Stephan-Boltzmann Law which states that
a body radiates energy in proportion to
the 4th power of its temperature. It is
also known as "black body radiation"

If only 10% were re-radiated, we wouldn't
have a global warming problem. The CO2
in the atmosphere blocks the re-radiated
energy from escaping. If that were only
10% of the solar influx, then blocking it
wouldn't be so big a problem.

You really want to pit your grade-school
understanding of science against me?

Dr. Greg

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrGregory]

56. More Sandia tests

BTW Sandia National Lab did more
tests than just the F4 Phantom.

The lesson drawn from the F4 Phantom
test was that the damage to the wall
is not done by the fuselage. The
fuselage is relatively fragile - it's
an aluminum shell. The vast majority
of the damage is done by the engines
which are dense objects.

So Sandia did tests hurling complete
jet engines into concrete walls. The
following report from the ASME - the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers;
which is the professional society for
Mechanical Engineers < your college[br />professors of ME belong to ASME ] details:

http://www.asmenews.org/archives/backissues/jan02/features/nucbrief.html

"During the Sandia tests in 1997, a 4,000-pound
jet engine slammed into a 24-inch-thick concrete
wall at 240 mph, resulting in extensive cracking
and spallation — concrete pieces on the inside of
the wall become dislodged and airborne — but no penetration.

The same engine impacting a 63-inch-thick,
reinforced concrete wall, similar to the exterior
of a nuclear containment structure, at 480 mph
resulted in less damage and no penetration."

Dr. Greg

[DrGregory]

67. Simple high school physics

This is a simple problem anyone who has
taken high school physics should be able
to solve. This scientist from IIT correctly
states that it is the same as a ballistic
pendulum as done in high school:

http://health.phys.iit.edu/extended_archive/0111/msg00463.html

From:

http://world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html

we see that the F4 weighed 27 tons and the
block 700 tons; or 26 times the weight of the
jet.

In a collision, two fundamental laws of Physics
apply; Conservation of Energy and Conservation
of Momentum.

Before the collision, the only momentum was in
the F4 jet. After the collision, the block and
the remnants of the jet share that same momentum.

However, to make the math easier; lets assume the
concrete block gets all the momentum. This will
over-predict the momentum and energy of the block.

Let m = mass of F4 jet = 27 tons
v = velocity of jet before collision
M = mass of concrete block
V = velocity of block if block gets all
the momentum. Hence, the true velocity
of the block will be less than V.

If the block gets all the momentum, then

MV = mv
V = v (m/M) = v/26

The energy of the block is given by the
formula for kinetic energy E = 1/2 (mass) (velocity)^2

E of block = 1/2 M V^2
= 1/2 (26 m) (v/26)^2
= (1/26) ( 1/2 mv^2 )
= (1/26) (Energy of jet)
< 4% of the jet's energy.

The MAXIMUM amount of energy the block can
get is less than 4% of the total energy.

Otherwise you can NOT conserve momentum.

Classic concept learned in high school physics.

Dr. Greg

[hunter]

16. The DU AdBot awards this thread:

For the high level of intellectual discourse exhibited by some of the posters.

[4dsc]

42. Nukes cannot replace oil

Once you get that thought correct, you'd see why no amount of nuclear energy will suffice in the coming decades of oil shortages.. We are an oil based society and nuclear power is not going to grease the wheels of our society.

[DrGregory]

54. What about...

How about electric cars charged by nuclear generated
energy?

How about hydrogen fuel cells with hydrogen produced
from water by nuclear generated electricity?

Dr. Greg

[Kolesar]

44. Imagine 400 nuclear plants with managers of the caliber of the BP deep-water drilling crew

Imagine locating nuclear plants in places like Egypt, Columbia, or Pakistan to supplant fossil fuel generation. The probability for a catastrophic fuck up is way too high.

[Dogmudgeon]

45. What's so bad about Egyptians, Columbians, or Pakistanis?

They are perfectly capable of operating nuclear reactors and other complex equipment. They're no more or less intelligent than anyone else.

Incidentally, Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency and Nobel laureate, is Egyptian.

--d!

[Confusious]

49. We don't need to place reactors I'm those places

They only need to be in countries that have nukes, since they use the most fossil fuels.

The only reason you would possibly bring up countries like that is to give legs to the proliferation argument, which would otherwise be headless, armless and legless.

[DrGregory]

53. No......

Imagine those 400 reactors are reactors like the Integral
Fast Reactor or IFR. The IFR is "inherently safe".

If something goes wrong, you don't have to rely
on the operators to shut it down. In fact, they
can walk away or sit on their hands.

The laws of physics which ALWAYS work will shut
down the reactor. This was demonstrated on the
IFR prototype in Idaho as detailed by then
Associate Director of Argonne, Dr. Charles Till
in this interview for Frontline on PBS:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/interviews/till.html

You can't argue with a successful experiment.

Dr. Greg

[DrGregory]

73. Chernobyl

Chernobyl is the "Hindenburg" of the
nuclear industry.

An outdated primitive design combined
with operator error to produce a disaster.

However, does anyone fear flying in a
modern Boeing 777 because of what happened
to the Hindenburg?

The failures of the Hindenburg have nothing
to do with the safety of a modern airliner
like a Boeing 777.

The failures of the primitive Chernobyl RBMK
reactor have nothing to do with the safety
of a modern nuclear power plant.

Dr. Greg