Controlling soot could stop global warming... almost immediately.

[DCBob]

from Wired..

A massive simulation of soot’s climate effects finds that basic pollution controls could put a brake on global warming, erasing in a decade most of the last century’s temperature change.

Compared to the larger, longer term task of getting greenhouse-gas pollution under control, limiting soot wouldn’t be hard. Unlike new energy technology and profound changes in lifestyle, the tools — exhaust filters, clean-burning stoves — already exist.

“Soot has such a strong climate effect, but it has a lifetime in the atmosphere of just a few weeks. Carbon dioxide has a lifetime of 30 to 50 years. If you totally stop CO2 emissions today, the Arctic will still be totally melted,” said Stanford University climate scientist Mark Jacobson. If soot pollution is immediately curtailed, “the reductions start to occur pretty much right away. Within months, you’ll start seeing temperature differences.”

Read More http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/07/soot-control/

This is quite fascinating and seems it could work in my opinion. This needs to be looked into in more detail and determine if it is really feasible/practical on a large scale. This should be an easier sell to politicians and there would be many side benefits of just having cleaner air.

[WVRICK13]

1. Very Interesting

Now this is worth investigation. It appears it should be relatively inexpensive to take corrective measures with darned near immediate benefits.

[drm604]

2. self delete

[drm604]

3. This seems doable

and is a good idea if the science holds up. However, it's important to note that it does not alleviate the need to reduce carbon output. It's something that can be done alongside working to reduce CO2 emissions.

“It will take some decades to phase down fossil-fuel emissions, so reducing dirty aerosols while we are doing that may help retain Arctic sea ice,” said NASA climatologist James Hansen, one of the first researchers to study soot dynamics. But he emphasized that soot control is only a stopgap measure. “We should reduce soot for several reasons, especially its health effects, but it is only a modest help in controlling global warming,” he said.

Nevertheless, soot could ease the delay between controlling greenhouse gas emissions and cooling. It might also help “avoid tipping points — nonlinear, abrupt and potentially irreversible climate change, especially in the Arctic,” said Erika Rosenthal, a climate policy expert at the progressive nonprofit Earthjustice.

[DCBob]

4. Yeah, I agree with that.. CO2 is still the problem but this seems like a good short term "fix"

I hope the policy makers take this seriously. It really makes sense to me.

[dipsydoodle]

5. Do you use DPF's over there ?

Diesel particulant filters that is.

[DCBob]

6. yes, it seems so..

from wiki..

Particulate filters have been in use on non-road machines since 1980, and in automobiles since 1996. Diesel engines during combustion of the fuel/air mix produce a variety of particles generically classified as diesel particulate matter due to incomplete combustion. The composition of the particles varies widely dependent upon engine type, age, and the emissions specification that the engine was designed to meet. Two-stroke diesel engines produce more particulate per unit of power than do four-stroke diesel engines, as they burn the fuel-air mix less completely.

Historically diesel engine emissions were not regulated until 1987 when the first California Heavy Truck rule was introduced capping particulate emissions at 0.60 g/BHP Hour. Since then progressively tighter standards have been introduced for both On-Road and Non-Road diesel engines.

While particulate emissions from diesel engines was first regulated in the United States, similar regulations have also been adopted by the European Union, most Asian countries, and the rest of North and South America World List of Standards.

While no jurisdiction has made filters mandatory, the increasingly stringent emissions regulations that engine manufactures must meet mean that eventually all on-road diesel engines will be fitted with them. The American 2007 heavy truck engine emissions regulations cannot be met without filters. In the European Union, filters are expected to be necessary to meet Euro.VI heavy truck engine emissions regulations currently under discussion and planned for the 2012-2013 time frame. PSA Peugeot Citroën was the first company to make them standard fit on passenger cars in 2000, in anticipation of the future Euro V regulations.

It is expected that non-road diesel engines will be regulated in a similar manner.

As of December 2008 the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has established diesel emissions regulations which—with variance according to vehicle type, size and usage—require that in-use diesel engines (in California) be retrofitted, repowered or replaced in order to remove at least 85% of particulate matter (PM) emitted from diesel engines. Retrofitting the engines with CARB verified diesel particulate filters are one way to fulfil this requirement.<1> In 2009 the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided funding to assist owners in offsetting the cost of diesel retrofits for their vehicles.<2>

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

[dipsydoodle]

7. Ta for that

My '07 model year 2.8 CRD Jeep Unlimited is Euro 4. It was one of batch which Jeep knocked out cheap middle of last year to ensure it was registered prior to Euro 5 coming into force.

Our diesel Jeeps do 34 to an imperial gallon.

:hi: