Its a diversion, its above water vapour which exists in clouds and not in clouds. Should really be in the Hydrogen thread

Maybe I'm getting my wires crossed catching up on the thread, but with the comments a couple of pages back suggesting LPG as the way to go, wasn't it even further back in the thread something about there only being 10 years or so of LPG available?

Doesn't sound like a viable long term solution if that's the case.

geoffwnz:

 

Maybe I'm getting my wires crossed catching up on the thread, but with the comments a couple of pages back suggesting LPG as the way to go, wasn't it even further back in the thread something about there only being 10 years or so of LPG available?

 

Doesn't sound like a viable long term solution if that's the case.

 

That was me, so query answered

geoffwnz:

 

Maybe I'm getting my wires crossed catching up on the thread, but with the comments a couple of pages back suggesting LPG as the way to go, wasn't it even further back in the thread something about there only being 10 years or so of LPG available?

 

Doesn't sound like a viable long term solution if that's the case.

 

...based on proven reserves.  That's really probably more than "proven" but "notified" - it might be proven enough for an exploration/oil company to sit on a claim but not notify it, there's nothing quite like creating an impression of future shortage to keep prices up.  (For an extreme example, look at bitcoin - something with no intrinsic value to humanity at all - but as it has an increasing cost to produce, the hoopleheads are in feet and all. Do hope it's not a ponzi scheme).

Anyway, the world major proven reserves are in Russia, Iran, Qatar.  Except of course for US/Canada shale oil reserves, which US EPA claims released more methane/CO2E than conventional LPG extraction.  The US seems destined on a path to deal with bad environmental news by shutting down the EPA, create a shortage by having a war with Iran, and share the spoils with Russia.  The US is already exporting LPG to Europe.

If/when our reserves run out, NZ could import LPG from various sources, geopolitics will decide from whom.

A quick google shows that we have 7 - 11 years left, but 30 years of exploration, based on the permits still open, since the future ban on exploration. This may mean plenty. Its a FF but much cleaner, so it might be an option for ICE cars as we transition to EV over the next few decades

Natural gas is a non-renewable[3] hydrocarbon used as a source of energy for heating, cooking, and electricity generation. It is also used as a fuel for vehicles and as a chemical feedstock in the manufacture of plastics and other commercially important organic chemicals.

Natural gas is a major cause of climate change, both in itself when leaked[4] and also due to the carbon dioxide it produces when burnt.

There is a good reason unflued gas heaters are banned in many countries.  I would suggest that like other fossil fuels gas is best left sequestered in the ground, not burnt. 

kotuku4: From Wikipedia   Natural gas (also called fossil gas) is a naturally occurring hydrocarbon gas mixture consisting primarily of methane, but commonly including varying amounts of other higher alkanes, and sometimes a small percentage of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, or helium.[2] It is formed when layers of decomposing plant and animal matter are exposed to intense heat and pressure under the surface of the Earth over millions of years. The energy that the plants originally obtained from the sun is stored in the form of chemical bonds in the gas.[3]

 

Natural gas is a non-renewable[3] hydrocarbon used as a source of energy for heating, cooking, and electricity generation. It is also used as a fuel for vehicles and as a chemical feedstock in the manufacture of plastics and other commercially important organic chemicals.

 

Natural gas is a major cause of climate change, both in itself when leaked[4] and also due to the carbon dioxide it produces when burnt.

 

 

 

There is a good reason unflued gas heaters are banned in many countries.  I would suggest that like other fossil fuels gas is best left sequestered in the ground, not burnt. 

 

Ideally cease all FF tomorrow. Put one billion EVs out for sale on Wednesday. Turn off coal fired power plants Thursday. Hydrogen is everywhere for cars and the home and business. None of that will happen this week. If we can replace a high emmiting FF with a low emitting FF that helps. LPG is a lot cleaner.

gzt: LPG is not a great CO2 solution for powering ice vehicles. Sure it's less CO2, not as low as we need to go.

We can wait 30 years till all ICE are gone and replaced by EV and Hydrogen Gas. If you have ICE you have a problem and that problem will exist for a loooong time. Mitigation is a help.

CO2 is 30% lower, NO is 50% lower, per energy equivalent. You can connect it now, or get to converted in days.Id like all cares to to EV or H2, but in the meantime LPG is a better offering than petrol. Smoke is a lot less as well

gzt: On an individual level for some people that will make sense.

It should make sense to everyone IMHO. But while climate change is the big deal everywhere, most of the public dont have much knowledge of the things that can be done to help. It needs a lot of education. Knowing its a problem isnt really much help

tdgeek:

 

frankv:

 

tdgeek:

 

frankv:

 

tdgeek:

 

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

 

 

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

 

 

Where is the rest of my post that states that water vapour content in the air is determined by temperature? Clearly if clouds are in the air they are not saturated. Note dark clouds

 

 

I'm not disputing that water vapour content of air is proportional to temperature. Clouds are formed when the air becomes saturated, and the water droplets do not fall.

 

 

 

 

As they are too light. If they turn to ice they will fall and usually end up as rain,

 

Nope, still wrong. Cirrus clouds are made of ice crystals. And, BTW, ice is less dense than water.

 

or if the temp falls, the water will exceed what the cloud can hold so it falls. Or it can just build up and gravity will take over

 

Kindof right. When the temperature falls, more water will condense. If enough water condenses, it will become too heavy for the rising air to support it. This water will fall into the unsaturated (cause, if it was saturated, that would be part of the cloud too) air below the cloud. The falling water will evaporate. If not all of it evaporates before it hits the ground, you get rain. Air which contains a lot of water vapour is lighter than drier air, and rises.

Now, getting back to CC... if the temperature falls and water leaves the atmosphere, what do you think will happen if the temperature rises?

Ge0rge:

 

From the Smithsonian Science Education website:

"It’s only when that water vapor cools and condenses into liquid water droplets or solid ice crystals that visible clouds form"

I too can cherry-pick information to suit my argument.

Missing from your cherry-pick is that condensation to form clouds only happens when the air is saturated. Your quote is irrelevant to that.

frankv:

 

 

 

Nope, still wrong. Cirrus clouds are made of ice crystals. And, BTW, ice is less dense than water.

 

No one was talking about each cloud type.

 

 

 

 

 

Now, getting back to CC... if the temperature falls and water leaves the atmosphere, what do you think will happen if the temperature rises?

 

 

 

It will going the atmosphere, in that location, as everyone here already knows.