NASA | Ship Tracks Reveal Pollution’s Effects on Clouds


[ music ] [ music ] [ music ] The Earth is a bright planet. From space, we can see why. More than half our world is covered with clouds at any one time. Those clouds reflect a lot of sunlight back to space, helping keep our planet relatively cool. But a NASA satellite instrument called MODIS is showing us that humans can change our planet’s brightness. The pollution we put into the atmosphere actually alters clouds. The best way to see this is to look for signs of pollution in areas that have otherwise clean air, like the north Pacific, near the Aleutian islands. In clean ocean air, water vapor condenses around salt particles and marine sulfate particles, creating clouds. To the naked eye, the clouds in the north Pacific all look about the same. But MODIS’ sensor reveals a different story… … long skinny trails of brighter clouds hidden within. As ships travel across the ocean, sulfate particles in their exhaust create more cloud drops that are smaller in size resulting in even brighter clouds. And, on clear days, ships can actually create new clouds. Water vapor condenses around particles of pollution, forming streamers of clouds as the ships travel on. Could air pollution actually curb global warming by making our planet brighter and more reflective? Scientists are studying the phenomenon, but scientists say it’s not likely to significantly slow global warming. The heat-trapping effect of greenhouse gases, many of which lurk in the same pollution, will most likely keep temperatures on the rise. [ music ] [ music ] [ music ]

39 thoughts on “NASA | Ship Tracks Reveal Pollution’s Effects on Clouds

  1. woo, i didnt know that clouds other than providing shade from sunlight, it has also other positive effects on Earth.

  2. @Zoroasterrrr Global warming is a fact. Every single science institute in the world or national or international standing agrees with it and in fact measures it. When all the other factors are added, such as orbital and sun factors, CO2 rise is the only thing that explains it. Humans now produce 100 times more CO2 than volcanism.
    Only oil & coal lobbies and right 'libertarian' (authoritarian and fascist) politicians deny it.
    Read science journals and dump the far right and FOX/Beck/Paul trash.

  3. @marsCubed wrong, not every scientist agrees on the myth of global warming, read more than one magazine or perhapse do more research.

  4. @Mikej1592 I did not say every scientist agrees, some are sponsored by oil corps or outright bought as lobbyists.
    I said every single science institute in the world, that is in every single country on the planet, the major scientific institutions and universities agree that global warming is happening. Only in oil capitals like Saudi and USA is there any kind of denial, and even that is by oil corp backed lobbyists.
    watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio
    Check the second half to see how the corps fund the denial.

  5. @Mrcharliebobo
    It isn't nonsense though, it is a fact that every single science institute in the world of national and international standing agrees with global warming.
    The lobbyists who deny it are funded directly by oil corps and the far right.
    watch?v=2T4UF_Rmlio
    check out the second half for details.
    scepticism is good, but denial is a political stunt by corps who would rather rape for profits than kill the golden goose.. even if it means trashing the planet and life on it's surface.

  6. @Delly117 God forbid that you may be basing your knowledge of respiratory illness from the U.S. population. Couldn't it be much easier to say that because America is the fattest country in the world that it's because they eat too many cheeseburgers and deep fried chicken that they have high respiratory illness. Lots of fat fucks eating greasy food and not excercising enough. Much easier to blame it on chemtrails though….I guess.

  7. Propaganda from a once great space agency . NASA what happened to you ? 01 September 2009The Royal Society has published the findings of a major study into geoengineering the climate. Now get back in space and forget about global warming lies and muslim outreach

  8. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHA
    WTF? HAHAHAHAHAHA, do you get the jist? this is total B.S

  9. What a load of bull shit lies wtf!?? WE ARE NOT DUMB>>YOU GUYS AT NASA ARE>THINKING YOU CAN PULL OFF THIS BULL SHIT!!

  10. Because ur brainwashed!! fascinating that there is such a level of corruption taking place in front of our eyes and they are still able to tell us a load of bullshit and everyone still believes it. Please my friend, open ur eyes for one second, see how much corruption is in the world and question why u would believe nasa. WHY? Look into chemtrails look into haarp. AND PLEASE LOOK INTO Weather Modification Inc – YOU WILL FIND THE TRUTH BUDDY!! Peace. x

  11. Title:
    Factors determining the most efficient spray size distribution for marine cloud brightening
    Authors:
    Wood, R.; Connolly, P.; McFiggans, G.
    Affiliation:
    AA(Univ Washington, Seattle, WA, United States [email protected]), AB(University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom [email protected]), AC(University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom [email protected])
    Publication:
    American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2014, abstract id. GC13I-0782
    Publication Date:
    12/2014
    Origin:
    AGU
    Keywords:
    0305 Aerosols and particles, 0370 Volcanic effects, 1622 Earth system modeling, 1630 Impacts of global change
    Bibliographic Code:
    2014AGUFMGC13I0782W

    Abstract
    We investigate the sensitivity of marine cloud brightening geoengineering to the properties of the added salt particle distribution using a cloud parcel model, with an aim to address the question: what is the most efficient particle size distribution to produce a desired cooling effect?. We investigate this by using a parcel model with different configurations of salt spray size distribution to assess the approximate power required to generate an albedo increase sufficient to approximately offset a doubling of carbon dioxide. Our findings show that this question depends on the spray generation method employed. We find that for all three methods of spray generation investigated (supercritical fluid, Taylor cone, and Rayleigh jet), distributions of salt particles with median dry diameters in the range Dm = 30 to 100 nm are the are the most effective in terms of brightening per power consumed in generating the particles. Size distributions that resemble the present day emitted sea-spray distribution are not particularly efficient for brightening clouds. The Rayleigh jet method is found to be the most energy efficient method when compared to the supercritical fluid and Taylor cone-jet method. We also find that care needs to be taken when using droplet activation parameterizations: for the concentrations considered Aitken particles do not result in a decrease in the total albedo, as was found in a recent study, and such findings are likely a result of the parameterization's inability to simulate the effect of swollen aerosol.

  12. Even if this were true, we would never believe it now. NASA has been shown to be an effective decay preventive dentifrice when used in a conscientiously applied program of regular professional care. Sounds very impressive. But those are just words used to describe toothpaste (Crest). NASA tries to do the same thing. Empty words.

  13. Not necessarily air pollution but changes in the temperature create condensation effects. I see nothing to assume this human activity promotes global warming anymore than rain promotes global cooling.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *