[Rugoz]

Mars colonization is incredibly silly but if it motivates Musk to build huge reusable rockets, who cares. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[AFAIK]

@late
If our current efforts to reach Mars fail we can try again next century. If our planet is ravaged by famines, mass migrations and wars then we won't have another chance.

I respect Nasa. My comment was directed more at billionaires who dress up their self serving space adventures as some form of altruism or philanthropy.

[late]

[usermention=41202]

@late[/usermention]
If our current efforts to reach Mars fail we can try again next century. If our planet is ravaged by famines, mass migrations and wars then we won't have another chance.

We will need NASA if we ever get serious about dealing with climate change.

[BeesKnee5]

Not sure on this NASA obsession, but it's NOAA who operate the climate monitoring satelites

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/content/our-satellites


NASA has climate satelites but they are all part of a whole group of international effort

[late]

Not sure on this NASA obsession, but it's NOAA who operate the climate monitoring satelites

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/content/our-satellites


NASA has climate satelites but they are all part of a whole group of international effort

We will need more of the new ones to get the kind of accuracy we need to evaluate our progress.

[BeesKnee5]

We will need more of the new ones to get the kind of accuracy we need to evaluate our progress.

What is it you think isn't being monitored?

[late]

What is it you think isn't being monitored?

Not what I said...

[BeesKnee5]

Not what I said...

I get the impression you haven't a clue what you are asking for.

We can already pinpoint methane, so2, pm10, CO2, O3 and NOx emmisions. We can measure the earth's radiation budget, albedo, surface temperature and ocean heat capacity.

Having a higher resolution on these things is all very nice, but it doesn't mean we cannot act without it and monitor the effects of our actions.

[AFAIK]

Water vapour is the most common greenhouse gas and we weren't able to map it last I heard. I don't know if we can map it yet since I ignore climate contrarians in all their forms.

[late]

I get the impression you haven't a clue what you are asking for.

NASA wanted 4 of those, Republicans cut it down to one.

So it isn't me asking for them...

One NASA scientist said measuring the small changes we will hopefully be making will be extraordinarily tough to measure.

Have a cup of coffee...

[BeesKnee5]

NASA wanted 4 of those, Republicans cut it down to one.

So it isn't me asking for them...

One NASA scientist said measuring the small changes we will hopefully be making will be extraordinarily tough to measure.

Have a cup of coffee...

Four of those .

Four of what?


I suspect you've misunderstood. This isn't about more powerful satelites, it's about maintaining a suite of satelites in orbit. As satelites orbits degrade they need replacing. Our global temperature satelite record is built from 20 NOAA satelites

[BeesKnee5]

Water vapour is the most common greenhouse gas and we weren't able to map it last I heard. I don't know if we can map it yet since I ignore climate contrarians in all their forms.

The GOES satellites have been measuring humidiy ( water vapour ) for quite a while.

Aqua and Aura have been using multiple microwave and spectrometer scanning instruments to monitor watar vapour for some time.

[late]

This isn't about more powerful satelites, it's about maintaining a suite of satelites in orbit.

NASA wanted better...

[BeesKnee5]

NASA wanted better...

We always want better. What we need more than anything is a consistent record.

The delay between Grace and Grace-FO left a gap in our sea ice record.

[late]

We always want better. What we need more than anything is a consistent record.

"May. 5, 2021 , 11:15 AM

NASA is about to announce its next generation of Earth-observing satellites. As soon as this month, it will lay out preliminary plans for a multibillion-dollar set of missions that will launch later this decade. This “Earth system observatory,” as NASA calls it, will offer insights into two long-standing wild cards of climate change—clouds and aerosols—while providing new details about the temperatures and chemistry of the planet’s changing surface. The satellite fleets also mark a revival for NASA’s earth science, which has languished over the past decade compared with exploration of Mars and other planets.

Although officials have been planning the missions for several years, the Biden administration is accelerating them as part of its focus on addressing climate change."

You were saying?

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/05/nasas-new-fleet-satellites-will-offer-insights-wild-cards-climate-change

[BeesKnee5]

[

You were saying?

Yep,

The funny thing is you think it's just NASA that's putting more complex satelites up to understand cloud cover.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EarthCARE


Even your article makes it clear that the priority is to replace aging satelites to maintain the record

"The ACCP satellites, with a total cost of up to $1.6 billion, would replace CloudSat and CALIPSO , CloudSat has lost two of the four reaction wheels it uses to stabilize its orbit, and CALIPSO is out of fuel and onto its backup laser. "

This is the damage of Trump and his denial of climate change.

[late]

The funny thing is you think it's just NASA that's putting more complex satelites up to understand cloud cover.

Why do you keep lying, and why can't you spell satellite?

[BeesKnee5]

Why do you keep lying, and why can't you spell satellite?

It's not lying, it's clear that NASA aren't the only space agency and others are already putting satelites into space to monitor the points you've tried to raise.

Does it bother you that ESA and JAXA are ahead of NASA by at least 5 years in this example?

Why is it lying to highlight that it's the replacement of existing aging satelites that's the priority?

As I pointed out before, the only way you can tell if things are getting worse or better is to have a continuous satelite record that can be calibrated to the previous record. The gap between NOAA-19 and NOAA-20 was 8 years. If NOAA-21 is delayed again to beyond 2022 then we will struggle to maintain the UAH and RSS satelite temperature record. These are the things that matter to me when I'm trying to understand the effects of climate change.
We cannot afford another delay like we had with GRACE that means there is a gap in the record and we have no way of checking the information from GRACE-FO is calibrated to GRACE
https://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/resources/31 ... 2002-2020/

If my swipe keyboard resulting in the occasional double letter missed bothers you, tough. Such pedantry suggests desperation.

[late]

It's not lying...

You've been trying to escape the obvious...

"This “Earth system observatory,” as NASA calls it, will offer insights into two long-standing wild cards of climate change—clouds and aerosols—while providing new details about the temperatures and chemistry of the planet’s changing surface.

“Earth system science is poised to make an enormous difference in our ability to mitigate, adapt to, and plan for changes we’re seeing,” says Karen St. Germain, director of NASA’s earth science division. “The pace we’re going to have to do that is much higher in the decade in front of us than the decade behind us.”

NASA has been saying for years they need to improve the technology. Yes, they need to replace instruments, but that is not enough.

[BeesKnee5]

You've been trying to escape the obvious...

NASA has been saying for years they need to improve the technology. Yes, they need to replace instruments, but that is not enough.

The obvious is that they won't be launching until at least 2028 and ESA/JAXA will have at least 5 years worth of data by then. Not that I expect NASA to meet their targets based on past experience.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EarthCARE

GRACE ran for 15 years and had an expected lifespan of 5, still they couldn't get its replacement in space to avoid an 18 month gap in the record (even if GRACE-FO is a more advanced version than GRACE). What chance the new ACCP satellites will be in space before CloudSat and CALIPSO die? They're already 15 years old.

Every new satellite has improved technology, but gaps in the record make it much, much harder to know if the results are accurate or if there is an unexpected difference in the sensitivity of the instruments.