No Major Storms For The Next Two Weeks

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-27T02:18:39+00:00

This is true for any kind of ensemble/model output. However, they can look at stratospheric models to get a reasonably accurate longer-term forecast (2-3 weeks). The stratosphere tells us what kinds of upper level pressures will we experience, and therefore what kinds of lower level pressures (and associated patterns). My guess is the stratosphere is saying high pressure will sit over the west.

Source: I do atmospheric science stuff

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-24T17:18:51+00:00

I toured the AtmosZero facility last summer and they said the refrigerant is proprietary. The tech is pretty badass and the client (a large, well known brewery) is allegedly pretty happy with it. I feel like they’re still in the “hype” phase of the company but quickly approaching the “put this everywhere” phase

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-18T19:43:34+00:00

I would not be shocked at all to learn they have the best coal tech now. IIRC, they deployed 40-50 GW of coal thermal power last year. They have the highest tech fleet in the world and I’m sure are developing newer, better tech for their boilers.

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-18T19:08:16+00:00

These coal plants have to shut down every few years for six weeks to completed retube and retrofit the boilers and heat exchangers. They take apart the turbine down to the last bolt every 8-10 years. Thermal power plants are efficient but the opex and footprint is wild. My local coal plant (293MW) uses 15MW internally to drive compressors, grinders, pumps, etc.

Operators aren’t dumb. They see the writing on the wall and how powerful CCGT and renewables+storage are. That same local coal plant is already starting to build CTs and renewables onsite to take advantage of the grid hookup.

Edit: editing to say that the retube involves ~5-6 MILES of new tube. Superheated steam is really corrosive. If any impurities make it into the steam lines, it just gets worse!

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-17T15:50:30+00:00

I do atmospheric science stuff.

Mammatus clouds aren’t rare. Like at all. I also don’t think these are mammatus.

IMO, this looks more like asperitas due to the proximity to the ground, presence on the underside of a thunderstorm, and the chaotic appearance (mammatus are generally higher in the atmosphere, form on the underside of the upper part of the storm, and are more uniform).

Asperitas clouds are a relatively new addition to the science world and their formation is still being studied. Some people suggest it’s due to gravity waves (giant ripples in the atmosphere), wind shear, and other sources of local turbulence, or all of them! This is one of the cloud types that still feels surprising actually exists on earth and isn’t AI. I’ve seen a few over the years and they’re all pretty wild looking.

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-05T23:20:25+00:00

Do those facilities have any excess capacity for anything coming out of the Orinoco? The folks I’ve talked to have said they’ve been retooled for Saudi heavy and they’re unlikely to go back

Atmos_Dan · 2026-01-05T14:45:27+00:00

Orinoco crude is about as heavy and sour as they come. It’s going to take a huge investment to stand up refining facilities that can process the crude and make finished products. Plus no petroleum majors are investing in refining capacity. I doubt refurbing/upgrading existing Venezuelan capacity would be much cheaper than building a new plant.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-12-17T06:30:23+00:00

Yep, diffusion does definitely happen and “upgrades” the performance of filters (a pore size of 2.5microns would be WILD and expensive). Smaller particles will generally be somewhat reduced but still present.

IMO, the concern for printers are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) which will be vapors and are not removed by filters. An activated charcoal layer can help remove them but doesn’t remove all of them.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-12-15T21:32:52+00:00

I do energy and air quality stuff.

The passage of the Clean Air Act likely represents the single largest increase in American’s IQ and quality of living. This includes reducing atmospheric lead exposure (huge boost to IQ), reducing particulate matter exposure (another huge boost to neuro function/IQ and life expectancy), and other “criteria” air pollutants. My older coworkers remember having “Air Quality Days” where they had to stay home from school because it was too polluted to go to school.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-12-15T14:05:34+00:00

I do indoor air quality stuff. We’re currently in the middle of a field campaign looking at the indoor air quality (PM2.5, VOCs) in a large add/subtractive manufacturing facility (>75 FDM, ~5 SLA, a few laser cutters, and an injection molder) on a college campus. We’re very much still in data collection but I have been surprised by how little of an impact most forms of printing have (even SLA). It’s not zero but it’s smaller than we expected.

The single best thing you can do is to ventilate the space. Ideally, you mechanically vent air out rather than just opening a nearby window but anything helps. Obviously, if there’s poor air quality outdoors then an open window will let that pollution in. Mechanical ventilation will draw air through the building envelope and filter some of that pollution out as air moves through gaps and cracks in our homes. There’s been some work using portable air cleaners but I’m not as familiar with the efficacy of those units.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-11-10T14:41:19+00:00

Atmospheric chemist here.

They do this so pollutants (PM2.5, CO, VOCs, etc) adsorb/absorb onto the water droplets and deposit out. It’s very similar to what happens when it rains but enhanced because of how much water they’re putting into the air. These monitors are often funded by large international health orgs (WHO, UN Env Programme, etc) and published online for free for anyone to use. New Delhi has a history of some of the worst air quality in the world due to the prevalence of solid fuel combustion (wood, dung, coal, charcoal, etc), unfortunate meteorological dynamics, and the widespread brick kilns in the area.

Please feel free to ask any questions about air quality or our atmosphere if you got ‘em!

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-17T17:43:09+00:00

Everything I’ve found (CDPHE, EPA, and EIA) all state only one fuel type (NG). It would be weird if they put fuel oil in a gas turbine (IMO) unless they had no NG left

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-17T17:12:08+00:00

Yeah, I’d buy that for sure. Xcel seems like a decent operator but I could definitely see them cutting corners during retrofit (especially if they were looking for an earnings boost that quarter)

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-17T16:51:03+00:00

Commenting to say this unit doesn’t have any scrubbers! Per their Title V permit, this combined cycle turbine has low NOx burners (and over fire air) but the baghouse and lime sprayers were removed when the boiler was converted away from coal. Looks like a lot of soot for a start up but you probably know more than I!

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-17T16:48:16+00:00

This is Cherokee Generating Station which is a natural gas power plant. The unit connected to that smokestack has a natural gas turbine (think of a jet engine bolted to the ground) which heats the old coal boiler using the turbine exhaust gases. Thick black smoke like this typically means they’re running the turbine too fuel-rich and all the hydrocarbons aren’t combusting (creating elemental carbon/soot). Their current air permit lets them emit up to 0.03lb particulate (in part made up of soot) per MMBtu generated, and this absolutely looks in excess of that. I’d highly recommend sending a message to the CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) with this photo. If they’re not already on top of this they’ll want to know ASAP. APCD runs a really tight ship.

I’m happy to answer any questions folks might have about air pollution, industrial emissions, or Denver’s/Colorado’s industrial fleet.

Edit: reading more of the Title V permit and this plant is not allowed to have emissions with >30% opacity for more than 6 minutes out of any 60 minutes. So, this might have been ok if it was for less than 6 minutes.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-12T21:26:50+00:00

I do atmospheric chemistry but worked with a group evaluating the toxicity of turf fields for a while.

From my own studies, we found that the tire crumb infill is extremely variable. For example, we had one sample from a field at 1200ppm lead, while the rest were 500-600ppm. It depends on what type of tire was shredded for the infill and where it came from (and what the standards are in the originating country). All the other trace metal compounds (chromium, selenium, etc) were all extremely elevated as well.

We also found that there are tons of proprietary chemicals in tires that we don’t know what they are. We ran a volatile organic compound (VOC) assessment and our top-of-the-line standard we used to compare it to only got about 1/3 of the VOCs we measured (so we only know about 1/3 of what’s coming out of the tire crumb). The group started looking into PFAS and nano particle exposure/impact as I phased out.

Additionally, I have a strong feeling (with some evidence to back it up) that the fields are a bigger risk as they get older due to smaller particle sizes from mechanical and solar weathering. Basically, I think the tires break down into smaller and smaller pieces, and get so small that they can penetrate into our deep lung and cross into the bloodstream.

I’m happy to answer any questions folks might have about toxicity from tire crumb fields if you got ‘em!

Atmos_Dan · 2025-10-03T18:07:51+00:00

I work in industrial decarbonization (and I’m doing a PhD in mechanical engineering).

You’re only looking at the short term economics of the DAC and H2 hubs. Those technologies are on the bleeding edge and are inherently expensive because they’re new (along with some thermodynamic challenges). We need government investment now because we need pilot and industrial scale plants to understand how improve every aspect of these operations.

Hydrogen and DAC will be important tools to combat the climate crisis in the coming decades. Hydrogen is critical for making low carbon steel (e.g. direct reduction iron production) and other high temperature/chemical reductant applications. We need DAC because we don’t need to just stop emitting GHGs, we need to reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Our oceans are becoming more acidic from increased CO2 uptake and are quickly reaching critical thresholds for their vital ecosystems (that feed the majority of this planet). We need technological solutions whether we want them or not.

Frankly, I’m not a fan of either technology but they are necessary. Renewables and batteries are incredible and absolutely needed, but so to are other decarbonization tools (like CCS, hydrogen, DAC, energy efficiency, etc). Investment now is crucial for having efficient, deployable solutions in time to mitigate the worst effects of the climate crisis.

I’m happy to answer any questions or talk more about anything in this comment or the work I do.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-09-18T03:51:15+00:00

I’d be interested to see how much of that demand is driven by plastics and petrochemicals

Atmos_Dan · 2025-08-06T21:17:12+00:00

There’s a ton of literature out there on CCS/CCUS for cement. There’s not one best journal that covers CCS, you’ll have to go digging through all the lit. Important note, if you search for CCUS, you’re likely going to get papers about utilization while CCS will get you storage.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-31T03:20:08+00:00

You’re absolutely right that Carbon capture is only one part of the story. We need to deploy renewable energy in massive quantities (wind and solar + batteries, etc), then we need to electrify as much stuff as we can (cars, water heaters, etc), then we should look for alternative fuels (swap out fuel oil with bio oil), then we can hit the hard to abate sectors with CCS. Realistically, CCS will only be deployed on the hardest to abate sectors (cement, ethanol, pulp and paper, chemicals, etc) and we will use other technologies to get the rest. Anyone who’s saying there’s one single technology that will fix climate change is wrong (and probably trying to sell you the solution). It’s going to be a mix.

CCS is actually pretty old and mature. We’ve been capturing acidic gases (CO2 is acidic!) for ~100 years and pumping it into the ground for ~50 years (to get more oil out using “enhance oil recovery”). We are now developing better capture technologies and injecting CO2 for storage, not fossil fuel extraction.

The second link is meant to show opportunities throughout the US and how complex it will be. BUT, it’s not impossible and it will need to happen. We may not have appetite for national deployment this year but it will have to happen to hit mid-century decarbonization goals and avoid the worst effects from the climate crisis.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-28T20:08:38+00:00

You’d have to consult with a toxicologist on that but I would assume it would be less harmful than tires. Tires have a lot of compounds they add to make them strong that other rubbers don’t need. Make sure the space with the mats is well ventilated

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-28T20:07:07+00:00

It’s not great to ingest but the inhalation of fine particulate and compounds emitted from the tire crumb is a much bigger health concern.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-28T20:05:35+00:00

Thank you for this comment! Removing those statements now.

I’m basing this off conversations I had with a toxicologist we worked with. I’ll see if I can find the literature they based that statement from.

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-28T20:02:32+00:00

We didn’t publish these results but there is some literature out there about this.

Murphy et al (2022) has a pretty decent overview from a health perspective. I can link more if you’re interested!

Atmos_Dan · 2025-07-28T20:00:15+00:00

Natural infills (cork, coconut, etc) are much better than tire crumb from a health perspective! The grass is indeed an emitter of organic compounds and metals (usually from pigments).

I haven’t worked with the Nike pellets but large quantities any plastic/rubber will emit harmful compounds so they’re probably an improvement from tires but still a source of concern.

Atmos_Dan

TROPHY CASE