Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Aurcana Silver Corp V.AUN.H

Aurcana Silver Corporation is a Canada-based company, which is engaged in the exploration, development, and operation of natural resource properties. The Company’s development properties are the Revenue-Virginius mine (the Revenue-Virginius mine or Ouray), located in Ouray Colorado and held through the Company’s 100% owned United States subsidiary, Ouray Silver Mines, Inc. (OSMI) and the Shafter silver property (the Shafter Silver Project or Shafter), located in Presidio County, Texas and held Aurcana Silver Corporation. The Revenue-Virginius mine is located in southwestern Colorado about 5.5 miles southwest of the town of Ouray. Access to the mine site is via County Road 361. The Shafter Silver Project, which is 375 miles southeast of El Paso, in Presidio County, southwest Texas, within a historic mining district.


TSXV:AUN.H - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Post by TriN2Learnon Dec 02, 2012 1:15pm
327 Views
Post# 20672181

Way Off-Topic: slowwhizz & CO2

Way Off-Topic: slowwhizz & CO2

@slowwhizz wrote:  If CO2 in the atmosphere causes the earth to get warmer by reflecting normal radiation cooling at night (thereby trapping heat), why doesn't CO2 reflect radiation heat from the sun during the day (like a cloud of water vapor or dust from a storm) to make the earth cooler than normal?

First, CO2 in the atmosphere does not reflect radiation. Obeying various laws of physics, the CO2 molecule can absorb very narrow bands of energy within the electromagnetic (EM) spectrum, then quickly re-radiate that same energy.  The direction of the re-radiated energy is random, so sometimes the radiation continues in the same general direction of the original, sometimes is re-radiated in the general direction from where it came.  The net result of this process is to cut down on the rate of energy loss into space.

Most of the energy in sunlight comes to us within the visible region of the EM spectrum, but CO2 has no absorption bands within the visible spectrum, so it has virtually no effect on sunlight.  At night, the earth radiates energy, predominantly in the infrared region of the EM spectrum, and CO2 has several narrow absorption bands within the infrared region. That is why CO2 has an impact on the energy loss from the earth, but not the incoming energy from the sun.

The common analogy used is the "greenhouse effect". In a greenhouse, the sunlight passes through glass, or transparent plastic, relatively unattenuated.  The sunlight is absorbed by the objects inside the greenhouse, which radiates infrared radiation. The glass or plastic that readily passes sunlight, absorbs much of the infrared radiation, then re-radiates some of it back into the greenhouse, and some of it to the outside. The actual physics in this analogy is different, but the net result is similar.

The above is greatly simplified, but I have worked with energy transmission through CO2 starting in the early 1970's. The work was on military applications, but the physics is the same. I will not engage in a discussion of global warming, climate change, or any such sort. I do suspect the many "scientists" in the argument, on both sides of the debate, don't understand the physics behind their computer models. Also, their conclusions has more to do with money, politics, and personal beliefs than it does with science... IMO.    'Nuff said.  Trin

Bullboard Posts