Few people realise how serious the situation has become.
Science News: Global warming may lead to practically irreversible Antarctic melting
"How is melting a continent-sized ice sheet like stirring milk into coffee? Both are, for all practical purposes, irreversible.
In a new study published in the Sept. 24 Nature, researchers outline a series of temperature-related tipping points for the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Once each tipping point is reached, changes to the ice sheet and subsequent melting can’t be truly reversed, even if temperatures drop back down to current levels, the scientists say.
The full mass of ice sitting on top of Antarctica holds enough water to create about 58 meters of sea level rise. Although the ice sheet won’t fully collapse tomorrow or even in the next century, Antarctic ice loss is accelerating (SN: 6/13/18). So scientists are keen to understand the processes by which such a collapse might occur."
"The new study suggests that below 1 degree Celsius of warming relative to preindustrial times, increased snowfall slightly increases the mass of ice on the continent, briefly outpacing overall losses. But that’s where the good news ends. Simulations suggest that after about 2 degrees Celsius of warming, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet will become unstable and collapse, primarily due to its interactions with warm ocean waters, increasing sea levels by more than 2 meters. That’s a warming target that the signatories to the 2015 Paris Agreement pledged not to exceed, but which the world is on track to surpass by 2100 (SN: 11/26/2019).
As the planet continues to warm, some East Antarctic glaciers will follow suit. At 6 degrees Celsius of warming, “we reach a point where surface processes become dominant,” Winkelmann says. In other words, the ice surface is now at low enough elevation to accelerate melting. Between 6 and 9 degrees of warming, more than 70 percent of the total ice mass in Antarctica is loss, corresponding to an eventual sea level rise of more than 40 meters, the team found."
The world has already warmed by 1°C compared to pre-industrial times and we are set to reach +2°C around 2060.
You can see on this simulation map what a 2 metres sea rise is going to do. Many coastal cities, including New York, the San Francisco Bay Area, Venice, Tokyo, Shanghai, Bangkok, Dhaka, Mumbai... and their surrounding area will be flooded. A third of Florida will be under water. It's not going to be a progressive sea rise. Once part of the Antarctic sheep collapses, the oceans are going to rise abruptly, like when adding an ince cube in a glass that is almost full. Young people buying a house now should keep that in mind as in 40 years houses in these areas may needed to be evacuated and would become worthless.
Yetos,as engineer on hydraylics and enviromental techniques, I had to made some works and presentations as pre-gratuate (diploma) and post-gratuate (master and doctora)
The climate change and global warming is a fact, but happens myriads of milleniums
But as always some exagerate,
when I did my first work as pre-gratuate, I choose to work on solar activity and the solar eras known as solar cirlcles, and the little ice age theory.
that was the time of terror, some numbers terrorizing humanity, announcing such disasters etc etc, coming from minds believing that human activity is responsible for more than 70%.
I remember I have seen once a doctora (2002-3) lecture predicting huge disasters start from 2018 AD.
that era passed infront me a fine work for solar activity through millenias, studying even old trees and especially the ones who turn in stone (απολιθομενα)
I made a work about to see about 20th century effect and especially data from the valley of Po river at Italy which was hit very hard by warming at 1970's, and at local upper and central Makedonia river Aliakmon,
with help from the School of Physicomathematicians, the department of meteorology and the school of Topography (space maps) made a work-effort to search solar activity to these specific areas,
by calculating the model we have seen that a huge 'flame tongue' from sun had strike Po river (if remember correct 1977 or 78) and sun was at a max activity this 9-11 year circle,
when I present the work, only 2 proffesors watch it. and 11 students, but next day was a discuss at department of school
after many works, personally I had a feeling that solar activity is more than 60% and human activity is about 24% and rest is nature activity (like termites)
from 70% to 24% human activity the difference is huge.
after years when CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]data and stock exchange etc establish made another work for predicting the climate and especially the precipitations at Makedonia. and part of this work had to evolve with the global warming and climate changes.
(damn the maths of Grey are ..... ) this time with more data and varriants on my hands the human activity was max 28%.
(btw this time I was proud for I had unexpected audience)
Anyway, models are models and tools, maybe I was wrong, maybe others were wrong, but solar activity was underestimate, (I believe in purpose for creating the CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]stock exchange) while human activity was overestimate.
Global warming, global cooling, and climate changes happens and is happening from the birth of the planet,
even eras when human did not dominate at earth or not even exist.
next strong 'warming up' solar activity will be among 2040-2060,
simply human activity will make the next 'warm' solar activity look like 'closer to hell' than ever, than it should be if only solar and nature activity should be.
our sun shine and lives under a fracture which is a mix of added cosinus circles,
and this is how humanity has to live,
only we have to do is to organise and synchorinise our (human) activities with the solar circles,
so not to live the phaenomena under harm conditions,by theory we know that chaotic and eternal phaenomena that have at least 1 trigonometrical fracture, tend to maximize it and work under it, at a normal, non accidental mode.at the end all happpen normally under this trigonometrical fractures
Planet and nature have the ability to synchronise with sun's willing, accepting and rejecting his 'life giving, and life taking' energy
only we have to do as humans is to organise our societies not to push to the killing limits.
and since human is a animal and not a tree, helps more to global warming, than global cooling.
Think, a big volcano explodes, and spread microdust on atmospheara, and the area nearby burns, but the dust cloud even warm, makes a shield to solar activity, reflecting the warming rays back to space,
so no matter the cloud temperature, for days after it will have a cooling effect at a bigger suround area.
So my opinion is not to input fear and terror to humanity,
but also help reduce and raise human activity in accordance with sun's extreme limits.
So my answer is that organisations that had subject the global warming and the climate change, made a lot of mistakes the previous decades, overestimating the human activity on climate, and I believe in purpose, so to create a CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]buraeu for stock exchange market.
Do you think that if for example a new ice age climate is to come, or a new dinosaur climate era? human activity can prevent it? or push it?
that is a good question to start creative thinking on subject.
besides after 1940 which is the starting point of modern measurements, we also had underwater and desert subterranean nuclear bomb tests.
have we consider for how many years the warming of deep ocean water may affect climate? or phenomena like el Nigno? etc etc
these is average temperature maps of planet,
this the last ice ages
and WOW, was Human responsible for that global climate temperatures also that happened in past
take a look 330 000 years before, was human responsible for that?
From 2040 to 2060 there is a high peak of 90 years solar activity, but we enter a new circle of milleniums of high solar activity, the second big cosinus circle as it is known, we are already at first max one.
using the trigonometrical fractures of sun warming ray waves transmission to earth from 2200 we enter high dangerous for human kind eras,
I'm not a scientist so I depend on what the 'experts' tell me.
What bothers me are those non-scientists that tell me that this is an existential crisis, but are unwilling to do more than token efforts. Non-token efforts would include shutting down aviation: no sight-seeing, no business travel (phone/VTC/Zoom instead). It would include dramatically cutting imports (if it can't be provided locally consider whether we really need it . . . I mean really need it). It would also include any extraneous use of power (including the servers that support Eupedia). You don't need YouTube, Google, or Twitter.
It's draconian, but didn't somebody say this was an existential crisis? If so, then own it.
I don't recommend any of this because I don't know if this is a crisis or not, I'm not an expert.
The burning of forests, especially in the Amazon and in Indonesia, generates 3.5% of all emissions and could easily be avoided if there was more political will to condemn the practice.
that is indeed a great problem in the equation of recycling energy.
and is at least for me a top variant on the balance of globa l warming and global cooling.
Trees have the ability to absorve more CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]with photosynthesis than release with their breath, and turn solar energy to chemical one, not to heat-warmness.
Forests are generally considered as cooling variants to the climate.
That is the primary we must do, protect and reserve the needed surface of forests and green,
Notice that industry advertise a lot the solar photovoltaic panels.
But did not compare or tell us how the same surface, could absorve CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]if was covered by trees,
and what happens with rain water at the areas of solar panels parks .
maybe one of the top urgent actions we must do is to keep and spread more forests, generally tree coverage,
one of the top things that help planet to cool .
There are places like deserts where nothing else will grow. The same places have plenty of sunshine. Places like the Sahara or the deserts of Arizona.
Thanks for your work in this area. We have amongst us two extreme viewpoints, one that ascribes all warming and climate change to solar activity and the other one all to human activity. Now for me even if there was no global warming as an engineer and a human being I like electric cars (and trucks and other means of transportation) for two reasons, noise pollution and exhaust pollution in addition to CO2. You all have seen the before and after pics of cities with extremely clear views post lockdown. I heard birds that I had never heard before because of noise pollution. I do believe that we can remake our economies so that they are not fossil fuel dependent.
But if Nature defeats Man, then the planet will definitely survive. This can happen in a global flood, and not the one described in the Bible, but a real and destructive one. It seems to me that there may be thousands of guesses in this case and they all have a place to bePOTUS believes in climate change, ... he questions the data, ... the influence of human activity vs nature, ... and if the efficacy of the proposed solutions are worth the economic impact on the people.
Tramp is right we can stop this process simply with co2 industrial regulation
[FONT="]With 90 degree heat reported in the high Arctic in both Canada and Russia this summer, and sea ice near record lows, has the Arctic changed permanently into a new state? That could alter the weather in the entire northern hemisphere where the majority of humans live – and raise sea levels beyond expectations.
This thread has been viewed 11879 times.