Climate experts' "rapidly rising levels of anxiety "

[Jonti]

FFS!

No, I posted additional information about an important matter, and provided another source for the story.

Get over it.

 

[Jonti]

Here's a neat site from the US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's National Climate Data Center. It claims to be the world's largest archive of climate data.

The Climate TimeLine's my favourite part. It allows the user to explore weather & climate change through time.

The Climate TimeLine uses a "powers of ten" exponential approach to frame meteorological and climatic processes (Climate Science), and specific climate events of the past (Climate History) at varying timescales. Each timescale has its own collection of resources and links to more information

 

[Jonti]

Just a quick note to highlight some interesting info on Geoengineering below. The mention of the large cooling effect following the eruption of Mount Pinatubo set me thinking about how self-correcting 'gaia' can be, and how the man-made geoengineering outlined below, particularly the rather undemocratic 'unilateral' sort, may not be necessary after all. Rising sea levels will probably lead to increased volcanic activity this century (owing to increased volumes of salt water seeping into volcanic fissures). Consequently, the entirely natural and unpreventable occurence of a few Krakatoa sized events over the course of this century could, rather prosaically, have the cooling and stabilising effect necessary to prevent runaway global warming, although there would of course be impacts on crop fertility and food production (increased acidity of rain caused by sulphur, volcanic fall-out and reduced sunlight reaching plants).

http://www.cfr.org/content/thinktank/GeoEng_041209.pdf
http://www.cfr.org/content/thinktank/GM_CFR_briefing_REV.pdf

Other people have said that rising sea levels are unlikely to trigger volcanic activity, which is driven by events deep in the earth, below the tectonic plates (c/f the genesis of the islands of Hawaii, and of Yellowstone Park).

Also consider that at the last glacial maximum around 20,000 years ago sea levels were around 120m lower than the are now. A huge amount of continental shelf has since been flooded, but (asfaik) this hasn't caused loads of volcanic activity.

Anyhoo, this snippet from the first of those links gives pause for thought ...

Unlike the control of greenhouse gas emissions, which must be undertaken by all major emitting nations to be effective and is likely to be costly, geoengineering could be undertaken quickly and unilaterally by a single party, at relatively low cost. Unilateral geoengineering, however, is highly likely to impose costs on other countries and run risks with the entire planet’s climate system.

[emphases added]

So, looks like that's what'll actually happen then

Except that, as so often with heroic engineering solutions, there's no mention of the massive role played by the soil as one of the five available carbon sinks or sources available in the short term (the atmosphere, the land plants, the topsoil in which land plants grow, the surface layer of the ocean in which ocean plants grow, and the known reserves of fossil fuels).

 

[goebfwai]

I am amazed at how much coverage geoengineering schemes like artificial trees to extract CO2 from the atmosphere, ships being used to seed salt water into the air to increase cloud cover etc are getting now on TV news bulletins. I wonder if they will end up pressing these moth-balled ships into service in the cause!?

Revealed: The ghost fleet of the recession
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1212013/Revealed-The-ghost-fleet-recession.html

Anyway, I digress. The worldwide ban on the use of CFC's in the eighties, and how quickly the ozone layer was able to self-repair, shows how powerful concerted worldwide action can be. But tinkering with the weather is highly controversial, politically very sensitive (perhaps even to the extent of provoking a climatic or 'weather war' between 2 countries) and has potentially very far-reaching consequences for global rainfall distribution patterns, regional temperature and crop yields. Countries cloud-seeding to alter rainfall distribution, which means rain gets 'stolen' from one area in order to have it deposit itself first on another, can all go disastrously wrong - e.g. the Lynemouth disaster in the 50's.

Anyway, there is a story below which has had very little media coverage, which I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on. A weakening in the Gulf Stream to the extent that it would contribute to an unpredicted and unseasonal sea level rise of up to 2 foot along the US coast seems to me to be an extraordinary hydrologic event, which, were it not to dissipate or self-correct, could have implications for the weather and temperature experienced in the coming months in western europe (e.g. an unseasonably cold winter). The engines that drive the Gulf Stream off Greenland have been weakening over the past couple of decades, something that is of course to be expected as fresh water melt volumes from the ice sheets there increase.

Sea Levels Rose Two Feet This Summer in U.S. East
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090910-sea-levels-rise.html

Strange sea level rise along East Coast this summer
http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/greenblog/2009/09/strange_sea_level_rise_along_e_1.html

2 Foot Sea Level Rise Along US East Coast, Not Due to Global Warming
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/2-foot-sea-level-rise-along-us-east-coast.php

For the full report go to
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/EastCoastSeaLevelAnomaly_2009.pdf

 

[Dr Jon]

Arctic to be 'ice-free in summer'

"Dogs can swim but they can't tow a sledge through water which is what's needed now."

"Now we have to wear immersion suits and swim and we need sledges that can float. I can foresee needing sledges that are more like canoes that you also pull over the ice."

 

[WouldBe]

I am amazed at how much coverage geoengineering schemes like artificial trees to extract CO2 from the atmosphere....

If they are still banging on about that shit idea then we really are doomed.

 

[Dr Jon]

Just spotted this:
Without Drastic CO2 Cuts Immediately, the World Faces a Massive 'Oh Shit' Moment

"I myself was terrified when I saw these numbers," Schellnhuber told me. He urges governments to agree in Copenhagen to launch "a Green Apollo Project." Like John Kennedy's pledge to land a man on the moon in ten years, a global Green Apollo Project would aim to put leading economies on a trajectory of zero carbon emissions within ten years. Combined with carbon trading with low-emissions countries, Schellnhuber says, such a "wartime mobilization" might still save us from the worst impacts of climate change.

 

[derf]

It's not about numbers unless you consider the number of people that are going to be effected by this.
Over here, rainfall is increasing and the dry season getting wet. There is more rainfall when it does rain.
I'm seeing reports of islands and coastal areas slowly getting swamped as sea levels start to rise in Bangladesh.

Well out of the way, not really, London is well fucked as well if the sea level get not a lot higher as it will.

 

[Falcon]

PROF. ANN HENDERSON-SELLERS, MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY: A lot of people like myself, and I believe many, many scientists now, who are frantically, hysterically worried.

Yes. That it all turned out to be a meme, and her funding is about to run out and with it her capacity to repay her mortgage.

 

[Signal 11]

Yes. That it all turned out to be a meme, and her funding is about to run out and with it her capacity to repay her mortgage.

 

[david dissadent]

Has the impact of methane been underestimated?

The effects of a critical greenhouse gas on global warming have been significantly underestimated, according to research suggesting that emissions controls and climate models may need to be revised

Methane’s impact on global temperatures is about a third higher than generally thought because previous estimates have not accounted for its interaction with airborne particles called aerosols, Nasa scientists found.

When this indirect effect of the potent greenhouse gas is included one tonne of methane has about 33 times as much effect on the climate over 100 years as a tonne of carbon dioxide, rather than 25 times as in standard estimates.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I know that feeling. When I first started reading up on climate change and changing my lifestyle I was being altruistic to my grandchildrens generation and beyond. By the turn of the centuary I was thinking that there may be big impacts in my childrens generations lifetime.
Since last year I have been able to see the impacts of climate change happen live, year by year in the North pole.
And now we have the arctic methane.
2 degrees in our lifetime. And this coming from a former senior member of the Hadley climate institute?



link

It seems the professionals share some of my concerns that things are much worse than officialy stated.

Jesus: that tidal wave will be at my front door by the middle of next week.

I wonder if sacrificing some virgins might help?

 

[david dissadent]

Jesus: that tidal wave will be at my front door by the middle of next week.

I wonder if sacrificing some virgins might help?

You must be lonely tonight and trying to stir up a conversation so someone will talk to you.


Perhaps a local premium rate number would be more appropriate than the Urban science forum?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Thing is, no way to stop it now. We had our chance and it's passed us by ...

Sometimes humans really piss me off.

Personally, I'm going to rush out and buy these things:

 

[Shevek]

James Lovelock: One Last Chance to Save Mankind

With his 90th birthday in July, a trip into space scheduled for later in the year and a new book out next month, 2009 promises to be an exciting time for James Lovelock. But the originator of the Gaia theory, which describes Earth as a self-regulating planet, has a stark view of the future of humanity. He tells Gaia Vince we have one last chance to save ourselves - and it has nothing to do with nuclear power.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html

that article is for subscribers only. Can someone give me a run down?

 

[matt m]

Yes. That it all turned out to be a meme, and her funding is about to run out and with it her capacity to repay her mortgage.

Thing is, if climate change turns out not to exist, that would obviously be a massively good thing.

And the thing I’ve never understood about cc deniers is that it’s in the world’s interest to move to sustainable energy sources anyway, irrespective of climate change.

Basically you have to be a bit of a cunt not to want to provide cheap, clean electricity to impoverished regions of Africa in which poor people die from the lack of it. (Which could be achieved by solar photovoltaics in the Sahara, HVDC cables and political will.) The sun is Africa's best resource: it makes simple economic sense to hook it up.

Even if you don’t believe global warming is happening, even if you don’t believe peak oil predictions, you ought to be supporting the measures that would prevent them on purely humanitarian grounds - so some poor bastard no longer has to burn literal shit to cook his supper with.

 

[Falcon]

you ought to be supporting the measures that would prevent them on purely humanitarian grounds - so some poor bastard no longer has to burn literal shit to cook his supper with.

To provide the energy to drive the carbon capture for just the 22GW of UK electricity generation capacity that is going to switch off (1/3 of our total generation capacity) will require 4 large power stations (10GW) costing £8 billion burning 18 million tonnes of coal and producing 6 million tonnes a year of ash just to shove carbon dioxide into the ground on the basis of a climate model with a grid size 16 times too big to provide meaningful predictive results.

I think there are better ways of helping Africans.

 

[IMR]

a climate model with a grid size 16 times too big to provide meaningful predictive results.

Where did you read that?

 

[Dr Jon]

Very Bad News on Climate Front

Not long ago it was our distinct pleasure to transmit a piece of rare good news from the climate front, the discovery by British researchers that microorganisms living in Antarctic waters are taking up a small but significant amount of atmospheric carbon. Now comes the bad news, and unfortunately it's a lot worse--evidence that our oceans' ability to absorb carbon may be dropping sharply.