Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Ice-free Arctic  (Read 13254 times)

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #100 on: February 24, 2017, 02:43:56 PM »
I recall there was a study published (something like) 3 to 5 years ago* that modeled Arctic ice rebound if, magically, all the Arctic sea ice disappeared one day.  The ice returned to the (then) current volume (or extent) in about 3 years.  I'm sure they were looking primarily at albedo issues - summer heating - and winter freezing. 

Today we know more (or think we know more) about how weather is affected by ice loss, including increased humidity and storminess.  I am curious how that old model wound respond if adjusted to include these 'new' feedbacks.

_____
* - I tried looking for it (failed); it was obliquely referred to in these threads (Slow Transition) in 2014 (at least).

Seems like you should swap the position of the word "magically" so it reads more like this, given what we know...

I recall there was a study published (something like) 3 to 5 years ago* that modeled Arctic ice rebound if all the Arctic sea ice disappeared one day.  The ice magically returned to the (then) current volume (or extent) in about 3 years.

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #101 on: February 24, 2017, 03:12:04 PM »
I recall there was a study published (something like) 3 to 5 years ago* that modeled Arctic ice rebound if, magically, all the Arctic sea ice disappeared one day.  The ice returned to the (then) current volume (or extent) in about 3 years.  I'm sure they were looking primarily at albedo issues - summer heating - and winter freezing. 


Ok but the volume is not disappearing magically. The volume is disappearing because a combination of forcings due to AGW are changing the relative equilibrium of the Arctic. I have seen nothing that will stop those forcing once the ice reserves are gone. Since the forcing will keep going, but there will be no reserves of ice, the arctic will warm considerably. Any model that use the historical temperatures for the Arctic winter will be very wrong.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #102 on: February 24, 2017, 03:34:30 PM »
5to10

Echoing other comments. Your original post which I queried suggested multi-degree changes for 'the earth' in just years. There is no evidence that I am aware of for that happening. In contrast the video was talking very much about local changes in the Arctic and that is a whole different story. Even the ice cores show that different things happened in different parts of Greenland. So vey localised disruptions rather than global.

The bolded statement is an extraordinary claim. If there are large scale localized changes, there are good chances that there will be global changes. The Earth system is completely connected. For such claim to be true you would have to prove that the Arctic is disconnected from the rest of the climate system.

Could we see some dramatic switches in local Arctic climate if sea ice crashes? Yes. The circulation changes we are seeing this year suggest those possibilities. But changes of that scale globally are a whole different kettle of fish. Needing much larger changes in heat flows. Climate might be disrupted on a larger scale quickly, but global temperature simply can't rise that quickly. Thermodynamics precludes it.


Think of this way. In theory the whole arctic could melt today while the global temperatures remain constant. The distribution of the heat in the earth system is not a function of the global temperatures. The atmospheric and oceanic patterns can change very fast if the heat is redistributed fast enough while global temperature remain the same.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1372
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #103 on: February 24, 2017, 04:13:19 PM »
One may wish this study didn't conclude what it did, but this particular computer experiment started with the understood physical reality of the Arctic, then "instantly removed" (that's magic, right?) all Arctic sea ice.  Employing the known major physical inputs and constraints, the model showed "slow" (not traditional magic where I come from) rebound, because (on an annual basis) the forces that cause ice to melt did not exceed the forces that cause water to freeze.

What I learned from hearing about that study is that the Arctic Ocean is in a relatively stable condition, ice-wise.  Or, we don't have sea ice only because ice was there ten years ago.  As greenhouse gas levels increase, the stable condition will change to one with less sea ice.  At some point, the ice will be seasonally gone, then some time later, totally gone (alligators-in-Nome, gone).  These changes may be geologically instantaneous (but not magically so :o ), but on a human scale may occur during my kids' lifetime, possibly mine. (Well, not the alligator part - not this century, anyway.)

Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Gray-Wolf

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #104 on: February 24, 2017, 04:23:24 PM »
I've always held that when the Arc tic Ocean Halocline is destroyed then the type of basin that used to exist will be gone.

We would end up with an ocean like all the others on the planet and not this 'Special' ocean with its ancient deep halocline.
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #105 on: February 24, 2017, 05:06:47 PM »
Tor Bejnar, I wonder if this is the paper you are refering to:

Recovery mechanisms of Arctic summer sea ice


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010GL045698/full


If that's the paper, please look at the assumptions made on that 2011 paper and compare it to the current developments in the arctic, in particular this:

We use ECHAM5/MPI-OM to perform a climate projection for the 21st century according to the IPCC-A1B emission scenario [Nakićenović et al., 2000]. In this reference run, annual mean surface air temperature in the Arctic rises from −14°C in the 1900s to −4°C in the 2090s. Arctic sea-ice extent declines, and the Arctic Ocean is typically ice-free by the end of summer from 2070 onward (see auxiliary material; we note that the sea-ice decline here is somewhat faster than in the higher-resolution version of the model).


Note that the models they use predict that the Arctic is typically ice free by 2070. After the 2012 event, a 2070 ice free Arctic became  a pipedream. After 2016, it is obvious that the Arctic will be ice free much sooner than that. That means that whatever assumptions were used in this model were too low.

IF you can find a paper where the model runs predict an arctic sea ice before 2050 and run the same experiment I would give it more credibility. As it stands, given this year multiple anomalies, that paper is obsolete and the conclusions are not valid.

Perhaps you have a more recent paper with more realistic assumptions, but I doubt there are models out there that already digested the changes seen this year.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #106 on: February 24, 2017, 05:47:30 PM »
I think the study in question assumed that by 2050 man-made CO2 emissions would be reduced to about zilch and CO2 concentrations would also be heading down.

Since this is just about impossible to believe, and most people who do not live in la-la-land reckon that sometime or other before 2050 positive feedbacks put the planet in a more or less permanent  hotter place then the study is about what mankind could have done, but did not.

(The USA, UK, and Australia leading the walk backwards from Paris 2015, which was not enough anyway).

End of post from  person having not a good day)

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1380
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #107 on: February 24, 2017, 06:17:02 PM »
Tor, what you mentioned is described by Chris Reynolds here. Please read. It's not all ice gone, but instead 1m of ice magically taken away. But in any case it's an interesting read.
http://dosbat.blogspot.co.il/2015/05/the-slow-transition.html?m=1

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1372
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #108 on: February 24, 2017, 08:52:21 PM »
Tor Bejnar, I wonder if this is the paper you are refering to:
Recovery mechanisms of Arctic summer sea ice
...

Thanks - yes.  Hmmm - 6 years old!

I'm not bothered much by their optimistic projection of first ice-free summer.  We know more about humidity and southern storms.  I figure their model 'knows' something about how much heat would get into the water during the summer/autumn and how much heat would leave during the long winter.

Tor, what you mentioned is described by Chris Reynolds here. Please read. It's not all ice gone, but instead 1m of ice magically taken away. But in any case it's an interesting read.
http://dosbat.blogspot.co.il/2015/05/the-slow-transition.html?m=1

I've read much of what Chris has written (including that post), and am influenced by it, but I don't think I'm on his bandwagon.

I've always held that when the Arctic Ocean Halocline is destroyed then the type of basin that used to exist will be gone.

We would end up with an ocean like all the others on the planet and not this 'Special' ocean with its ancient deep halocline.

This is the number one likely game-changer, in my view.  Before the halocline goes, the Arctic will behave as we've come to expect, more or less.  After the halocline goes, serious "ice-free"dom!

Back in 2012 I made a mathematically-based projection that suggested an ice-free Arctic (the old <1M km2 meme) would arrive in 2019 or '20.  (I never revisited the method to see what it would say later.)
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 02:57:50 AM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

wili

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1929
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #109 on: February 24, 2017, 10:08:08 PM »
possible accelerated shutdown of the Gulf Stream leading to a much chillier N. Europe?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/24/drastic-cooling-north-atlantic-beyond-worst-fears-scientists-warn
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1380
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #110 on: February 24, 2017, 11:31:51 PM »
I've read much of what Chris has written (including that post), and am influenced by it, but I don't think I'm on his bandwagon.
Same here. The theory is quite solid but his assumption about winter power declining only gradually is proving incorrect, which totally undermines the whole thing.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1721
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #111 on: February 25, 2017, 02:50:23 AM »
I recall there was a study published (something like) 3 to 5 years ago* that modeled Arctic ice rebound if, magically, all the Arctic sea ice disappeared one day.  The ice returned to the (then) current volume (or extent) in about 3 years.  I'm sure they were looking primarily at albedo issues - summer heating - and winter freezing. 

Today we know more (or think we know more) about how weather is affected by ice loss, including increased humidity and storminess.  I am curious how that old model wound respond if adjusted to include these 'new' feedbacks.

_____
* - I tried looking for it (failed); it was obliquely referred to in these threads (Slow Transition) in 2014 (at least).


If you're still looking, I believe the study was done earlier than that. Believe it was being discussed as early as 2010, and therefor would have preceded that date.


Terry

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1372
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #112 on: February 25, 2017, 02:56:00 AM »
Archimid found it (see above - published in 2011).  But thanks.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1721
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #113 on: February 25, 2017, 12:03:32 PM »
Archimid found it (see above - published in 2011).  But thanks.



The paper I recalled was from 2007


Climate models used to test summer Arctic sea ice recovery after either sudden artificial removal find that sea ice returns within a few years 2007


There was considerable discussion prior to 2011 with most discounting the 2007 paper.  It's possible that the later study came out to confirm or reject the earlier findings. IIRC the denier community thought S&C had nailed it while our side thought it must have been flawed.


Terry


Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1372
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #114 on: February 25, 2017, 02:53:18 PM »
Thanks, Terry!

Impact of instantaneous sea ice removal in a coupled general circulation model
by D. Schröder and W. M. Connolley (First published: 19 July 2007)

From the abstract:
... A control run is chosen as reference experiment with greenhouse gas concentration fixed at pre-industrial conditions. Sensitivity experiments show an almost complete recovery from total removal or strong increase of sea ice after four years. ...

From the paper (section 3):
[paraphrase: December removal of ice results in almost instantaneous ice coverage because it's cold and the water is cold too]... A longer-lasting impact is achieved by removing the sea ice in summer. This is because no sea ice can build up during summer, and if no sea ice is present the reduced surface albedo causes an increase in ocean temperature (up to 2.5 K for the area mean in the Arctic and 1 K in the Antarctic at a depth of 5 m) which delays freezing in the next autumn. The impact of seasonality found when sea ice is removed differs from the study of Wu et al. [1996], in which the strongest effect occurs when the sea ice is removed at its maximum coverage (late winter). The disagreement can be explained by the different models. Wu et al. [1996] have applied an atmospheric sea ice model with a one layer ocean beneath sea ice. Thus, they couldn't resolve the heating process of the mixed-layer ocean, which is the dominating effect in our study. ...

Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Csnavywx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 388
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #115 on: February 25, 2017, 08:10:17 PM »
possible accelerated shutdown of the Gulf Stream leading to a much chillier N. Europe?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/24/drastic-cooling-north-atlantic-beyond-worst-fears-scientists-warn

The paper the article links to is $$$. The interesting thing is that the higher the model skill in the study, the higher the chance of deep ocean convection collapse in the North Atlantic sub-polar gyre. Note that this doesn't include any meltwater input (and they call for models that can do this).

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1936
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #116 on: February 25, 2017, 09:49:13 PM »
I've read much of what Chris has written (including that post), and am influenced by it, but I don't think I'm on his bandwagon.
Same here. The theory is quite solid but his assumption about winter power declining only gradually is proving incorrect, which totally undermines the whole thing.

Winter power may very well be dropping precipitously but this ridiculously warm winter north of 80 degrees is still averaging about -20C. Even with the complete destruction of the halocline which I am certain will occur, sea ice will form in the dark polar night. It just won't be the sea ice we are used to and a seasonally ice free state will persist.

The real issue is how the global climate will be impacted by this new polar ocean environment. It will be an unending series of weather disasters stretching into perpetuity.

I believe the Beaufort provides a hint of what the freeze will look like. It was completely ice free at the end of the melt season. There has been no import of thicker MYI this freeze season and the halocline, due to persistent storms, has been damaged if not destroyed. Never the less, there is 1.5 meters thin, highly mobile FYI that covers the Beaufort.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 10:01:01 PM by Shared Humanity »

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #117 on: February 26, 2017, 02:52:54 AM »
Thanks, Terry!

Impact of instantaneous sea ice removal in a coupled general circulation model
by D. Schröder and W. M. Connolley (First published: 19 July 2007)


Let me see if I get this straight. They removed the ice in December, the ice grows back really fast. They remove the ice in September, it grows back. Excellent. Then this happens

The preceding experiments were somewhat unrealistic because although the ice was removed, the ocean was still in a state compatible with ice cover. Hence, in the following experiments the ocean temperature will be modified to examine an ice-free situation in the real world where an ice anomaly is connected with an ocean heat anomaly.


So what changes they make?

Based on these findings two further sensitivity experiments are performed in which the initial global sea ice is removed and the ocean temperature of the uppermost 200 m (10 model levels) is artificially increased to a minimum value of 3°C on March 1st and September 1st, respectively. The initial salinity and ocean circulation remain the same as in the Ctrl run.


To me the bolded statement ruins the experiment. Salinity and circulation might be more important than temperature. Not to mention waves. The fact that they don't mention the starting air temperatures worry me even more. The ocean might be 3C warmer, but the atmosphere will be much warmer than that, as we have previewed this year.


I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Glenn Tamblyn

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #118 on: February 26, 2017, 10:06:31 AM »
5to10

"If weather is disrupted, agriculture could be seriously affected. Again, I'm not sure at what scale the disruption may be, so perhaps that's a false statement too."

This is perhaps the key predictive uncertainty on a sub-decadal timescale. Can changes in weather systems around the Arctic propagate outwards to produce chaotic weather changes on a global scale. Very hard to say.

Thermodynamically it is harder to imagine substantial weather variability changes propagating over much of the planet as a regular feature of annual weather over short timescales. The basic heat engine of the climate system doesn't let it be completely chaotic. That's a positive.

However, agriculture can be very sensitive to short term weather excursions. Hit rice plants with a heat wave that is too high for even a few hours and the male parts of the plant become sterile - no rice from that plant. So key agricultural regions can get hit hard as we saw in Russia in 2010.

Thus if Arctic weather chaos can propagate far enough it can potentially produce bad individual events. Localised famines for example. Bad, but the world can cope with them, in the short term. Its called food aid.

How far off are structural food supply problems, permanent famines? That's harder but I suspect several decades.

Which is a very bleak prospect. Years of sporadic famine, then eventually, no light at the end of the tunnel, just entrenched famine.  But I think it will take more than a few years of the first before the later arrives. More like a small number of decades.

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #119 on: February 26, 2017, 12:56:35 PM »
5to10

"If weather is disrupted, agriculture could be seriously affected. Again, I'm not sure at what scale the disruption may be, so perhaps that's a false statement too."

This is perhaps the key predictive uncertainty on a sub-decadal timescale. Can changes in weather systems around the Arctic propagate outwards to produce chaotic weather changes on a global scale. Very hard to say.

Thermodynamically it is harder to imagine substantial weather variability changes propagating over much of the planet as a regular feature of annual weather over short timescales. The basic heat engine of the climate system doesn't let it be completely chaotic. That's a positive.

However, agriculture can be very sensitive to short term weather excursions. Hit rice plants with a heat wave that is too high for even a few hours and the male parts of the plant become sterile - no rice from that plant. So key agricultural regions can get hit hard as we saw in Russia in 2010.

Thus if Arctic weather chaos can propagate far enough it can potentially produce bad individual events. Localised famines for example. Bad, but the world can cope with them, in the short term. Its called food aid.

How far off are structural food supply problems, permanent famines? That's harder but I suspect several decades.

Which is a very bleak prospect. Years of sporadic famine, then eventually, no light at the end of the tunnel, just entrenched famine.  But I think it will take more than a few years of the first before the later arrives. More like a small number of decades.

Yes, It seems logical that this is the biggest threat re: collapse in the near future. All it will take is one really bad year.

magnamentis

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1117
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #120 on: February 26, 2017, 04:47:53 PM »
5to10

"If weather is disrupted, agriculture could be seriously affected. Again, I'm not sure at what scale the disruption may be, so perhaps that's a false statement too."

This is perhaps the key predictive uncertainty on a sub-decadal timescale. Can changes in weather systems around the Arctic propagate outwards to produce chaotic weather changes on a global scale. Very hard to say.

Thermodynamically it is harder to imagine substantial weather variability changes propagating over much of the planet as a regular feature of annual weather over short timescales. The basic heat engine of the climate system doesn't let it be completely chaotic. That's a positive.

However, agriculture can be very sensitive to short term weather excursions. Hit rice plants with a heat wave that is too high for even a few hours and the male parts of the plant become sterile - no rice from that plant. So key agricultural regions can get hit hard as we saw in Russia in 2010.

Thus if Arctic weather chaos can propagate far enough it can potentially produce bad individual events. Localised famines for example. Bad, but the world can cope with them, in the short term. Its called food aid.

How far off are structural food supply problems, permanent famines? That's harder but I suspect several decades.

Which is a very bleak prospect. Years of sporadic famine, then eventually, no light at the end of the tunnel, just entrenched famine.  But I think it will take more than a few years of the first before the later arrives. More like a small number of decades.

Yes, It seems logical that this is the biggest threat re: collapse in the near future. All it will take is one really bad year.

i get the point and agree to the meaning and intention while the biggest threat IMO is Sea Level Rise, why?

because it cannot be compensated and corrected or held in check by any means. a city under water is a lost city and arable land under water is no arable land anymore, while drying up zones can be watered with water taken from the ocean and de-salinated by osmosis with energy produced by the sun or other sustainable means.

don't wanna start a discussion about this, it's just an example to show the difference between:

a) possible to correct or lower the consequence by no matter how far fetches means

b) not possible to correct and/or reduce the consequences by no means at all.

hope i was able to make my point, else jump in and make up for my lake of english skills

cheers
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #121 on: February 26, 2017, 05:01:03 PM »
Is it more likely that sea level rise will be the culprit before extreme, chaotic weather that is rearing its head faster already? Don't know about that... Seems agriculture failure due to weather is the most present danger. I don't see how sea level could rise fast enough to become an issue before that.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1721
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #122 on: February 26, 2017, 06:54:31 PM »
i get the point and agree to the meaning and intention while the biggest threat IMO is Sea Level Rise, why?

because it cannot be compensated and corrected or held in check by any means. a city under water is a lost city and arable land under water is no arable land anymore, while drying up zones can be watered with water taken from the ocean and de-salinated by osmosis with energy produced by the sun or other sustainable means.

don't wanna start a discussion about this, it's just an example to show the difference between:

a) possible to correct or lower the consequence by no matter how far fetches means

b) not possible to correct and/or reduce the consequences by no means at all.

hope i was able to make my point, else jump in and make up for my lake of english skills

cheers


No problem with your English, but perhaps there is a difference in land use where you are located.


In the States & Canada most of the shoreline lost whatever agricultural potential it might have had decades ago when housing or resort facilities took up much of the most productive and scenic land. Ocean vistas sell for inflated prices and building up delta regions has been going on for centuries.


When SLR damages North America, the damage will be to infrastructure as opposed to agriculture. Port facilities, transportation hubs, urbanized structures, these will be devastated before agricultural losses become apparent.
Drought/flood cycles and unpredictable weather will play havoc with agriculture long before SLR needs to be entered into the equation here in North America. The situation may be different elsewhere.


Terry

magnamentis

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1117
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #123 on: February 26, 2017, 07:02:07 PM »
i get the point and agree to the meaning and intention while the biggest threat IMO is Sea Level Rise, why?

because it cannot be compensated and corrected or held in check by any means. a city under water is a lost city and arable land under water is no arable land anymore, while drying up zones can be watered with water taken from the ocean and de-salinated by osmosis with energy produced by the sun or other sustainable means.

don't wanna start a discussion about this, it's just an example to show the difference between:

a) possible to correct or lower the consequence by no matter how far fetches means

b) not possible to correct and/or reduce the consequences by no means at all.

hope i was able to make my point, else jump in and make up for my lake of english skills

cheers


No problem with your English, but perhaps there is a difference in land use where you are located.


In the States & Canada most of the shoreline lost whatever agricultural potential it might have had decades ago when housing or resort facilities took up much of the most productive and scenic land. Ocean vistas sell for inflated prices and building up delta regions has been going on for centuries.


When SLR damages North America, the damage will be to infrastructure as opposed to agriculture. Port facilities, transportation hubs, urbanized structures, these will be devastated before agricultural losses become apparent.
Drought/flood cycles and unpredictable weather will play havoc with agriculture long before SLR needs to be entered into the equation here in North America. The situation may be different elsewhere.


Terry

sure, i get your point of view, thanks for elaborating :-)

i'ts very often that different peoples views and opinions depend on different priorities depending where we all are coming from and/or how and from which angle we are looking at things.

this, IMHO is the main and best reason why it's so important to exchange thought with an open mind so to not see things too narrow minded which again is the reason why i so much appreciate all the different input that will add to the never ending (at least in our life time LOL) learning curve.

i wish you and your folks a pleasant reminder of the weekend
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1380
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #124 on: February 26, 2017, 07:07:46 PM »
Food shortage will mostly affect poor people in poor countries, initially (as happened in 2010), while sea level rise will affect all low lying areas and a lot of infrastructure built near the shore in rich countries: harbors, power plants, desalination plants, and lots more. Sea level is a much stronger impact, although slower in coming.
Bear in mind sea level rise affects food - a lot of production happens in low-lying river deltas.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1721
    • View Profile
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #125 on: February 26, 2017, 09:49:59 PM »
i wish you and your folks a pleasant reminder of the weekend


Thanks!


Oren brings up the important role that wealth, both individually and nationally, will have as things continue to break. With no one willing, or perhaps able, to pay for the repairs or simply required maintenance, the future can look bleak.


When North Americans bemoan the loss Miami's white beaches, the Vietnamese may well hunger for delta grown rice. SLR is final, with Bangladesh, the Maldives ,and others set to lose so much of the land they need, that migration or genocide are the only alternatives available.


Under ASLR conditions the wealthy countries will need whatever resources they still possess to prop up their own failing infrastructure, just at the time that the have nots will require a massive influx of food and money just to stay afloat. (unintended) If Trump's followers consider today's levels of immigration to be problematical, wait until peoples land is literally washing out from beneath their feet.


Debt forgiveness now, while there is still some fluidity in the vaults of the wealthy, is essential. Squeezing those who will soon need these same resources for their own survival is neither morally correct nor fiscally sound. The moral argument seems self evident, while the fiscal imperative to either feed starving neighbors, or spend more trying to keep them out, indicates that early intervention might prove less expensive.


Three years ago Cuba had a $32B debt to Russia. Today that debt is gone. Cuba had been unable to make payments for years and Russia had a claim on whatever future assets Cuba might amass. Cuba, looking forward, will probably have more need of these Billions than a resurgent Russia.


If Germany, France, in fact the whole of industrialized Europe, would forgive Greece, Italy and other southern European states their debt, these states might have more of the resiliency needed in the coming decades. Similar arrangements are needed between the US and some central and south American nations. With the Monroe Doctrine the US took responsibility for all of the Americas, yet at present many are finding themselves insolvent and with huge debts to American banks.


Walls, fences, and coastal defenses, are expensive, inhumane, and ineffective. Historically only small island nations have had short lived success at keeping the barbarian's from the gate.
While the billions extant will never attain European or North American lifestyles, the excesses we waste could maintain many in livable conditions.


Had anyone thought to provide sufficient bread to those starving in Syria, perhaps millions would not now be banging on European doors. Had much of the middle east not suddenly lost it's infrastructure, their citizens would still be at home plotting football strategies. If NAFTA had not beggared Mexican corn farmers, their sons and daughters would be taking siesta under the tropical sun, rather than huddling in cold Chicago alleyways.


Wow, sorry for my extended revelry. The point I was trying to make is that it might prove less expensive to forgive debt at a national level, than to fight to "preserve our way of life" when starving people head in our direction.
Sea Level Rise is coming, and it won't be pretty whether viewed from under tattered tarpaulins or silver chandeliers.


Terry

magnamentis

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1117
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: Ice-free Arctic
« Reply #126 on: February 26, 2017, 10:21:07 PM »
no no no.... don't be sorry, that is all spot on and +1 and it's key to so many things that go wrong.

they prefer to sell guns for billions and justify their army with the profit ( i know it's too simple) instead of giving their surplus of milk, tomatoes and bread which they sell in africa under the local production price, for free to those who just need food and perhaps a tent.

sometimes i honestly think that i will end up on one of those islands, you know, those where the polynesian seafarers went to to wait for their days to end.
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !