Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event  (Read 19455 times)

The Walrus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 782
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #200 on: September 25, 2020, 01:39:54 PM »
How is DMI N80 heavily skewed?

As I understand it, not all areas N of 80 are equally weighted in their "average."  Weighting increases as you approach the pole.  I can't fathom why it was set up this way.  But having started with this algorithm, it needs to be continued to enable direct year-to-year comparisons.

It was done to relate temperature to equal measures of latitude, instead of area.

The Walrus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 782
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #201 on: September 25, 2020, 01:52:39 PM »

Your intuition is supported by the data.  The last few winters have been almost 4C above average, while there has been little temperature change during the summer.

Well, that is only true for the heavily skewed and therefore not really relevant DMI 80N temp data. For the broader Arctic, summers are egetting warmer, just like winters:

Even the broader definition shows much more warming in winter than summer.  From your graph, winters warmed from ~-1C in the 1950s to ~2.5C in the 2010s, an increase of 3.5C.  Conversely, the summers warmed from ~025C to ~1.25C, an increase of 1C.  Your graph also excludes the temperature increase of the early twentieth century, which would eliminate that rise.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/jcli/article/17/20/4045/30396/The-Early-Twentieth-Century-Warming-in-the-Arctic

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #202 on: September 25, 2020, 02:10:16 PM »
It was a trick question. N80 is weighted more heavily towards the north pole than the outer latitudes. This "skewness" makes N80 an outstanding marker for  the most central, most northern Arctic.

Air temperatures 2 meters above the surface of the ice, averaged over N80, weighted more heavily towards the North Pole.

DMI N80 and is the "heart" of the Arctic.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2584
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1204
  • Likes Given: 1062
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #203 on: September 25, 2020, 02:35:28 PM »
Even the broader definition shows much more warming in winter than summer.

And that is because the remaining Arctic ice has a damping effect on summer temps.
Toms question mentions daily temperature swings which don´t really work there (compare summer and winter solstice f.e.).

When the ice is gone the central arctic temps will jump up.

I think that if you interpret the cycle on a year it will become more equal because it is all water.

If you look at actual daily temperature swings in the future at the pole well i don´t know but since Arctic ice was such a strong control on temps i will play for bigger. Now all we need is to wait some years.

Another open question is what the big scale weather will be like without arctic ice. I bet that is going to be really interesting.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3912
  • Earth will survive AGW...but will Homo sapiens?
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 641
  • Likes Given: 379
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #204 on: September 25, 2020, 04:55:28 PM »
Is that “interesting” in the Chinese sense, kassy?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6414
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2386
  • Likes Given: 2034
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #205 on: September 26, 2020, 12:58:33 AM »
DMI N80 is weighted by latitude rather than by area. So the circle 89-90 gets the same weight as the 80-81 belt, which has an area 19 times larger. Badly skewed.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #206 on: September 26, 2020, 07:45:02 AM »
Badly skewed towards exactly the right direction one wants if one is trying to get a snapshot of the "heart" of the Arctic.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1312
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 567
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #207 on: September 26, 2020, 09:05:49 AM »
Another open question is what the big scale weather will be like without arctic ice. I bet that is going to be really interesting.

That is the gazillion dollar question. Will there be a rearrangement of NH atmospheric circulation without the ice? And if so, then how? Noone knows the answer.

I still say that Greenland will take the role of the Central Arctic, as Greenland will stay a bastion of ice for centuries to come (due to inertia and 100s of meters of ice there)

A-Team

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2735
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 680
  • Likes Given: 34
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #208 on: September 26, 2020, 10:42:54 AM »
Quote
I cannot fathom why DMI 80N was set up so biased
Me either. Terrible idea. Ever look at their own description?

"Since the data are gridded, it is straightforward to deduce the average temperature North of 80 degree North. However, since the model is gridded in a regular 0.5 degree grid, the mean
temperature values are strongly biased towards the temperature in the most northern part of the Arctic! Therefore, do NOT use this measure as an actual physical mean temperature of the arctic."

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/documentation/arctic_mean_temp_data_explanation_newest.pdf

In other words, the lat lon grid is a completely inappropriate choice of coordinate system here unfit for purpose but the global data came that way so they foolishly used it rather than take a moment to re-grid. A biased average, dependent on coordinate system choice, is scientifically unacceptable, perhaps explaining why DMI 80N analysis has never appeared in a peer-reviewed journal.

Denmark has 5.8m people, a quarter of Los Angeles. What can be expected?

It is merely a ECMWF reanalysis product called ERA40 that you can get anywhere for any place on earth (eg the whole Arctic Ocean basin) as a colored time series map (2D+T data) for the same time span of years. If what you want is ice surface temperature variation or ice temperature profile with thickness, we have satellites and buoy thermistor chains for that.

In the bigger picture, it is a poor idea to believe the state of the Arctic Ocean can be reduced to single numbers. This made some sense in the pre-computer age when journals had minimal ability to dot print even b/w graphics and simple pre-spreadsheet tasks like averaging were tedious. However today analysis of 2D+T displays is preferable as all information is retained, unlike with the single number approach 0D+T.

There's another issue here called pipeline immortality. Once a product algorithm is set up to run unattended, no matter how flawed, that's what it does. The project automator may have moved on or even died but, as long as the institutional electric bill is paid, the daily product continues to be served indefinitely from some nook or cranny in storage. Someone has to actively intervene to take it down. However inaction is a whole lot easier. Innocents come along later on the internet and are duped.

The 2m amsl level is by far the least accurate atmospheric choice because of topographic effects of rough ice on wind and boundary layer. Ask yourself how many instruments exist offshore actually measuring it for assimilation, typically none. How many 80º+ weather stations on land: 4-5 and diminishing. The Polarstern does not measure it; their mast is at 36m. It is model-driven assumption, not observation.

The case cannot be made that north pole is somehow the "heart" of the Arctic Ocean. It's representative of it in any way becing such an asymmetric basin, both at current sea level and for continental shelf bathymetry. The ice is not centered there at any time of year, the cold pole is not centered there, the geographic center of the the ocean is not there, the last remnant ice will not be located anywhere near it. (In 2016 it was already open water; see Jim H's photo.)

DMI 80 is an inappropriate product for detecting climactic impacts of incipient BOE (this forum) because it leaves out so much of the open water of the excluded ESS, Chukchi, Beaufort and Laptev where the insolation of large area, low albedo early open water counts the most. The low area NP region is where it matters least because of the lower angle longer path through the atmosphere and poor match to peak insolation even when it is melt pond (this year) or open water.

Thus the Bering Strait is at 65.9º which is 1,234 ignored km below 80º, causing a whole lot of Arctic Ocean to be left out. Meanwhile 80º north is tainted by its inclusion of the anomalous localized area impacted by incoming Atlantic Waters.

The slides below show the highly variable 80th parallel enclosure on Sept 15 for the years 2012-20. The bottom image shows how poorly this enclosure characterizes actual basin percentages of land, water, ice on that date.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2020, 01:53:48 PM by A-Team »

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3720
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 653
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #209 on: September 26, 2020, 08:20:29 PM »
Great post, A-Team.
In the last graphic, it looks like about 75% ice and 25% water within 80N (ignoring land).  I presume the boxed percentages are derived from the entire rectangular graphic (not 80N), and therefore shows that "80N" just isn't a reasonable representation of the Arctic.  ["But what about the CAA?" I hear someone complain.  :)]

Why doesn't somebody make an easily accessed daily Arctic surface Temp website with a 'more reasonable' set of boundaries (etc.)?  If we had that, we wouldn't go to DMI. [Ideas:  ~85N equal area [where solar gain is minimal at the equinoxes), entire Arctic Ocean sea surface, a 10^6 km2 circle selected as being the mostly likely area to find ice in mid-September over the past decade)]

It's like atmospheric CO2 data from Mauna Loa, Hawaii.  It's not representative of the world, but it's not bad and the continuous record is worth a lot.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #210 on: September 26, 2020, 08:26:26 PM »
Quote
I cannot fathom why DMI 80N was set up so biased
Me either. Terrible idea. Ever look at their own description?

I do. I think they were trying to capture the most central arctic but with small effects added at the lower latitudes.  I like to think of it as heavy center weight that fades as it reaches lower latitudes.

"Since the data are gridded, it is straightforward to deduce the average temperature North of 80 degree North. However, since the model is gridded in a regular 0.5 degree grid, the mean
temperature values are strongly biased towards the temperature in the most northern part of the Arctic! Therefore, do NOT use this measure as an actual physical mean temperature of the arctic."



Good thing we are not taking it as an actual physical mean temperature of the arctic. We are using it as a marker for oceanic vs desert conditions above the Arctic.
 

Quote
In the bigger picture, it is a poor idea to believe the state of the Arctic Ocean can be reduced to single numbers.


If there was one single number that could represent a state change of the Arctic is temperatures close to the surface very close to the North Pole. I can't think of a better one. That said, I agree that a simple number is not nearly enough to explain the event and its consequences.

Quote
There's another issue here called pipeline immortality.

I'm not defending any particular research group. I'm defending the concept that temperatures near the ocean/atmosphere interface, near the pole, during the summer, will be a very good indicator of when a tipping point in Arctic Sea Ice and world climate has occured.

Exactly how that temperature is calculated is up for debate, but I think DMI's tradeoffs are particularly excellent to mark the departure of the Arctic from cold frozen desert to open, relatively "warm"ocean.

Like I said before, these temperatures are fixed to the ice during summer. When temperatures depart variability it means that the ice is not serving its function as the NH refrigerator. This concept is independent from research groups or model vs observation or methodology.

Quote
The case cannot be made that north pole is somehow the "heart" of the Arctic Ocean.

The incident radiation of the Sun upon Earth is the ultimate driving force behind all the climate on Earth.  That radiation hits the Earth that spins around it's own axis, a day/night cycle. The Earth is also tilted 23.5 degrees from the plane of its orbit around the sun with the North Pole and the South Pole as the pivot points and global minimums for global insolation. This creates the winter/summer cycle.

The north pole is the darkest point in the NH, where the light of the sun is gone first and arrives last. The poles are global extremes.

I think that's a good case to call the latitudes N80 the heart of the Arctic.

Quote
DMI 80 is an inappropriate product for detecting climactic impacts of incipient BOE (this forum) because it leaves out so much of the open water of the excluded ESS, Chukchi, Beaufort and Laptev where the insolation of large area, low albedo early open water counts the most.


I believe the opposite. All the seas you mention are already seasonally ice free. Any measure of temperature that includes the regions mentioned above would be affected by the "noise of those seasonally ice free regions. Temperatures N80 excludes those regions. N80 has very likely been mostly ice-covered since the eemian.

Quote
The low area NP region is where it matters least because of the lower angle longer path through the atmosphere and poor match to peak insolation even when it is melt pond (this year) or open water.

For the topic of climatic consequences, the long term permanence of ice cover and relative non-variance of temperatures of air above the surface is what matters most.

Since the Eemian, the air above N80 has been a relatively fixed size during summer due to the presence of ice.  A BOE will change the size of the air above by virtue of warming the air above to levels that have not happenned since the eemian.
A BOE has two main compoents. 

1. Albedo
2. Enthalphy of fusion.

Temperatures will increase not just because there is less albedo, they will increase because there is no ice to melt so not only there will be more albedo, but all the energy that goes to melt ice will go to warm the water, which in turn will warm the atmosphere above all the way up to space, increasing it's size.

This changes the gradients of atmospheric and changes pattern that have been basically unchanged for thousands of years.

Quote
Thus the Bering Strait is at 65.9º which is 1,234 ignored km below 80º, causing a whole lot of Arctic Ocean to be left out. Meanwhile 80º north is tainted by its inclusion of the anomalous localized area impacted by incoming Atlantic Waters.

But being skewed towards the North minimizes Atlantic water influences. If Atlantification occurs   N80 surface temperatures will shoot up.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6414
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2386
  • Likes Given: 2034
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #211 on: September 27, 2020, 09:48:41 AM »
Archimid, all that your reply to A-Team's excellent post achieved is explain why the biased and non-physical DMI N80 product will be a severely lagging indicator. When BOE arrives we will have plenty of indicators, one more of those is not overly interesting except it would make for a good headline. What should be more interesting are leading indicators marking the Arctic transition as it occurs.

I do see the merit of single numbers (0D+T) as easy to chew on indicators for non-scientists, but at least these numbers should be constructed properly. Following on from Tor:
* North of 85 2m temps.
* North of 85 850 HPA temps.
* Arctic Basin (non-land) 2m temps.
* Arctic Basin (non-land) 850 HPA temps.
* Siberian land/island stations north of 70 and within 50km of the Arctic ocean (Kara to ESS, Chukchi, CAB), surface temps.
* North American land/island stations north of 70 and within 50km of the Arctic ocean (Chukchi, Beaufort, CAA, CAB), surface temps.

All the above of course, averaged and weighted properly.

Like Sep minimum extent, these single numbers will not capture the complexity of the Arctic and will not tell the whole story. But they could be useful as a popular indicator with a long history.
I still hope "someone with a website" will take some of these up.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #212 on: September 27, 2020, 10:16:25 AM »
Quote
DMI N80 product will be a severely lagging indicator.

Yes, it will be. That is why is such a great marker to mark a BOE and a great starting point to theorize about consequences of a BOE. I have made no claim of its predictive power, in fact, I have been very clear that if that number departs summer variability it will be too late.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2584
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1204
  • Likes Given: 1062
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #213 on: September 27, 2020, 11:19:18 PM »
Another open question is what the big scale weather will be like without arctic ice. I bet that is going to be really interesting.

That is the gazillion dollar question. Will there be a rearrangement of NH atmospheric circulation without the ice? And if so, then how? Noone knows the answer.

I still say that Greenland will take the role of the Central Arctic, as Greenland will stay a bastion of ice for centuries to come (due to inertia and 100s of meters of ice there)

I am not sure just Greenland is the same as the old Arctic system + Greenland. Wayne used to write about the cold poles moving around. One was usually on Greenland and the other(s) moved over the ice or where on it. The connection to the siberian side has broken and the cold pole also cannot be on the central arctic anymore so this opens up the siberian side to more long range connections.

Yes Greenland will stay cold for a bit but that is just not the same as the system staying the same when we lose the central arctic ice.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

A-Team

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2735
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 680
  • Likes Given: 34
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #214 on: September 27, 2020, 11:55:05 PM »
"do NOT use this measure as an actual physical mean temperature -- DMI"
Quote
Tor asks: it looks like about 75% ice and 25% water within 80N (ignoring land).  I presume the boxed percentages are derived from the entire rectangular graphic (not 80N), and therefore shows that "80N" just isn't a reasonable representation of the Arctic.
That's correct. We are well over half way to a full-on BOE restricted to the Arctic Ocean proper, with 55% open water and 45% ice using NSIDC's standard end of season, 15 Sep 2020 (first image below). There is still insolation on the open water today but it's inconsequential in September.

The problem is, there's a surprising amount of open water even before summer solstice peaks on June 20th. Gerontocrat posted to the melt forum the key sine-like graphic that furnishes the bottom-of-atmosphere heat input to each high latitude, with the peripheral basin seas getting hit harder earlier, the idea being to weight the weekly open water areas by the weekly heat input graph. I provided that rainbow tool for doing this on that same forum.

One aspect of Arctic Amplification is higher open water percentages creeping back earlier in the season, thus better matching the insolation season and worsening reflection back out to space. It's not easy though to take clouds and adjacent land albedo into consideration but that was done in the trillion tons of Co2e and 2035 first BOE papers above. People have also wondered if increasing fog and rain-on-snow are additional unfavorable feedbacks:
 
Trends and spatial variation in rain-on-snow events over the Arctic Ocean during early melt season
T Dou et al
https://tc.copernicus.org/preprints/tc-2020-214/

"Rain-on-snow (ROS) events can accelerate the surface ablation of sea ice, thus greatly influencing the ice-albedo feedback. However, the variability of ROS events over the Arctic Ocean is poorly understood due to limited historical station data in this region. In this study early melt season ROS events were investigated based on four widely-used reanalysis products (ERA-Interim, JRA-55, MERRA2 and ERA5) in conjunction with available observations at Arctic coastal stations.

The performance of the reanalysis products in representing the timing of ROS events and the phase change of precipitation was assessed. Our results show that ERA-Interim better represents the onset date of ROS events in spring and ERA5 better represents the phase change of precipitation associated with ROS events.

All reanalyses indicate that ROS event timing has shifted to earlier dates in recent decades (with maximum trends up to −4 to −6 days/decade in some regions in ERA-Interim), and that sea ice melt onset in the Pacific sector and most of the Eurasian marginal seas is correlated with this shift."

The graphic in #208 is done with a rectangular crop mask that works for almost all Arctic Ocean data products. It does pick up a portion of the Bering Sea that often has ice via its transport coupling with the Chukchi as well as some CAA but not much of the Kara, Barents or Greenland seas (those crops are just corner extensions retaining 'Greenland down').

The coastline being rather irregular, it takes a detailed google earth polygon to reproducibly specify the many lat lon coordinates of the AO basin mask. I've posted that editable .kml before and have attached it again.

On the AMSR2_AWI mask, different days or years are layered into a stack, the light blue and gold mask applied, leaving the color picker tool free to count the pixels of open water and ice (of all concentrations). The latter pixels are the inverse of the combined selection of gold, light blue, and dark blue. If the color radius is increased, more of the concentration palette is picked, increasing the pixel count; however not by much.

The 80N product has no applicability to anything before its three errors are fixed: incorrect masking, false thermodynamic reasoning about non-laminar (turbulent) 2m flow of 7m/s, and non-utilization of one-click weighted zonal averaging. Some time back, the ice season moderator booted the 80N posts off to their own forum (with solar cycle collapses and sudden ice ages) to give yhe angle trisectors unlimited space of their own (if only they would use it!). For what it's worth, this is in line with US case law (Judge Posner's 1995 ruling):

"A crank is a person inexplicably obsessed by an obviously unsound idea—a person with a bee in his bonnet. To call a person a crank is to say that because of some quirk of temperament he is wasting his time pursuing a line of thought that is plainly without merit or promise … to say a person a crank is just a colorful way of expressing disagreement and it therefore belongs to the language of controversy rather than to the language of defamation."
« Last Edit: September 28, 2020, 12:26:15 AM by A-Team »

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1312
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 567
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #215 on: September 28, 2020, 08:28:13 AM »
...
I still say that Greenland will take the role of the Central Arctic, as Greenland will stay a bastion of ice for centuries to come (due to inertia and 100s of meters of ice there)

I am not sure just Greenland is the same as the old Arctic system + Greenland.
...
Yes Greenland will stay cold for a bit but that is just not the same as the system staying the same when we lose the central arctic ice.
I am not saying that it would be the same as the "old system", but even it is worth noting that even after a BOE there will be plenty of ice  in the Arctic (=Greenland). How that new cold pole will rearrange the atmospheric circulation is anyone's guess.
Any research on that  would be very interesting

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #216 on: September 28, 2020, 10:05:57 AM »
A BOE != an Ice Free Arctic.

Ice free arctic = less than a million square kilometers of ice on the Arctic ocean

BOE = a departure of the long term variability of summer temperatures right above the surface of the central arctic ocean.


If the ice reaches less than a million km2  in mid September, temperatures above the surface will not increase much for long, they might even drop significantly.

However, if by July/Aug temperatures N80 depart natural variability and warm up it will mean that there is no ice and albedo plus enthalpy are changing the state of the atmosphere above the most central Arctic.

This will change hydrologic cycles in a geological instant, even if it takes a few years. This is abrupt climate change.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Shared Humanity

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #217 on: September 28, 2020, 04:04:33 PM »
Thank you A-Team. I never fail to learn things from your posts.

metalreflectslime

  • New ice
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #218 on: November 13, 2020, 12:26:05 PM »
Will a BOE destroy soil?

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3912
  • Earth will survive AGW...but will Homo sapiens?
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 641
  • Likes Given: 379
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #219 on: November 13, 2020, 12:40:52 PM »
Will a BOE destroy soil?
My uneducated guess...
No, not directly. Possibly through some indirect effect.
Anyone with a better educated guess?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1312
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 567
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« Reply #220 on: November 13, 2020, 01:14:27 PM »
Will a BOE destroy soil?

Why and how would it?

Soil is mostly destroyed by human activities unfortunately (industrial agriculture, tillage, etc). We have the solution to these problems though (regenerative agriculture) but implementation is way too slow