Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - kassy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: February 28, 2021, 05:41:19 PM »
Why are you underplaying Covid?
Why are you overplaying Covid?

The questions exist side by side.

Is there a way to argue away the influences of pollution, demographics and horrid fabric food on deaths. Seems hard to me.

So then the next question arises: why does this argument annoy people so much? It is the virus that evil strange thing that is doing us in, it can not possibly be us?

We could learn from Covid that this sort of fall out of our current hyper capitalism is expected but that lesson is unwelcome i guess.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020/2021 freezing season
« on: February 27, 2021, 08:24:24 PM »
Five replies in a row is a bit much. 1270 and 1271 are on last page or the other thread recently so no need to repeat them and 1269 while true can probably be skipped too.

European court forces 33 governments to prove emissions cuts in line with Paris climate accord

The European Court of Human Rights is forcing 33 governments to prove they are cutting emissions in line with the requirements of the 2015 Paris climate accord.

The court also rejected an attempt by those governments to overturn its decision to fast-track a lawsuit filed by six young Portuguese climate activists.

The activists claim the countries’ efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate.

The governments asked the court to drop its priority status for the case and hear their argument that the case was inadmissible, the activists’ legal representatives said on Friday.

But the court dismissed the arguments against an urgent hearing and denied their application to defer scrutiny of their climate policies.

The governments now have until May 27 to submit their legal defence.

The activists are aged between 12 and 21.

Four of them live in central Portugal, where bushfires blamed in part on climate change killed more than 100 people in 2017.

The others in Lisbon, a coastal city threatened by rising sea levels.

Scientists say the man-made emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide must end by 2050 at the latest to avoid pushing global temperatures beyond the threshold of 1.5°C set out in the Paris agreement.

Gerry Liston, legal officer at the Global Legal Action Network, an international non-profit organisation assisting the activists, said the group would provide evidence that European governments were failing to adopt enough measures to meet the requirements of the accord.

The organisation starteda crowdfunding campaign to help support the activists.

They filed their claim last September at the court in Strasbourg, France.

On November 30, the court said it required a prompt response from the 33 countries named in the case, a move that activists said gave heart to their cause.

At the time, the court ordered the European countries to respond to the complaint and granted it priority status because of the “importance and urgency of the issues raised".
The countries named in the complaint are the 27 members of the EU, as well as the UK, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine.

If the activists win, the countries will be legally bound to cut emissions in line with the requirements of the climate accord.

They will also have to address their role in overseas emissions, including those from multinational companies.

Arctic sea ice / Re: What's new in the Arctic ?
« on: February 23, 2021, 09:50:07 PM »
The CERN scientists found that aerosol particles made of iodic acid could form very quickly — even more quickly than the rates of sulfuric acid mixed with ammonia. In fact, the iodine was such an effective nucleator that the researchers had a difficult time scrubbing it away from the sides of the chamber for subsequent experiments, which required a completely clean environment.

The findings are important for understanding the fundamental chemistry in the atmosphere that underlies cloud processes, Kirkby said, but also as a warning sign: Global iodine emissions have tripled over the past 70 years, and scientists predict that emissions will continue to accelerate as sea ice melts and surface ozone increases. Based on these results, an increase of molecular iodine could lead to more particles for water vapor to condense onto and spiral into a positive feedback loop. “The more the ice melts, the more sea surface is exposed, the more iodine is emitted, the more particles are made, the more clouds form, the faster it all goes,” Kirkby said.

Alpine ice evidence of a three-fold increase in atmospheric iodine deposition since 1950 in Europe due to increasing oceanic emissions

Our measurements show a tripling of iodine in Alpine ice between 1950 and 1990. A 20th century increase in global iodine emissions has been previously found from model simulations, based on laboratory studies, but, up to now, long-term iodine records exist only in polar regions. These polar records are influenced by sea ice processes, which may obscure global iodine trends. Our results suggest that the increased iodine deposition over the Alps is consistent with increased oceanic iodine emissions coupled with a change in the iodine speciation, both driven by increasing anthropogenic NOx emissions. In turn, the recent increase of iodine emissions implies that iodine-related ozone loss in the troposphere is more active now than in the preindustrial period.

Iodine is an important nutrient and a significant sink of tropospheric ozone, a climate-forcing gas and air pollutant. Ozone interacts with seawater iodide, leading to volatile inorganic iodine release that likely represents the largest source of atmospheric iodine. Increasing ozone concentrations since the preindustrial period imply that iodine chemistry and its associated ozone destruction is now substantially more active. However, the lack of historical observations of ozone and iodine means that such estimates rely primarily on model calculations. Here we use seasonally resolved records from an Alpine ice core to investigate 20th century changes in atmospheric iodine. After carefully considering possible postdepositional changes in the ice core record, we conclude that iodine deposition over the Alps increased by at least a factor of 3 from 1950 to the 1990s in the summer months, with smaller increases during the winter months. We reproduce these general trends using a chemical transport model and show that they are due to increased oceanic iodine emissions, coupled to a change in iodine speciation over Europe from enhanced nitrogen oxide emissions. The model underestimates the increase in iodine deposition by a factor of 2, however, which may be due to an underestimate in the 20th century ozone increase. Our results suggest that iodine’s impact on the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere accelerated over the 20th century and show a coupling between anthropogenic pollution and the availability of iodine as an essential nutrient to the terrestrial biosphere.

Bit more on the aerosols.

Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: February 23, 2021, 03:29:33 PM »
At least i was close.  :)

Ust-Shchuger has a subarctic climate (Dfc) with mild to warm summers and severely cold winters. It holds the European low temperature record of −58.1 °C (−72.6 °F), recorded on December 31, 1978

Interesting place...i still have the impression they profit from location if you go for purely Euro records.

WMO Region II (Asia): Lowest Temperature
Record Value   -67.8°C (-90°F)
Date of Record   (a) 5/2/1892, 7/2/1892
(b) 6/2/1933
Geospatial Location   (a) Verkhoyansk, Russia [67°33'N, 133°23'E, elevation 107 m (350 ft)]
(b) Oimaykon, Russia [63°28'N, 142°23'E, elevation 800m (2625 ft)]

Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: February 22, 2021, 04:41:01 PM »
Or give up on the idea that self regulation is a good idea and winterproof the grid and connect it to the the rest of the US.

Arctic sea ice / Re: What's new in the Arctic ?
« on: February 21, 2021, 06:22:28 PM »

Some quotes from:
A changing Bering Sea is influencing weather far to the south, scientists say


Hundreds of miles inland from the Bering Sea, at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, physical oceanographer Seth Danielson is monitoring the moving pieces of the climate ecosystem. One standout factor, he said, is the loss of ice in the Bering Sea.

“The waters start warmer in the fall, so we are making less ice. The air temperature is warmer so we are having less ice in the winter,” he said. “At some point, you have to assume that what you think is normal has changed.”


The Bering-Chukchi connection
The Bering Sea holds a pivotal role, Danielson said, because of its location at a critical point on the massive marine conveyor belt that regulates the world’s oceans. The Pacific Ocean rests at a higher elevation than the Atlantic Ocean, so water from the Pacific runs downhill through the Bering Strait into the Chukchi Sea, he said.

That means the heat that the Bering collects from the south pours through that narrow strait separating Alaska from Russia. That heat is building as increasingly open and dark-surfaced Bering Sea absorbs more of the sun’s rays rather than reflecting the energy with white ice.


Danielson and his colleagues in the UAF oceanography group and other institutions have been able to track the movement of heat from the Bering into the Chukchi with instruments on fixed moorings at strategic spots in the marine system.

That heat flow accelerated in just a few years. In the 2014-to-2018 period, the amount of heat going through the Bering Strait into the Chukchi was about 43 percent higher than the amount prior to 2014, according to the most recent calculations, which Danielson presented at this year’s Alaska Marine Science Symposium, held online in January.

Effects intensify as heat moves north.

Though the Bering Sea is undergoing a well-recognized transformation, with record-low and near-record-low winter ice amounts in recent years, the Chukchi Sea is in some ways changing more dramatically, he said.

Danielson and his colleagues quantified temperature differences in a study published in May of 2020. In the Bering Strait, temperatures increased at a rate of 0.27 degrees Celsius per decade from 1991 to 2015, mooring measurements showed. But in the Chukchi, temperatures increased by 0.43 degrees per decade since 1990, the measurements showed.

Every 1 degree Celsius of warming in the Chukchi delays freeze-up by about three weeks, Danielson said. Such delays are documented in the satellite record, which shows that type of ice extent that used to be normal in October is appearing much later — not until December in recent years.

That delay in freezing means the ocean and atmosphere absorb more heat over longer periods, Danielson said. With the extra heat now cast off by the Chukchi in the fall, “You would heat the whole Arctic by something like a degree (Celsius),” he said, referring to not just all the seas but also all the land above the Arctic Circle. “The Chukchi is a clear center of action for delivering heat to the Arctic,” he said.


And there is more about the teleconnections but i found the Arctic stuff more interesting.

Arctic sea ice / Re: What's new in the Arctic ?
« on: February 21, 2021, 06:00:43 PM »
thick sea-ice.

Propaganda...that is not thick sea ice.  ;)

I waved the magic wand and now they are one post.

There is an easy trick for such thing which was taught by typepad (although that just disappeared your posts without outages) :
Open word document and paste link and quotes in there.
From there you can post it and add the quote boxes or you can paste the code for them straight into the document. So [q uote] and [/q uote] withouth space otherwise it looks like this:

Consequences / Re: Places becoming less livable
« on: February 21, 2021, 05:29:00 PM »
Well this is Texas...the big dumb. You might well generalize it to the whole of the US but other parts of the world actually invest in their infrastructure.

If that is US only i would like to remark that you could pay for a whole lot with just part of the Pentagon budget.

The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: February 20, 2021, 11:59:38 AM »
That´s a fun thing, thx!

Consequences / Re: Origins of SARS-CoV-2
« on: February 18, 2021, 04:17:33 PM »
Whatever anyone thinks of the WHO is not relevant to the topic.

The politics / Re: The Collapse Of America
« on: February 15, 2021, 06:48:52 PM »
But what is it all about?

You have a president that is on a political trial. The facts are quite clear. Republics wiggle. No sense in doing it in his last week, no sense in doing it after office. That is of course nonsense. Crossing an arbitrary line in time does not mean you get a ´No prosecution free card´. It should be about the things done, the actual lines crossed.

Whining about the election is fine, litigating all you can fine but after that is exhausted take your losses. He knew what he did and they knew but most of them think about their short term interests (reelections) before the bigger picture. People died there. But line and personal income.

This does not increase our opinion of the US.

Now if the counter to that is ´but the left censors everything´ that is kind of weak and not really to the point.

It´s not like right wing dictators adore free speech.

Science / Re: Global Warming Would Stop Quickly After Emissions Go To Zero
« on: February 14, 2021, 11:18:48 PM »

Hat tip to Stephan.

Some quotes i would like to highlight:

Table 3 shows that, although CO2 is responsible for 66% of the climate forcing by all greenhouse gases, its rate of increase during the last five years accounts for 82% of the total increase in forcing. From well-known chemistry of the carbonate system in the oceans we can estimate that, when the atmosphere and oceans are again in chemical equilibrium (after about 1000 years), ~83% of the excess CO2 resides in oceans and ~17% in the atmosphere. In the natural system, very slow calcium carbonate dissolution (which includes coral reefs) increases the alkalinity of the oceans allowing them to ingest the remaining 17% from the atmosphere, but that is expected to take between 3000 and 7000 years [Archer et al., 2009]. This is how long future generations will likely have to deal with the enhanced atmospheric CO2 unless ways will be found to pull the excess CO2 back out of the atmosphere and out of the oceans. Note that for this purely chemical estimate we assume that other factors, such as ocean circulation and ocean biology do not change, which is unlikely when the climate changes. If we would merely pull excess CO2 out of the atmosphere, the oceans would emit enough of its excess carbon back into the atmosphere to re-establish chemical equilibrium. The same could happen with the terrestrial biosphere, if the main reason for their current net uptake is fertilization by high CO2.

So if we would manage a slightly negative emissions there will still be a long long plateau.

Then the other greenhouse gasses, the novelties that we introduced to the atmosphere:

Radiative forcing from the sum total of observed changes of the industrial gases continues to increase. The abundances of gases included in the original Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer have declined, but other gases, some of them included in later amendments to the Montreal Protocol, are still increasing. The increased radiative forcing from the sum of the latter group more than compensates for the declines of the original group, so that climate forcing from all industrial gases continues to go up.


Back to the original MP gases, the decrease of CH3CCl3 was rapid (Figure 5) when its production stopped because of its relatively short lifetime of 5 years. The rate of decrease for most CFCs was slower than the rate one would expect for zero emissions, because of stored “banks” in insulation materials, equipment, etc., but very recently the rate of decrease of CFC-11 slowed down significantly further because of new production of the chemical [Montzka et al., 2018]. CCl4 is still being produced and emitted in large quantities, as its rate of decrease is much slower than would be expected from its chemical lifetime.

None of our measures of succes (EVs, easy parts of the energy transition) address those at all and if you check fig 3 you can see that their effects is quite large.

Bonus round or how may kettles?

How much energy are we talking about?
When we multiply the 2019 average heating intensity of 3.224 Watt m-2 by the surface area of the Earth we have 1644 TeraWatt (TW). For comparison, a large electrical power plant produces 1 GigaWatt (GW) of electrical power. One TW equals the output of one thousand of such 1 GW power plants. So the heat retention by greenhouse gases in 2019 equals the electrical output of 1.64 million large power plants. Global electricity production from all power plants in 2019 was 3.15 TW (extrapolated from 2018, BP Statistical Review 2019).

Let’s also compare 1644 TW with all the direct heat produced from all energy uses, the production of electricity including nuclear, transportation, heating/cooling of buildings, industrial processes, biofuels, waste. That total is 18.1 TW in 2019 [Ritchie, 2014]. Therefore, the excess heat retention by greenhouse gases in 2019 was 91 times larger than all the direct heat produced by humanity.


Now we will take a look at what 1644 TW could do in the climate system. If all of that energy were (hypothetically) directed into the Greenland ice cap, in one year it would heat up the ice, and then melt, 5.0% of the Greenland ice cap, which would raise global sea level by 36 cm, or 14”.

Alternatively, the energy could go toward heating the upper layers of the oceans. In one year the upper 100 m of all oceans would warm by 0.35 degree centigrade (°C , or 0.64 °F). If all of the energy could be aimed exclusively at the Great Lakes in North America (their water volume is ~22,600 km3), they would completely evaporate in 14 months.

I like these examples because they do show the scale of the problem in a way.
In the year 2000 we added 370 TW less.

The rest / Re: Good music
« on: February 14, 2021, 01:41:08 AM »
One band i like quite a lot is Sonic Youth. Very distinct sound which had a lot to do with their different tuning and more conceptual approach of music.

Early on they also made a record under the name Ciccone Youth which was off course a reference to Madonna. It featured a Madonna cover, Get into the Groove which they did in a SY way but also a very slick cover version of ´Addicted to Love´. The instruments don´t really sound like SY at all. In fact it always sounded much more like Kim Gordon singing over a backing tape.

And here comes the hilarious twist: that was actually what it was. She went to a Karaoke bar in Japan and ended up singing to it and the bar offered a recording of the performance to take home
just like you could buy photó´s of yourself on scary rides in entertainment parks. So she took that tape home.

The clips was made at Sears which offered a record your own clip service for about the same. All in all under 100 bucks for a clip so now i wonder what the advances would have been.  ;D

The story is in this dutch TV show (just paste into YT).

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: February 12, 2021, 04:28:07 PM »
Vaccinations in the Netherlands:
Next week we start vaccinating the people age 63/64 (so the older ones are covered),
all people with Down syndrom and
All people age 18-64 with Morbid Obesity (BMI 40 and up). This last group is about 100.000 people.
At the moment 75% of corona patients are overweight although the MO are only a small part of that group but the are the hardest to treat.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cryptocurrency
« on: February 10, 2021, 09:53:07 PM »
As you posted in the Tesla thread they have mined 18,5 out of 21 million available coins. And along the way that needed the amount of energy Switzerland used in 2018.

The amount of money that translates to varies but lets go with 50k per coin that is a little over a billion. Double the amount and it is two billion.

If doubt our ´real money´ had anything like that relative energy cost. Block chain is computationally intensive and that eats energy. The minting process is highly optimized. In the Netherlands there are about 1,5 billion coins in circulation which is about half which was minted.
Coins do not last forever but they do last a long time. When i was young i collected the oldest coins of every type so oldest 1 or 5 cent pieces. I think the oldest i had was from 1905 and in great condition. Most of them last a very long time.

The printing part is also highly optimized with only a small number of companies doing that. They are buying high grade inks and all kinds of other stuff on an existing market which offers a whole range of inks papers and papers and plastics. When printing they also print way more of the small notes  that get used all the time.

If you were to compare metrics you would have to work how much money the coin or coupon represented over time which punches way higher then crypto because they get used a lot and they are designed to last a certain time.

Crypto is a BS technocratic fake solution.

So you do not trust your governments and banks so you create an alternative currency which only works if the governments and banks allow it.

For a whole lot of people in countries below Switzerland it is not even an option. So it is a toy and a harmful one.

A tidal wave of new carbon emissions data soon will be upon us

A radical increase in available carbon emissions data may be just around the corner. Should it happen within a matter of months as proponents hope, its effects will spread around the world to dramatic effect.

Cities failing to measure and publish their emissions data will find themselves under renewed and intense scrutiny. Slow-to-change investors and greenwashers in the business community will lose their cover to continue propping up the fossil fuel economy. And citizens and consumers will have the kind of granular information they need to more effectively target the decision-makers and brands standing in the way of a sustainable future.

Central to this shift is likely to be is a collaborative endeavor called Climate TRACE. Climate TRACE (Tracking Real-Time Atmospheric Carbon Emissions) is a project to use satellite image processing, remote sensing technologies, machine learning and artificial intelligence to monitor worldwide human-made greenhouse gas emissions in real time. Unlike other approaches to monitoring emissions, it plans to attribute emissions to specific sources, whether these be individual factories, ships, power plants or a range of other facilities and all its data will be placed in the public domain.


f successfully on stream by summer 2021 as its designers hope, the service should drive not only increased transparency but also increased accountability.

For the unprepared, the damage could be severe. The kind of Reddit-coordinated collective action by retail investors that disrupted stock prices recently soon may be copied by ethical investors armed with highly specific real-time emissions data to achieve similar effects. Some previously untargeted companies, brands, institutional investors and geographies will be thrust into the limelight as central problems in the battle against climate change. Their asset values and prospects will be damaged by sudden negative shifts in both consumer and investor sentiment as a result. 

Those that up to now have been talking a good game on environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting while failing to deliver in practice are likely to be exposed as greenwashers, sometimes brutally and at high speed. And data sets currently used to track a company’s ESG performance also will need to be radically overhauled.

As a result, we can expect to see personal, political and business incentives tilt in favor of more action to combat climate change. Faster private- and public-sector innovation to get emissions down should follow. Sustainable investments should grow as divestment from carbon-intensive industries intensifies. And the newly available data should make it easier for governments to enforce environmental laws and for climate change mitigation measures and aid flows to be more efficiently financed and targeted at the areas of greatest beneficial impact.

and much more on:

The rest / Re: Archaeology/Paleontology news
« on: February 06, 2021, 10:25:29 PM »
Watch This Billion-Year Journey of Earth’s Tectonic Plates

Older computerized simulations tended to recreate the movements of the continents alone, showing them drifting about on an undynamic blue ocean background like croutons bobbing about in soup. This time around, the scientists tried a new approach. They combined magnetic data, which reveals the positions of rocks relative to the magnetic poles millions of years ago, with geological data describing how the plates interact along their boundaries. The result is a high-fidelity simulation, one that models the migration of entire tectonic plates — continents, oceans and all — showing how they fraternize with one another with remarkable precision.

In the past decade, similarly painstaking plate tectonics reconstructions have been made but only for limited windows of geologic time. This is the first time this type of full-blown plate tectonics reconstruction has been assembled for an uninterrupted fifth of Earth’s history.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: February 02, 2021, 12:01:28 AM »
Actually that is just a lot of denialism veiled in lots of words.

Whatever we choose to call, I think we can agree that recent years (timeframe is somewhat dependent on the dataset chosen) have differed from the immediately preceding ones in that the rate of decline as diminished.

This is a longwinded way of saying hey i see a hiatus.

Behind the statistics there is also a changing physical world. The arctic now is quite unlike the arctic 10 years ago.

The key metric is volume and ice grows from ice. Prolonged open water is what will allow mixing up heat from below at some point. You can go by spreadsheets or think about the physical processes going on.

Science / Re: Paleoclimatology papers
« on: January 31, 2021, 02:57:31 PM »
El Cid we are not disagreeing on main lines just on nuances.

First off they did not realign reality, they just solved a puzzle related to the global temperature as resolved from the paleo record vs the model output. This is fine. This means that we don´t need to try to get models to reach those global temps (but i don´t think anyone was doing that).

Global models give global temps but they do not generate detail very much.

problem in a nutshell:

Evaluation of CMIP5 palaeo-simulations to improve climate projections

Structural differences among models account for much of the uncertainty in projected climate changes, at least until the mid-twenty-first century. Recent observations encompass too limited a range of climate variability to provide a robust test of the ability to simulate climate changes. Past climate changes provide a unique opportunity for out-of-sample evaluation of model performance. Palaeo-evaluation has shown that the large-scale changes seen in twenty-first-century projections, including enhanced land–sea temperature contrast, latitudinal amplification, changes in temperature seasonality and scaling of precipitation with temperature, are likely to be realistic. Although models generally simulate changes in large-scale circulation sufficiently well to shift regional climates in the right direction, they often do not predict the correct magnitude of these changes. Differences in performance are only weakly related to modern-day biases or climate sensitivity, and more sophisticated models are not better at simulating climate changes. Although models correctly capture the broad patterns of climate change, improvements are required to produce reliable regional projections.

paywalled but the essence is in the bolded quotes.

So the big problem is actually that the models don´t have the resolution needed for our current problem. We have four choices which do not really meaningfully diversify until much later this century.

If anything we need much better more detailed models and we should have invested in a CERN like climate change research program a couple of decades ago.

So the nuances are that i actually like the paper and i think we need better models since we cannot do without them. But we agree that current models are not sufficient.  ;)


Some papers and other stuff from the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project for people interested to check out what kind of research they are doing.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: January 29, 2021, 10:03:37 PM »
You can not just use extent or volume or area, you must check how they dance together.

If you look at those long term Arctic ice movies you see a sort of skeleton and all the ice goes towards Greenland. As volume declines and most of it is near Greenland anyway we might run out of  ice in the CAB/Siberia CAB/Atlantic area early which would open up the areas for mixing up bottom heat. Mix up enough and you can make it through the winter.

I am convinced that this is the mechanism which explains the quick (within a decade) climate flips in the HCO so we will see something similar happen but with more heat buried below and much more heat from the rest of the system. I think the bet is rather safe.

Just aside

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: January 28, 2021, 03:38:23 PM »
Why doesn't it encroach further and further; Why does it slow down?

Basically when the thick MYI is down to a new much lower minimal level the period of rapid loss is over.

Thermodynamic growth of ice in winter. The thicker the ice the more insulation there is so heat is lost only slowly. Less heat loss=less ice formation. So there is a limit of around 2m of ice through thermodynamics (compression, slabbing and ridging obviously make some thicker). Whereas with very little ice thickness then the ice grows rapidly over winter.

Consequently when and where there is thick MYI losing its thickness down to 2m in summer, this ice is gone and it doesn't grow back. If instead we have 1.5m FYI then this all melts out but it  regrows back quickly in winter. This means much less net change from one year to the next.

But it is important to remember that this is only a temporary situation. We have more and more open water in summer, more mobile ice. This over time interferes with the buildup of thick ice.

Early open waters can lead to mixing up heat and i suspect that this process can provoke areas with year round open waters.

And of course the very atmosphere over the now cracked up ice is changing from Arctic desert to some state with more water vapour year around so some day we are going to get a steady drizzle over ice.

The statistics are just an abstraction of a whole bunch of underlying physical processes.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 27, 2021, 08:34:33 PM »
Thé EU has also produced a report which expresses some doubt upon the presumption that woody biomass is carbon neutral:

Scientists have proposed 10 golden rules for tree-planting, which they say must be a top priority for all nations this decade.

It is not carbon neutral because our ´let´s use the trees as above ground oil´ schemes ignore the bigger needs of the planet and the other life on it. Every production plantation replaces potentially more worthwhile local viable life.

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: January 24, 2021, 08:17:02 PM »
Just a reminder that we care about the news/numbers/science not so much private theories.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 13, 2021, 05:58:40 PM »
I suggest just avoiding wild ass guesses and looking up reasonable ones for whatever it is about.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 08, 2021, 08:56:39 PM »
That is BS because GW always comes back to that if you discuss what we should do about it. That does not mean that all political discussions are interesting or that we should focus on some personal obsessions.

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020/2021 freezing season
« on: January 07, 2021, 11:10:57 PM »
The whole concept of rebound year is useless. Yes maybe some measure may be bigger then last year but overall the volume goes down and the ice we have now is not the ice we used to have.

It is much weaker, remember the polar ice picture from last year?

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020/2021 freezing season
« on: January 07, 2021, 04:32:44 PM »
A 42k daily sea ice area LOSS in the Kara Sea on 6 Jan is simply ridiculous

Looks like only 2016/2017 had a similar dip. It will be interesting how they compare in a while.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 06, 2021, 10:22:21 AM »
Yeah i did some mass moving and that messes up the new posts display.

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: January 06, 2021, 09:57:07 AM »
Said thread has been started, all feel free to post/rebut there.,3376.0.html

I have moved the posts related to Covid origins to the thread above.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 02, 2021, 12:23:19 AM »
kassy, you may not understand this but blumenkraft is a friend of mine. Yes, abstract as all of you are. Still, I will act on my well-developed-but-not-perfect senses and do the right thing. Hell, what is this about kassy? I repeat my question; Do you have a heart?

Yes i do but don´t you think that is a lame question?

There are several layers to this.

First of we do not know if the claim is actually true.

Second if this was happening and you want to stop it you have to do what i suggested above because it is the only thing that is going to help.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 01, 2021, 11:41:32 PM »
kassy, I know that is what a Vulcan would say, but we are not Vulcans. I remember when I first came here and a couple members picked me for a target. I would not know them on the street and they gave me one tittle of what blum has been getting, yet I very nearly left ASIF.


.. from b.c. .. Tom , once again , you were not 'picked' as a target .. your modus operandi was problematic , as was your clearly right-wing politics , making your very presence on the forum suspect . Blumenkraft shone a light and was persuasive in your defence . You have since been 'targeted' by Kassy and put on moderation . All I and others had asked for after your arrival here was moderation on your part .. now it is enforced .

Ok so the second part is someones PM i guess.

You have been told very early on by Neven not to make random new threads and later you had been told not discuss certain things and you ignore both.

Moderation just needs to be consistent and any targeting i do is among those lines. 

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: January 01, 2021, 01:00:25 PM »
I think this is the wrong way to go about it because if the claim is true then it also shows it works.
The only thing that works in the long run is ignoring and deleting. Personally i don´t get why you would care what some random person you don´t know mails to you. It´s just a long winded way to state they disagree which is fine.

The rest / Re: Good music
« on: December 31, 2020, 09:30:35 PM »
We´re in this together by NIN. We were in 2020 and we are in 2021 and all those years after too.

Antarctica / Re: Ice Apocalypse - MULTIPLE METERS SEA LEVEL RISE
« on: December 26, 2020, 05:29:47 PM »
There is an undisputed positive trend in SLR and on top of that a presumed 'acceleration' in the SLR that occurs since we started to get satellite data.

"The real world" is the way we interpret data that are sampled. Leading SLR researches such as  Nerem and Ablains interpret the data as an acceleration.

What Iz and Shum demonstrate is that the acceleration interpretation is an "a leap of faith without evidence", as the very same data can be equally well interpreted as a combination of various natural cycles in the ocean.
I think this tells us a lot:
1. we should be very careful with our interpretations of SLR data
2. we should not make forecasts based on such data
3. we should always look to make sound statistical analyses of data before rushing to conclusions, or projections.

They are still just arguing about a data set. One solution is to wait a couple of decades because then we have a better set which will show acceleration. More data will teach us more about the alleged 20 and 60 year cycles. Since those are celestial in origin they should just drag water around so of themselves they should not really contribute to SLR?

Of course we can guesstimate the likely hood of sea accelerated level rise.

1 As more land ice gets lost it will most likely end up it the oceans.
2 Sea ice that gets lost also gets added to the oceans.
3 And the CO2 warming push will continue for a while so more thermal expansion.

Then there are thing that are bound to happen like the collapse of the arctic sea ice some time this decade (or the next two for more conservative views but those always underestimate the speed which things happen) which in itself should give global temps a nice kick upwards.

None of that appears in the Sat record until it happens. 

Also not sure if any of the papers actually include a reference to the paper that explained part of the lack of sea level rise was due to our hydro projects which kept a lot of water on continents and lot of that overlapped with the beginning of the Sat records.

It still just is a technical discussion of a dataset where absence of proof does not mean it is not there. The problem will go away with time and more data, and also re-evalutions of prior cycles (the long time patterns from tide gauge data) with better data.

What you cannot do is focus on an article discussing a specific thing and then expect it to act as a shield against everything that is happening. All research has it´s limits and fits into all kinds of other research.

I like looking at paleo stuff. If the HCO can provoke really quick local change in the Arctic our current qualitatively different type of warming can do that too plus it effects Antarctica more.

Antarctica / Re: Ice Apocalypse - MULTIPLE METERS SEA LEVEL RISE
« on: December 23, 2020, 09:35:27 PM »
It is important to note that what they do in a model is not the same as a requirement in the real world.

Earth is the best model because it actually accounts for all variables while the models are crude. A lot better then they were but still crude.

A more detailed look has been posted before but basically there are some areas prone to this. There is an underlying physical principle which is rather sound so the question is when. The research on the local ice condition sort of hints we don´t need the forcings like in the model.

The other points are valid. It is what happens when you try to look at all those processes.

A lot of those are not in our current models we use to check if we are short of ´dangerous climate change´.

What is the probability estimate that the IPCC is ´right´?
What is the probability that they do not actually have a definition of dangerous climate change?

We can set a target but what does preventing a 1,5C overall rise do if it still kills ASI which then kicks the global temperatures up a notch?

Science / Re: Carbon Cycle
« on: December 22, 2020, 05:40:42 PM »
Muddying the waters: Weathering might remove less atmospheric CO2 than thought

The weathering of rocks at the Earth's surface may remove less greenhouse gases from the atmosphere than previous estimates, says new research from the University of Cambridge.

The findings, published in PNAS, suggest Earth's natural mechanism for removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere via the weathering of rocks may in fact be weaker than scientists had thought -- calling into question the exact role of rocks in alleviating warming over millions of years.

The research also suggests there may be a previously unknown sink drawing CO2 from the atmosphere and impacting climate changes over long timescales, which researchers now hope to find.

Weathering is the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide breaks down rocks and then gets trapped in sediment. It is a major part of our planet's carbon cycle, shuttling carbon dioxide between the land, sea and air, and influencing global temperatures.

"Weathering is like a planetary thermostat -- it's the reason why Earth is habitable. Scientists have long suggested this is why we don't have a runaway greenhouse effect like on Venus," said lead author Ed Tipper from Cambridge's Department of Earth Sciences. By locking carbon dioxide away in sediments, weathering removes it from the atmosphere over long timescales, reducing the greenhouse effect and lowering global temperatures.

The team's new calculations show that, across the globe, weathering fluxes have been overestimated by up to 28%, with the greatest impact on rivers in mountainous regions where rocks are broken down faster.

They also report that three of the largest river systems on Earth, including the neighbouring Yellow and Salween Rivers with their origins on the Tibetan Plateau and the Yukon River of North America, do not absorb carbon dioxide over long timescales -- as had been thought.

For decades the Tibetan plateau has been invoked as a long term sink for carbon and mediator of climate. Some 25% of the sediment in the world's oceans originate from the plateau.

"One of the best places to study the carbon cycle are rivers, they are the arteries of the continents. Rivers are the link between the solid Earth and oceans -- hauling sediments weathered from the land down to the oceans where their carbon is locked up in rocks," said Tipper.

"Scientists have been measuring the chemistry of river waters to estimate weathering rates for decades," said co-author Victoria Alcock "Dissolved sodium is one of the most commonly measured products of weathering -- but we've shown that it's not that simple, and in fact sodium often comes from elsewhere."

Sodium is released when silicate minerals, the basic building blocks of most of Earth's rocks, dissolve in carbonic acid -- a mix of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and rainwater.

However, the team found not all sodium comes from this weathering process. "We've found an additional source of sodium in river waters across the globe," said co-author Emily Stevenson. "That extra sodium is not from weathered silicate rocks as other studies assume, but in fact from very old clays which are being eroded in river catchments."

Tipper and his research group studied eight of the largest river systems on Earth, a mission involving 16 field seasons and thousands of lab analyses in search of where that extra sodium was coming from.

They found the answer in a soupy 'gel' of clay and water -- known as the cation exchange pool -- which is carried along by muddy river sediment.

The exchange pool is a reactive hive of cations -- positively charged ions like sodium -- which are weakly bonded to clay particles. The cations can easily swap out of the gel for other elements like calcium in river water, a process that can take just a few hours.

Although it has been described in soils since the 1950s, the role the exchange pool plays in supplying sodium to rivers has been largely neglected.

"The chemical and isotopic makeup of the clays in the exchange pool tell us what they are made of and where they've come from," said co-author Alasdair Knight. "We know that many of the clays carried by these rivers come from ancient sediments, and we suggest that some of the sodium in the river must come from these clays."

The clays were originally formed from continental erosion millions of years ago. On their journey downstream they harvested cations from the surrounding water -- their exchange pool picking up sodium on reaching the sea. Today, after being uplifted from the seafloor, these ancient clays -- together with their sodium -- are now being eroded by modern rivers.

This old sodium, which can switch out of the clays in the exchange pool and into river water, has previously been mistaken as the dissolved remnants of modern weathering.

"Generating just one data point took a huge amount of work in the lab and we also had to do a lot of maths," said Stevenson. "It's like unmixing a cake, using a forensic approach to isolate key ingredients in the sediments, leaving behind the exchange pool and the clays. People have used the same methods for a really long time -- and they work -- but we've been able to find an extra ingredient that provides the sodium and we need to account for this."

"It's thanks to the hard work of many collaborators and students over many years that our samples had the scope to get to grips with this complex chemical process at a global scale," said Tipper.

Scientists are now left to puzzle over what else could be absorbing Earth's carbon dioxide over geological time. There are no certain candidates -- but one controversial possibility is that life is removing carbon from the atmosphere. Another theory is that silicate dissolution on the ocean floor or volcanic arcs may be important. "People have spent decades looking on the continents for weathering -- so maybe we now need to start expanding where we look," said Tipper.

Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: December 22, 2020, 12:01:37 PM »
In the Netherlands we set a new record of days over 10 degrees at 286 days with possibly 1 or 2 more coming in the next few days.

Old record was 2002 with 285 days.

Also a record string of 233 consecutive days over 10C and latest ever day in the year over 10 C (with today and possibly tomorrow also clearing this mark.

The record string of days without mild frost is now 700 days and still going.

Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Arctic Go Ice Free?
« on: December 20, 2020, 11:30:30 PM »
I went looking back to what Oren used before but NSIDC regional data is extent only so that is not going to help.

Jan: -2 (for Extent) minus 13 (for Volume) = -15
    The Vol. estimate got 13 years earlier, but Extent est. became later not earlier, and thus farther away from the Vol estimate.  This is the opposite of convergence and NOT what the hypothesis predicts.

But it is consistent with melting stuff. Volume is hard to make and extent not so much. Extent chases area chases volume.

On another note there must be some thickness which leads to trouble. What is the average thickness to disappear in a year? At some point all kinds of processes that were not important are going to play a role. The summer ice will become ever more shattered and drift more.

Of the 4 measurements i would totally go with volume as the best predictor.

Antarctica / Re: What's new in Antarctica ?
« on: December 20, 2020, 11:52:30 AM »
The University of Chile has recorded a massive spike in seismic activity in Antarctica and said since the end of August, more than 30,000 earth tremors have rocked the world’s southernmost continent.
Scientists with the university’s National Seismological Center said the small quakes – including one stronger shake of magnitude 6 – were detected in the Bransfield Strait, a 96 km wide ocean channel between the South Shetland Islands and the Antarctic Peninsula, Reuters reported.
Several tectonic plates and microplates meet near the strait, leading to frequent rumbling, but the past three months have been unusual, according to the center.
“Most of the seismicity is concentrated at the beginning of the sequence, mainly during the month of September, with more than a thousand earthquakes a day,” the center said.
Reuters reported the shakes have become so frequent that the strait itself, once increasing in width at a rate of about 7 or 8 mm a year, is now expanding 15 cm a year.
“It’s a 20-fold increase … which suggests that right this minute … the Shetland Islands are separating more quickly from the Antarctic peninsula,” said Sergio Barrientos, the center’s director.

That is a pretty impressive increase...

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: December 20, 2020, 10:19:56 AM »
Ivory: Elephant decline revealed by shipwreck cargo

Researchers have examined ancient DNA preserved in elephant tusks that were among the cargo of a 487-year-old shipwreck.

Their forensic examination of the 100 tusks pinpointed the devastation caused to the elephant population by centuries of ivory trade.

On this single ship, researchers found genetic evidence of 17 distinct herds of the threatened animals.

Today, scientists can find only four of those herds surviving in Africa.


That preservation meant that the international team of researchers - including experts from from Namibia, the US and the UK - could unpick exactly how many herds of elephants the tusks came from.

The team examined something called mitochondrial DNA. Mitochondria are the power stations of every cell, converting food into fuel. And crucially for this study, the genetic blueprint that makes mitochondria is passed down from mother to offspring.

This makes it a particularly revealing piece of code for elephants.

"Elephants live in female-led family groups, and they tend to stay in the same geographic area throughout their lives," explained Alida de Flamingh from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, who led the study. "We were able to reconstruct complete mitochondrial genomes from these really old samples."

Those completed pieces of genetic code showed that the tusks on this single trading vessel came from 17 distinct elephant herds. The most up to date genetic information about the elephants surviving in that part of Africa today showed that only four of those could be found.

"That was quite shocking - that loss of diversity," said Dr Coutu. "Next we'd really like to fill in those gaps in a chronological way. We can look at where these pinch points are in history and create a timeline of exactly how and when the huge trade in ivory had an impact."


Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: December 18, 2020, 07:43:50 PM »
So much for children are hardly affected at all.

They are hardly affected by covid. It is a rare effect of influenza.

And in general it always helps to have context and you can use stats for basics. If deaths occur in an age group how much of them per 10000 occur?

If a certain symptom shows up in how much cases does it show up? Etc.

Children very well are likely to experience brain, kidney, and/or lung damage from this virus.

We have published evidence that this is happening even in young adults. 

Children are not likely to experience brain, kidney, and/or lung damage from this virus.
We know this by the known number of children infected by the virus (known positives) divided by the ones with serious consequences and then you can add all the kids that had it but did not get tested.

The possibility is not zero but extremely low.

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: December 18, 2020, 03:52:34 PM »
So much for children are hardly affected at all.

They are hardly affected by covid. It is a rare effect of influenza.

And in general it always helps to have context and you can use stats for basics. If deaths occur in an age group how much of them per 10000 occur?

If a certain symptom shows up in how much cases does it show up? Etc.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: December 17, 2020, 06:47:35 PM »
I can but hope this is a learning experience for you.
They are lying to you.
often subtlety.
To misquote or modify the conclusions of a scientific paper is never except able...ever.

I think this is a nice way to sum it up.

Hefaistos said:
The articles indeed say nothing about predictions, but the graph is in itself a prediction as to the speed and magnitude of the processes involved.

Is that so? It showed it was way bigger in the ice ages. Then it is smaller in modern day. We recovered from the HCO dip but we are now heading towards a pretty long committed period of warming.

given the fast reversal out of FF and GHG emissions we're seeing coming in the next several decades. Others are more alarmed, which is fine.

That is something you hope but not a fact. And then there are the earth responses that will happen in the meantime.

What we want to work out here is what happens to the planet not what various people belief will happen and a graph showing the historical background + the belief it will all just blow over is not actually discussing the issue.


The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: December 16, 2020, 04:38:09 PM »
quote author=Hefaistos link=topic=1562.msg295876#msg295876 date=1608077218]
It's the alarmist conjectures regarding the GIS that are controversial, in my opinion. That is what my final post Reply #4028 is about. I quote myself: "My own conjecture is that there is nothing particular to be alarmed over regarding the small amount of melting of the GIS.
Thus, coming back to where this started, the annotations on the chart from Briner et al are perfectly relevant." I motivated this with the geologically speaking short time-frame of build-up of GHG, and the fast reverseal that we're most likely to see already in the coming decades.
This is not a denier point of view, it's a realistic assessment of various developments we're seeing now, and, as such, a perfectly valid point of view here on ASIF.

When is a GIS melt prediction an alarmist conjecture?
And what is a small amount of melting? 2019 was a record year. And it beat 2012. (And contributed 1,5 mm to global SL).

You picked the graph because you think it supports your view but that is not necessarily true.
The fast reversal has its limits etc but all these are indeed topics under discussion.
How fast will it be?
What will be the limits?
What will be the earth systems responses? (Which is what the thread is about)

Actually discussing the sub subjects is interesting.
Just throwing a graph at it without context is not. The article says exactly zero about predictions.

So in a nutshell climate change is a thing but not a big thing because you think we will work it out. That is not a scientific argument.

Objections are fine but it has to be on point.
Also if some one points out your argument is all wrong you should reply why it is actually right or admit it´s wrong and not just reuse it later (the thermal ocean inertia thing).


Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: December 15, 2020, 10:08:53 PM »
I don´t know why the formatting turns up so messy but i suggest just using the standard text format.

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: December 15, 2020, 01:09:17 PM »
London & the SE sees a new mutation rapidly spreading there.....

Bit more on this:

There is no clear-cut evidence the new variant of coronavirus - which has been detected in south-east England - is able to transmit more easily, cause more serious symptoms or render the vaccine useless.

However, there are two reasons scientists are keeping a close eye on it.

The first is that levels of the variant are higher in places where cases are higher.

It is a warning sign, although it can be interpreted in two ways.

The virus could have mutated to spread more easily and is causing more infections.

But variants can also get a lucky break by infecting the right people at the right time. One explanation for the spread of the "Spanish strain" over the summer was simply people catching it on holiday and then bringing it home.

It will take experiments in the laboratory to figure out if this variant really is a better spreader than all the others.

The other issue that is raising scientific eyebrows is how the virus has mutated.

"It has a surprisingly large number of mutations, more than we would expect, and a few look interesting," Prof Nick Loman from the COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) Consortium told me.

There are two notable sets of mutation - and I apologise for their hideous names.

Both are found in the crucial spike protein, which is the key the virus uses to unlock the doorway into our body's cells in order to hijack them.

The mutation N501 (I did warn you) alters the most important part of the spike, known as the "receptor-binding domain".

This is where the spike makes first contact with the surface of our body's cells. Any changes that make it easier for the virus to get inside are likely to give it an edge.

"It looks and smells like an important adaptation," said Prof Loman.

The other mutation - a H69/V70 deletion - has emerged several times before, including famously in infected mink.

The concern was that antibodies from the blood of survivors was less effective at attacking that variant of virus.

Again, it is going to take more laboratory studies to really understand what is going on.

Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: December 12, 2020, 06:20:33 PM »
Exceedingly unlikely since there are very little deaths in the children cohort and possibly none without underlying consequences.

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: December 11, 2020, 01:55:14 PM »
This article is very interesting but not relevant to the holocene so i replaced the article with a link to the same article in the astronomy thread. Any discussion of this should also be on that thread.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24