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 - DrTskoul

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 30
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 31, 2019, 06:46:52 PM »
I guess the fat lady has a few more notes...

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 29, 2019, 11:42:22 AM »
Talk about a left turn !! 2019 took the exit ramp...

The rest / Re: Wildlife
« on: August 28, 2019, 01:10:52 AM »
Have you seen northern boreal mosquitoes?? Giant !!!

Policy and solutions / Re: Space colonization
« on: August 28, 2019, 01:08:47 AM »
Go for the twofer:

Presidential candidate Andrew Yang's climate plan aims to get the U.S. to net-zero carbon emissions with a range of new initiatives -- including investing in major geoengineering projects like giant mirrors in space.

Colonize space with the laborers needed to build the space mirrors...

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 28, 2019, 12:42:45 AM »
Marshal plan to increase the extraction of materials needed for the production of the equipment, marshal plan for the mobilization of labor at below competitive rates to keep it financially sustainable, a marshal plan to obtain the right of way in any locality that is needed regardless local opposition. Requires a determination akin to aliens attacking imminently...

I have been in Alberta and I got a fact that this is not a scam. There has been a ton of research for in-situ upgrading of bitumen and heavy hydrocarbons with air and added external energy ( uhf, microwaves etc). Nobody would give a license to operate an underground fire essentially...  not back then,  not today.

Consequences / Re: Laurentide II
« on: August 27, 2019, 09:26:35 PM »
Ice would be at surface....not injected at 3 ocean layers

Consequences / Re: Laurentide II
« on: August 27, 2019, 09:08:59 PM »
And from the local ground: I guess they don't know how to measure rain...

There is a worrying increase in all indicators that record the risk of desertification in the Eastern Mediterranean and in Greece, says academic Christos Zerefos, underlining the great importance of the problem on the eve of World War II and World War Day. Indeed, giving "news", Mr. Zerefos reveals to K that climate models to reduce rainfall in eastern Greece are already being modified for the worse: climate change, predicted, in the worst-case scenario, to reduce rainfall in the eastern regions of our country by 15%. The revision of estimates, which will be announced in the coming months, provides for a 20% reduction, ”Mr Zerefos told K. "Already in the last 100 years, there has been a 20% reduction in rainfalls in Western Greece, which is the region with the highest rainfall and the largest water reserves. In the east the decline is smaller, but the worst is coming, ”says the academic, based on the report of the Committee on Climate Change Study (EMEKA), set up by the Bank of Greece.

Another 4 years and it will be game over ....

Consequences / Re: Laurentide II
« on: August 27, 2019, 09:00:18 PM »
Cool!!! I can tell my compatriots to stop planning for future droughts....

Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: August 27, 2019, 07:38:55 PM »

Consequences / Re: Drought 2019
« on: August 27, 2019, 07:34:22 PM »
World’s largest permafrost river dries to a record low

Lena River fleet cannot sail after abnormal heat causes 2.5 metre water level drop.

The current water level means critical delays in the summer ritual delivering vital supplies to Arctic settlements in Yakutia, Russia’s biggest region.

Most of its remote corners are only accessible via water, with the lives of thousands of people depending on this traffic flow - which has been halted for weeks due to the low level of the longest river flowing entirely within Russia.

In regional capital Yakutsk the water dropped so suddenly that hundreds of cargo ships and smaller boats were left stranded in the sand.

Elsewhere along the river fishermen complained about an extremely low catch, saying that for days they were coming back home with empty buckets.

‘However many times I tried fishing with spinning and net, I caught nothing. I am now having to buy fish at shops, and many of us anglers fear that fish will die out in such shallow water’, bemoaned local fishermen Alexander Chigmarev.

Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: August 27, 2019, 06:46:03 PM »
Other than CO2 increase isn't any other feedback associated with forest fires captured by the land use sub models


Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: August 26, 2019, 05:55:43 PM »
You are not "causing" volatiles with mixing of the incoming liquid unless it's a stratified tank. You are displacing the vapor with the added liquid and have a bad vapor recovery system.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: August 26, 2019, 05:48:04 PM »
Next at a coast near you...

Trump Reportedly Discussed Nuking Hurricanes Headed To The United States

Axios reported Sunday that President Donald Trump suggested “multiple times” that Homeland and national security officials explore using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes from striking the United States.

During one hurricane briefing at the White House, Trump responded: “I got it. Why don’t we nuke them?” according to an unnamed source who was present, Axios reported. “We drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can’t we do that?”

Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: August 26, 2019, 05:42:26 PM »
The propaganda is taking hold


An airplane pilot who declined to give his name accused space agency scientists in the United States of releasing doctored satellite photos of the Amazon.

“There is so much sensationalism. The images of Nasa — that show fire — are manipulated,” the pilot said. “I have been flying since Monday and have not seen anything.”

Science / Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: August 25, 2019, 03:28:52 AM »
Yeap.... planet on fire...another positive feedback loop... yay...

Science / Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: August 24, 2019, 10:07:10 PM »
Although the exact quantities are difficult to calculate, scientists estimate that wildfires emitted about 8 billion tons of CO2 per year for the past 20 years.

How Wildfires Can Affect Climate Change (and Vice Versa) | ...

Science / Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: August 24, 2019, 03:59:13 PM »
Every year there about 40 gigatons of CO2 emitted.

Science / Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: August 24, 2019, 01:57:14 PM »
There about 3 million gigatons of CO2 in our atmosphere ( multiplied weight of atmosphere by 400 ppm and corrected for MW very roughly ). The forest fires in amazon released 228 megatons so far this year ( ), so roughly for a well mixed system and order of magnitude 30 micro ppm.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Global sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 24, 2019, 01:47:56 PM »
One GAC away from lowest false minimum?

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: August 23, 2019, 11:53:52 PM »
Woe wawes ...

And fro the navele doun al covered was / With wawes grene, and brighte as any glas.

The scientific method is the same regardless the phenomena. However it might be too late to define baseline and departure from baseline for a lot of ecosystems as they are changing rapidly.

Arctic sea ice / Re: Are you hoping to witness a BOE?
« on: August 23, 2019, 04:46:34 PM »
I'm curious why so many ppl want a BOE as soon as possible.
Equating hopes and things to want. I might want a way to travel by a vehicle that's not using any fossil fuels in all it's lifetime, but there's no hope I could afford it LOL.

Here ya go ...  8)

Don't think its on topic but here you go: I do not think that there is a mode of locomotion today that will not use _any_ FF in all its lifetime.... Even with your two feet... So the bar is placed _quite_ high...

Consequences / Re: Qué se ficieron ?
« on: August 23, 2019, 04:43:46 PM »
He has three kids so the math is probably wrong.  ::)

Good thing that the children of these type of men rarely rise to the levels of their fathers IQ and capability (look at trump's)

The rest / Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:46:50 PM »
World without US and Canada has already peaked....

Unfortunately the changes are faster than we can study them...

Consequences / Re: Qué se ficieron ?
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:43:30 PM »
One down, one to go ?? Am I too dark?? Or good riddance is in order?

Science / Re: Global Forest Watch
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:42:44 PM »
Yet, more acres have been burned in Siberia than in the Amazon. I understand the news cycle and the images but forest fires are a worldwide scourge....

However most Amazon fires are due to land clearing by farmers...

It is a sad state of affairs...

Consequences / Re: Floods
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:25:49 PM »
Not only that... the flow of rivers depend on the sea level..the consequences indeed cascade inwards...

Policy and solutions / Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:24:37 PM »
The biggest issue that I have is that there is no way to "de-risk" the scale-up other than global transport models that are not adequately quantitative there is no "mini earth system" physical model to understand what will happen. There is about 100% chance of an unexpected negative consequence. What they will focus is to try and convince us that the consequence is going to be less than doing nothing....

Yeah,  read about that yesterday. Fascinating in a terrifying way..!! I guess global weirding will accelerate...

Consequences / Re: Conservative Scientists & its Consequences
« on: August 23, 2019, 03:17:54 PM »
One funder of denying scientists down, one to go ?? Am I too dark?? Or good riddance is in order?

One down, one to go ?? Am I too dark?? Or good riddance is in order?

Consequences / Re: Floods
« on: August 23, 2019, 01:28:18 PM »
'100-year' floods will happen every 1 to 30 years, according to new flood maps

In a new paper published in the journal Nature Communications, researchers combined storm surge, sea level rise, and the predicted increased occurrence and strength in tropical storms and hurricanes to create a map of flood hazard possibility along the U.S. East Coast and Gulf of Mexico. Coastlines at northern latitudes, like those in New England, will face higher flood levels primarily because of sea level rise. Those in more southern latitudes, especially along the Gulf of Mexico, will face higher flood levels because of both sea level rise and increasing storms into the late 21st century.

More information: Reza Marsooli et al, Climate change exacerbates hurricane flood hazards along US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts in spatially varying patterns, Nature Communications (2019). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-11755-z

Policy and solutions / Re: When will CO2 emissions peak?
« on: August 23, 2019, 01:19:25 AM »
Less CO2 emissions per unit of consumption however is...

The rest / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: August 23, 2019, 01:07:13 AM »
You mean use reason, when asking?

Arctic sea ice / Re: Are you hoping to witness a BOE?
« on: August 23, 2019, 12:46:49 AM »
Two things are certain in life.... taxes and death....

Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: The Nares Strait thread
« on: August 23, 2019, 12:36:06 AM »
Mass tourism in the Arctic. Can you imagine the year after BOE?

Policy and solutions / Re: When will CO2 emissions peak?
« on: August 22, 2019, 01:06:10 PM »
Yes, do it for all, i agree! This is why i'm in favor of a $150 (+15%/year) carbon tax transferred directly into subsidies for renewables. This is how you accelerate the energy transition.

It has to be transferred back to the people....otherwise it is a very regressive tax. Poor and middle class spend higher percentage of their income to energy use.

Policy and solutions / Re: Space colonization
« on: August 21, 2019, 06:36:31 PM »
I am just saying...I'd rather fight it on the only habitable planet of the solar system. Some people have seen too much sci-fi....turning Mars habitable will take several hundred to a thousand years with more advanced tech than today

Policy and solutions / Re: Space colonization
« on: August 21, 2019, 06:26:28 PM »
To people that think space is the answer, good luck with that!!

Arctic sea ice / Re: meaningless freezingseason/melting season chatter.
« on: August 21, 2019, 06:20:58 PM »
I guess I cannot see

Policy and solutions / Re: When will CO2 emissions peak?
« on: August 21, 2019, 06:17:09 PM »
I found it by searching at google from

What are the environmental externalities of agriculture, forestry, building construction? Why aren't those counted for those sectors ? Do you think they are smaller ?  FF demand and use does not happen in vaccum or forced on to people.  The whole system of modern life is entangled with energy use. And usually the cheaper source wins.  Make FF more expensive and other sources will be used instead, preferably renewable. In the mean time if a tax subsidy is available to many companies why do FF ones have to be exempt from those? You want to count externalities as cost do it for all...

Arctic sea ice / Re: meaningless freezingseason/melting season chatter.
« on: August 21, 2019, 05:48:49 PM »
My new profile picture is an old one from Facebook that seems suitable for this forum. Nobody ever got it on Facebook... So I wonder... Can YOU see it?  :o

Where is the damn ice....

Consequences / Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« on: August 21, 2019, 05:40:12 PM »
Global Warming: How Fast?

Interesting graphs by Tamino.

So what can we say about Earth’s warming rate right now? Based on the smoothed model, I’d say it’s almost surely between 1.66 and 2.67 deg.C/century. The average rate from 1970 to now was between 1.70 and 1.95 deg.C/century. Note that the values from the straight-line model are well within the uncertainty range of the smoothed model, so we don’t have statistically significant evidence of any recent change in the warming rate since 1970. It’s certainly possible, we just don’t have solid evidence for it.
My opinion: the present warming rate is about 2.23 deg.C/century, but could be as low as 1.66 or 2.67. It might be substantially higher than its average-since-1970 value of 1.83, but then again it might not.

My other opinion: given that the uncertainty is so large, we should at least be prepared for the possibility that right now, Earth is warming substantially faster than it has for the last 50 years. If that’s true, it’s a matter of serious concern.

Policy and solutions / Re: When will CO2 emissions peak?
« on: August 21, 2019, 05:34:09 PM »
But along came new technology to exploit the Tar Sands and fracking of the Texas Permian et al. Now there are questions on whether those additional unconventional resources are close to maximum  annual production levels, which combined with depletion of conventional fields could reduce overall production capacity. If there is confirmatory data about this, I guess its kept under wraps.

I agree with what you said Gerontocrat and want to add, the low hanging fruits are gone. Oil production will be more expensive in the future. You always have to drill deeper or move mountains or whatnot.

Today it's done due to the massive subsidies. Who knows how long people allow this to happen. And then the oil industry goes poof anyway.

Just to note sth ( from Forbes) but that information is available everywhere...

The top six “subsidies” included in the $10-$18.5 billion estimates are as follows:

Master Limited Partnerships ($3.9 billion “subsidy”) – Ending the MLP “subsidy” would result in MLP’s being considered corporations that must be taxed before their distributions are passed along to shareholders. Therefore, any MLP income would be taxed at the corporate level and then again at the dividend level. Distributions to shareholders would be impacted substantially. Preventing double taxation is not a subsidy. MLPs also exist for Real Estate and other industries. Furthermore, the “subsidy” affects people across the spectrum from Pensioners, 401ks holders, to widows and orphans – hardly a “subsidy” for the oil and gas industry.

Intangible Drilling Costs ($3.5 billion “subsidy” – low estimate is $780 million) – Intangible Drilling Costs are essentially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currently, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. In what world would money spent that may or may not be recovered be capitalized as an asset?

Royalty Payment Reductions on Federal Lands ($2.2 billion “subsidy”) While paying no royalties on some offshore plots and reduced royalties in some regions might be considered a break by many. The incomes derived from operations are taxed at the same levels as any other income – hardly a “subsidy”.

Depletion Allowance ($1 billion subsidy – low estimate is $900 million) The depletion allowance allows companies to treat reserves in the ground as a capitalized asset that may be written down by 15% per year. The government only allows the “subsidy” for independent producers. Integrated oil companies such as Exxon, BP etc. are not allowed the exemption. Companies across the US are allowed a depreciation deduction for taxation purposes. The oil & gas industry should not be an exception.

Domestic Manufacturing Deduction ($1.7 billion per year – low estimate is $574 million) – Congress passed the tax break in 2004 to encourage manufacturing companies to maintain their operations in the US. The tax break has been extended to oil & gas companies and allows them to deduct 9% of their income from operations. Critics charge that companies would not leave for a lower tax rate. Ever looked at how much cheaper it would be to operate a refinery in another country? Furthermore, the tax break extends to companies across multiple business segments – not just the oil & gas sector.

Foreign Tax Credit ($900 million) The tax break allows US companies to deduct taxes paid in foreign countries from profits when the money is returned to the US. Of all the tax breaks, calling the Foreign Tax Credit a subsidy for the oil & gas industry has to be the most egregious. The US Federal Government allows any corporation doing business outside of the US the same exception.

Several “subsidies” totaling an additional $3 billion combine to complete the $18.5 billion estimate.

In addition to the $18.5 billion in “subsidies” states also grant an additional $3 billion in tax breaks to the oil & gas sector that can be considered subsides. Politicians and political pundits tend to lump state and federal subsidies together. Shockingly, nobody holds them accountable for their misstatements. In addition to the “subsidies” given to oil & gas company operations, politicians attempt to lump in an additional $16 billion in consumption incentives to the oil & gas industry. Consumption incentives range from direct subsidies to low income households for heating oil to tax breaks for farmers, and the US military. It seems that these should be classified as breaks for farmers and the military rather than to oil & gas industry. To somehow get to the $52 billion total, activists then lump in the military costs to defend shipping lanes and pipelines in the Middle East.

Now let’s analyze what the oil & gas sector pays in taxes. In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.

I only see a couple of subsidies that are not claimed by other industries too..although I am sure mining of all shorts has similar ones.

So which are the massive subsidies that oil and gas industry has ??

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: August 21, 2019, 03:40:32 PM »
Walmart sues Tesla for negligence after repeated solar system fires

Walmart Inc on Tuesday sued Tesla Inc, accusing it of “widespread negligence” that led to repeated fires of its solar systems and asking a court to force Tesla to remove solar panels from more than 240 of its U.S. stores.

Solar energy systems installed and maintained by the electric car maker were responsible for fires at seven locations, with dozens showing hazardous problems such as loose wiring and “hot spots” on panels, according to court papers filed in New York State Supreme Court.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 17, 2019, 06:16:53 PM »
The big dip after 2007-2008 was due to the economic downturn.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 30