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 - Ktb

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: April 03, 2020, 04:08:58 PM »
Wind in excess of 50 kph pushing ice out the Fram. Greater than 55 kph north of Greenland moving ice in that direction as well.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: April 01, 2020, 09:42:06 AM »
Semimonthly BOE evaluation.

The max was reached on March 3rd. Extent was 14,447,631 km2. As of March 31st, extent is 13,599,874 km2. With on average 166 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -75,903 km2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

We had a 10 day stretch in early March with many small gains and small losses, the result was extent dropped by only -14,622 km2 during that period. Thus greatly hampering the massive impact on averages that our two century drops had.

Total extent loss so far this season is -847,767 km2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -30,277 km2. This is the 3rd highest average daily loss from maximum to March 31st (2007-2020), behind 2014 (Minimum on March 20th) and 2019 (Minimum on March 12). (See Attachment 2).

Although it is worth noting that the total extent loss from maximum is 2nd highest on record behind only 2019. 2019 lost ~50,000 km2 more in 9 fewer days. Wow. (See Attachment 3).

Keep in mind that there are a wide range of minimums since 2007, ranging from Feb 24th to March 31st.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: March 07, 2020, 03:27:18 PM »
Slater's Projection is up and running for those interested.

Science / Re: Global Forest Watch
« on: March 02, 2020, 09:31:15 AM »
Evaluation of primary vs secondary rainforest on Australia's east coast. No paper provided as this is original research, just felt like posting after the data had been punched through Rstudio.

Units are natural log transformed biomass (tonnes) per hectare. i.e. e^5.444 tonnes/hectare.

Data collected at ten 20 m x 20 m plots at the secondary forest site (site 1), and ten 20 m x 20 m plots at the primary rainforest site (site 2). Trees only included if diameter at breast height was greater than 10 cm.

At site 1 (~40 years after clearance, unrestricted growth, passive management), the aboveground biomass was found to be 5.4440 units.

At site 2, aboveground biomass was found to be 1.2051 units greater than the secondary rainforest AGB (P value = 3.96e-07).

Tree biomass is approximately half carbon. The carbon sequestered at site 1 is approximately 231 tonnes per hectare after 40 years. Compared to 772 tonnes of carbon per hectare at site 2.

Planting trees won't save us. It will help more than leaving land fallow. But good lord, it will not save us.

Edit: Looking back at my Rstudio inputs, natural log was supposed to be used not log base 10. Adjustments have been made. Still massive difference between Primary and secondary rainforest. Sorry for the mistake.

Edit again: My adviser laughed at me

Consequences / Re: Global recession
« on: March 01, 2020, 11:43:28 AM »
Watched The Big Short again today.

Good lord we are not ready for the next financial crisis or recession.

Some 40% of Americans would struggle to come up with $400 for an unexpected expense.


Everybody's favorite post debate post. Nevada 2/19/2020.

Winners: Elizabeth Warren. Holy cow, way to absolutely skewer Bloomberg. Good lord. Imagine paying $300 million to be lambasted on national television. If I was Bloomberg, I would have attempted to skirt out during a commercial break. Disappointing that she had to add an attack on "revolution" leaving out millions of people. That simply is not true.

Mid tier: Bernie Sanders. Staying on message per usual. Solid defense against attacks from all sides. Joe Biden. Just doing Biden things. Nothing impressive. Not too much talking time.

Losers: Mayor Pete and Amy Klobuchar. Their back and forth was an absolute joy to watch. Pete looked terrible being as vicious as he was. All out offense. Classic that he thinks he can make points on race after the last debate. Was Klobuchar just writing down how much she hates Pete? Debate Moderator Chuck Todd. Dude attempted to hurt Sanders repeatedly, and it just did not work, did not land well, or was easily parried.

Catastrophic failure: Bloomberg. Pathetic. He looked like he had never been talked poorly about before. Billionaire insulation is real, must be shocking to not be surrounded by yes men all the time. All call outs on redlining, sexism, NDAs, stop-and-frisk, and more were greatly deserved.

I cannot wait to see the next set of polls. Perhaps a small Warren bump. But I expect Bloomberg to plummet.

Have yet to finish the debate. My link went bad and MSNBC's website kinda sucks.

Fan made Bernie ad.

Timestamp 1:57. A navy veteran talks about how his only solution to his medical debt is suicide. Supporting a system that allows this to happen is incomprehensible. The ad flashes stories about elderly couples committing suicide due to medical debt. Nobody should accept a system in which these things are commonplace, or possible at all.


Supporting anything other than medicare for all is criminal and those who do so are without conscience.

The forum / Re: Arctic Sea Ice Forum Humor
« on: February 07, 2020, 02:14:58 PM »

Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: February 07, 2020, 07:17:14 AM »

Electrochemical process
Nowadays, in the environmental field, the removal of TC by electrochemical technologies has received considerable attention.[15] By means of anodic oxidation, highly ordered TiO2 nanotube array electrodes were prepared in the electrolytes, respectively with HF acid solution and NH4F glycerol solution. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) results show that TiO2 nanotube arrays are of uniform morphology. The length of TiO2 nanotube arrays prepared in organic electrolyte is 3 μm, while the length prepared in aqueous solution is 300 nm. At the bias potential of 4 V, the photocurrents are 1.37 and 0.83 mA/cm2, respectively. By using the electrode of 3μm, the removal efficiency of 50 mg/L TC reaches about 93% within 180 min.[106] Carbon base membrane coated with nano Sbdoped SnO2(Sb-SnO2) was fabricated through sol-gel and heat-treatment process. The removal ratio of carbon membrane for TC increased significantly after coating with Sb-SnO2 under the condition of 2.5 V DC field. The TC removal ratio was still as high as 92.30% even the operation time was up to 12 h. This indicated that there would be promising application prospects for electrocatalytic membrane in the field of treating antibiotic wastewater in the near future.[107] The SnO2/quartz column particle electrode was prepared by dipping-calcination method. The optimum calcination temperature and calcination time to prepare SnO2/quartz column particle electrode were 550°C and 5h. When the cell voltage was 15 V and the dosage of particle electrode was 32g, they performed a pretty good electrocatalytic property in TC degradation. 88.60% TC was degraded in 2h and it was 25.30% higher than that in two-dimensional system.[108] With a facile photochemical method, degradation of TC hydrochloride (TC-HCl) Ag2O/g-C3N4 p-n heterojunctions were successfully fabricated through enhanced visible-light photosynthetic activity of Ag2O/g-C3N4 p-n heterojunctions synthesized via a photochemical route. Under visible light irradiation, this method regards as a photocatalyst in the degradation of antibiotic TC-HCl.[109] Electrochemical processes seemed to be fit for treating high concentrations of antibiotics from manufacturing wastewaters. By using electrochemical technology, the removal of TC was advanced, but the applicability of this process was limited for large scale. The high operating cost caused the high-energy consumption. It is still the principal disadvantage, which limits the application of the electrochemical process.[110]

Hydrolysis process
Hydrolysis is the main way to degrade TC in the water environment.[111] The hydrolysis of TC is strongly influenced by pH and temperature. TC degradation ratio increased with the increasing of pH and temperature. Ionic strength does not affect the hydrolysis of TC.[112] The functions of biological treatment systems may be limited by high concentrations of TC in wastewater. Yi et al. (2016) established a pretreatment method for TC production wastewater by using an enhanced hydrolysis process under the optimization of temperature and pH conditions.[113] This research showed that the TC hydrolysis rate was accelerated by 2.22–2.74-fold with an increase of 10°C. When the pH value was increased from 3 to 11 at 85°C, the hydrolysis half-life of TC was shortened by 3.23-fold. The half-life of TC at pH 7 and pH 11 could be shortened from 5.5 to 0.93 h and from 3.7 to 0.59 h, by elevating the temperature from 65 to 85°C. Kang et al. (2012) measured the first order hydrolysis rate constants of TC at pH 5, 7, and 9 using batch tests. The value was highest at pH 7 for TC, indicating short environmental half-lives of TC. For TC, half-lives were approximately 7–10 days at pH 7. It also was found that the degradation ratio of TC was much faster when the solution was passed through a silica column or silica sand was present in a batch solution. This indicates that the silica surface may serve as a catalyst for hydrolysis and that the actual environment half-lives of TC could be shorter than those estimated from laboratory hydrolysis rate constants.[114] Hydrolysis time is longer and the effect is limited. It can be used as an auxiliary means of degradation of TC.

Ultrasonic degradation
As new technology of water treatment, ultrasonic degradation has received wide attention in the removal of TC.[115] Ultrasonic degradation technology can generate instantaneous high temperature and instantaneous high pressure by using ultrasonic activation to activate the nucleate and break chemical bonds of pollutants in liquids. At the same time, vapors produce HO to oxidize organic pollutants in liquids at high temperature and high pressure. Then, those pollutants would become molecules and ions, which are easier to deal with. Researchers found that the average ratio of removal of TC by ultrasonic degradation technology was 63.89%.[116] Ultrasonic degradation technology has a wide range of application, but it needs more moderate degradation conditions, and higher cost and energy consumption, which have restricted the development of ultrasonic degradation technology.[117]

Low-temperature plasma technology
Low-temperature plasma technology is the use of a large number of ions generated by the active particle of ultraviolet light, ozone and electronic radiation as the conditions for the occurrence, thereby accelerating the degradation of pollutants in chemical reactions and to achieve the removal effect of the technology.[118] Under natural conditions, half-life of TC is 7.5 h.[119] However, TC removed by low-temperature plasma technology in a short time. Previous report deemed that the removal ratios of TC under the conditions that synergism of electron radiation, ozone and ultraviolet light which could accelerate the degradation of TC were higher than that under the individual conditions.[69,70,76–82,120,121] Low-temperature plasma technology is a simple and convenient operation, without adding chemical agents and other advantages, but its reaction condition, reaction rate and quantity are difficult to control, disinfection by-products produced in the process of reaction is also a problem to be solved.

Enzyme degradation
Li et al. (2016) chose the crude enzyme of lignin peroxidase (Lip) from Phanerochaete chrysosporium as the research object.[54] The results indicated that the limitation of carbon, nitrogen and low concertation of Mn2+ were important factors for enzyme production. Lip had a strong ability of TC degradation with initial concentrations of 10 , 25, 50, and 100 mg/L, the degradation rate being 62, 80, 82, and 90%, respectively. However, this method is limited by the industrial production of enzyme.

Conclusion and future directions in pollution control technology of TC
This review examines the contamination and control of TC in groundwater. Firstly, it elaborated on the livestock and poultry farming industry in rural areas where TC is the primary source of surface water. Secondly, the survey found that TC was commonly used in medicine and veterinary medicine. Thirdly, effects of toxicity of TC in groundwater and its biology were studied. Finally, the application conditions, mechanism, advantages, and disadvantages of various TC control technologies were summarized.

The above review shows that TC poses a threat to aquatic organisms, aquatic animals, plants, and microbes in groundwater. Therefore, this paper presents a variety of methods such as photodegradation, microbial degradation, phytodegradation, sludge digestion technology, membrane processes, adsorption processes, advanced oxidation processes, electrochemical process, and hydrolysis process to deal with the environmental risks brought by ex situ groundwater. Nevertheless, these methods could also be used to treat drinking waters issued from groundwater. There is no doubt that in situ treatment of groundwater is one of the most important is our future research direction. These methods have their shortcomings, and the treatment technology is not enough to fully remove TC currently. Therefore, the application and improvement of various detection techniques and treatment methods should continue to be strengthened. Combined with pollution situation of TC in groundwater, there are further research directions following aspects:

(1) Photocatalysts for the efficient removal of TC should be studied. As demonstrated by Hong et al. (2016) who applied photodegradation, it was possible to use entirely new Nb2O5/g–C3N4(niobium pentoxide/graphitic-like carbon nitride) heterojunctions made by a simple one-step heating strategy for removing TC, which would bring about potential application in removing of TC pollutant and solar energy conversion. It was found that the new heterojunction showed the highest photocatalytic efficiency for TC–HCl degradation and excellent photocatalytic recyclability.[122] Then, a new nano-photocatalyst of TC was born as recently exemplified by Omorogie et al. (2017), which enhanced its surface area/pore structure and photoactivity by decreasing the electron-hole pair recombination.[123] Moreover, the development of multiresponsive catalytic materials was a wonderful subject for forwarding to the understanding on catalysis and removing mechanism, which had already being studied by Tu et al. (2017).[124] They developed a series of different forms of Bi4Ti3O12 catalyst, including nanorods, flake assembled microspheres, hollow microspheres and cubic nested assembly. This catalyst had general photoreactivity for various contaminants and antibiotics such as bisphenol A, rhodamine B, chlortetracycline and tetracycline hydrochloride.[124]

(2) Biodegradable repair which is based on enzymatic degradation is a relatively recent field of research and a promising technology to remove TC from groundwater. Taheran et al. (2017) have been done a supernacular exploring who used enzymatic degradation with laccase to remove pharmaceutical compounds from aqueous media. In this study, laccase was immobilized on a homemade polyacrylonitrile-biochar composite nanofiber membrane and then biocatalyst was used to remove antibiotics from the water.[125] Conventional biological processes can still pose threat to groundwater. So the hybrid process combined with biological or physical technology will remove efficiently. Advancing biological technologies and Membrane Bio–Reactor hybrid systems are considered as one promising technology for removing TC. On the other hand, it is important to discuss the harm of microbial oxidative degradation products of TC. It is very promising to elucidate the degradation of degradation products in environment and their role in the formation of microbial communities. It’s necessary to analyze the ecological risk-assessment to reduce the risks we would cause.

(3) Standard removal process can remove most TC. It’s possible to focus on the treatment of trace TC. The minority pays attention to remove trace TC, Yang et al. (2017) have studied that the fate of trace organic contaminants.[126] The results of this report showed the pervasive presence of 17 trace organic contaminants (TrOCs) in sewage sludge and highlighted the importance of evaluating TrOC removal through mass balance calculations. This calculation took into account the distribution and biodegradation between aqueous and solid phase. In addition, the substrate concentration required for advanced oxidation technology is generally higher than the actual concentration of antibiotic in water. Therefore, it is necessary to study the advanced oxidation method combined with traditional technology to avoid secondary pollution.

(4) The production of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) has been considered as a rising contaminant which would be a pivotal danger to groundwater in worldwide. In order to further understand the migration and transformation of TC in environment, at the same time, improving the control of TC prediction model in groundwater, it is benefit to take different ways to deal with its diverse forms. Some heavy metals, fungicides, and TC have a co-selection effect on bacterial microbes, so the degradation of TC by resistant bacterial microorganisms in groundwater will also be the focus of future research. Zhou et al. (2017) thought that it was significant to control ARG spread in the agriculture sector within the globe.[127]

Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: February 07, 2020, 07:16:50 AM »

Another alternative research method is called as vitro testing,[50] which found that the enzyme activity as a sub-lethal toxicity test indicators could also provide ecological toxicity estimates.[51,52] Babin et al. (2005) tested the toxicity of TC antibiotics (mainly for oxytetracycline and TC) to fish, using fish RTG-2 and RTL-W1 cell lines for test tube toxicity testing.[10] This operation replaces the direct toxicity test. The activity of EROD (ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase) and β-galactosidase activity were used as toxic endpoints, and the oxytetracycline and TC solutions were used in order. The test showed that TC and oxytetracycline inhibited the activity of EROD and β-galactosidase. The EC50 of EROD in TC was 167.63mg/L, and the EC50 of β-galactosidase in TC reached 84.59 mg/L.[10] So the toxicity of oxytetracycline was slightly lower than that of TC.

Effects of TC on plants in water environment
Holling-Sorenson et al. (2000)[11] and Holten et al. (1999)[53] used toxicological tests on Microcystis aeruginosa, Chlorella algae using TC antibiotics in different fisheries. The contents of TC in M. aeruginosa was higher than in green algae. Holling-Sorenson showed that TC drugs were toxic or medium toxic chemicals in aquatic algae.[11] In addition, Jiang et al. (2010) also studied the toxic effects of TC on the photosynthesis and antioxidant enzyme activities of M. aeruginosa.[54] Authors thought that TC could hinder the photosynthesis of M. aeruginosa.[54] At the same time, the inhibitory effect increases with the increase of TC concentration. TC will destroy the antioxidant enzymes and inhibit the growth of algae eventually.

Effects of TCs on microbes in water environment
Dijek et al. (1976) studied the effects of 21 antibiotics including TC on 36 typical microbes in water.[55] The results showed that only 7 kinds of microorganisms were sensitive to antibiotics, and the other 29 species had natural resistance to common antibiotics. Back-haus et al. (1999) studied the five commonly used antibiotics using the long-term bioluminescence inhibition test of Vibrio spp.[56] The results showed that the above antibiotics were highly toxic, most of the EC50 are less than 1 mg/L. Tetracycline hydrochloride was the most potent in all 20 tested antibiotics. The EC90 (concentration for 90% of maximal effect), EC50 and EC10 (concentration for 10% of maximal effect) of TC hydrochloride were 0.0738 ng/L, 0.025 mg/L, 0.0046 mg/L, respectively.[57]

Degradation methods of TC
Photodegradation refers that a molecule absorbs energy of lights into an excited state and causes various reactions. TC directly absorbs photons and leads to the light reaction which called direct photodegradation. Adding the light-absorbing substance, the light reaction is called indirect photodegradation.[58] Verma et al. (2007) studied the degradation of TC in sterilized water and found that the half-life of TC was 2 days under light conditions while 18 days under dark conditions.[59] This study had confirmed by other researchers, Garcia-Rodriguez et al. (2013) studied found that TC in water could be removed by photodegradation.[60] The molecular structure of TC determines whether the antibiotic can undergo photodegradation. TC molecules contain amido group (CONH2) whose carbon-nitrogen bond (C-N) is easily fracture into substances which called amino under the photodegradation reaction.[18] The efficiency of direct photodegradation of TC is low. Some researches had proved that under natural light and ultraviolet light the degradation ratio of TC after 1h were 27.2% and 73.2%, respectively.[61] Photosensitizer, as a light energy carrier, can change the light stability of compounds, thereby accelerating the photolysis. Strong photosensitizer can accelerate the photodegradation of TC by capturing free radicals in the TC reaction system that photosensitizer could catch ·O2−, H+ and ·OH. In nature environment, indirect photodegradation is the main way of the degradation of TC. There are widely photosensitizers in nature, such as humus, vitamin B2, NO2−, Fe3 +, Fe2 +, NaCl and TiO2. The mechanisms of photosensitizer how to accelerating the photodegradation of TC are similar, for example, TiO2 can rapidly improve the photodegradation rate of TC. Only under the ultraviolet light, visible light and long wave ultraviolet light irradiation, it is almost undetectable that degradation of TC. However, TC degraded 50% at 10min with TiO2(0.5g/L).[62] Under the sunlight and mercury lamp, the removal ratio of TC could achieve 80% after 30 min with TiO2 and ZnO at the same time.[63] TCs mainly adsorb on the surface of TiO2 and occur photocatalytic oxidation which conform the first-order reaction kinetic equation. This adsorption process plays a controlling role in the overall photodegradation.[64] In nature, the photodegradation of TC is greatly influenced by pH. At different pH conditions, the molecular structure of TC has dissociable functional groups that morphology is different. The negative ions are unstable so that they could easily absorb photons and occur photodegradation. With the increase of pH, the photodegradation of TC is enhanced and the alkaline conditions are more favorable for the photodegradation of TC.[65] Oxygen-free radicals are another important factor, which could affect the photodegradation of TC. TCs generate riboflavin (Rf) and superoxide radical anion (·O2−) by transfer of ground-state electron, stimulate the triplet (3Rf*), and then transfer the energy to the dissolved oxygen, at the same time produce singlet molecular oxygen, thereby promote TC degradation.[66] Besides, the photodegradation of TC is also affected by light intensity, light time, initial concentration and ionic strength.[67] Though photodegradation reaction is quick and efficient, making a large area of ultraviolet light and other light source is difficult and adding photosensitizers may have side effects. Therefore, the production and control of light sources, suitable photosensitizers and multi-component combinations to cope with wastewater are the focus in the future research.

Microbial degradation
Microbes can change the structure and physico-chemical properties of TC, which is degradation of TC from macromolecules into small molecule compounds until it converts to H2O and CO2.[68] In the degradation of TC, drug-resistant bacterium plays an important role that can directly destroy and modify the TC and make it inactivated. Several typical bacteria are shown in Table 2. There are about three kinds of degradation mechanisms of TC as follows.[72] First, hydrolysis, drug-resistant bacterium cause that TC lose their activities by enzymes eliminating chemical bong which are easily to hydrolyze and sensitive, such as the amide bond. Acetylation, acetylation is a common mechanism for bacteria to inactivate TC. Drug-resistant bacterium causes TC to lose target-binding ability and makes them inactivated by covalent modification of active groups of TC such as hydroxyl or amide groups of TC. Third, the redox is a vital mechanism for degradation of TC. TC can be oxidized by resistant enzyme, which called TetX. Related studies have shown that the addition of exogenous microorganisms into pig manure can improve the degradation of TC.[73] Microbial degradation, which is highly effective, is difficult to screening of microbial strain and control of combination conditions of compounds. At present, microbial degradation is widely used in the composting and wastewater treatment process.[74]

Table 2. Degradation of tetracycline by several typical plants.

CSVDisplay Table
Plants can degrade TC through direct absorption, exudate of root, and microbial transformation of root system.[75] There are typical plants shown in Table 3. Phytodegradation may be the most viable method to fundamentally remediate the wastewater contaminated by TC. The most common ways of phytodegradation are filter bed of aquatic plant and wetland remediation system.[83] Eichhornia crassipes could remove TC in water, and it can remove 80% TC when the concentration of TC was less than 2.5mg/L. However, the removal of TC in water by aquatic vegetables effects by season. In summer, the TC removal efficiency of cress filtration system was significantly higher than that of spinach filtration system, and the TC removal rates were 71.83 and 33.28%, respectively. While in winter, there was no significant difference in TC removal rates between them.[71] There are many advantages of aquatic plant filter bed, such as it could remove TC without chemical reagents and secondary pollution, low costs, and efficient. However, aquatic plant filter bed needs the large area and may produce stink. Therefore, this technology is more suitable for degradation of TC in wastewater in oxidation ponds around large scale farms and towns.[84] When using the constructed wetland to remove TC, the removal efficiency of TC by different wetland plants is different, and the accumulation of TC was different in different parts of wetland plants.[85] In addition, the matrix property of artificial wetland and its relationship with other structural elements should be considered.[86] Though there are several common matrix, such as slag, cinder, clay, and zeolite, the selection of artificial wetland matrices for TC removal is still to be studied in the future.

Table 3. Degradation of tetracycline by several typical fungus.

CSVDisplay Table
Table 4. Degradation of tetracycline by membrane processes.

CSVDisplay Table
Table 5. Degradation of tetracycline by adsorption processes.

CSVDisplay Table
Table 6. Degradation of tetracycline by advanced oxidation processes.

CSVDisplay Table
Table 7. Degradation of tetracycline by electrochemical process.

CSVDisplay Table

Sludge digestion technology
Li et al. (2013)[96] studied the removal of trace amounts of TC in activated sludge reactors and found that the vast majority of TC was removed by sludge adsorption with negligible biodegradability.[87] Lapara et al. (2011) found that the vast majority of TC is present in the sludge sedimentary facies, so there were still amount of TC in the wastewater which was treated.[88] Therefore, the sludge digestion process had a potential prospective to remove TC. According to the recent research on sludge digestion technology, TC removal efficiency is more significant under anaerobic conditions than that under aerobic conditions, the high temperature anaerobic system is better than the medium temperature anaerobic system, and the removal rate increases with the increasing temperature; in the same digestion system, the efficiency of removing TC increases with the higher sludge age.[89] How to adjust the influential factors, such as oxygen consumption, temperature and sludge age, to achieve a better removal result is worth to study in the future. Moreover, sludge bulking, single component, and low removing rate of TC are all problems of sludge digestion technology to solve in the future.

Membrane processes
Membrane technology is a new type of separation enrichment technology, which is the use of membrane for the selective permeability of mixture components, to achieve the separation and purification. The nanofiltration membrane (NF) and reverse osmosis (RO) technology are the most promising methods removing TC. Nevertheless, RO, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration techniques could remove to a lot of organic matter naturally occurring in the water matrix and the concentration of dissolved salts.[90] A electrocatalytic filtration membrane with high degradation efficiency about 96.50% after 6 h and low cost was fabricated by coating nano antimony-doped tin dioxide (Sb-SnO2) on a porous coal-based carbon membrane through sol-gel method.[91] Rejection of the examined TC is acceptably high for the selected RO and the tight NF membranes, in most cases, more than 98.50%.[92] H4SiW12O40 (SiW12)/cellulose acetate (CA) composite nanofibrous membrane was prepared by electrospinning in which CA was employed as the support of SiW12. Under ultraviolet irradiation, the as-prepared composite membrane exhibited enhanced photocatalytic activity in the decomposition of TC compared with pure and provided more contact area between SiW12 and the pollutant in TC photodegradation process. The optimal mass ratio of SiW12 to cellulose acetate (CA) was 1:4, and the corresponding degradation ratio for TC was 63.80%.[93] TC can be degraded by anaerobic/aerobic MBBR (A/O – MBBR) process bout 41.79%, but with increasing concentration of TC in the water, the system of TC removal ratio is declining, and fell more and more bigger.[94]

Adsorption processes
Adsorption is a process that contaminants shift from liquid to a solid surface. Granular activated carbon adsorbent is the most popular, however, expense of activated carbon is the major disadvantage at present.[95] In the investigation of the adsorption process of TC on anaerobic granular sludge during anaerobic digestion of animal wastewater, the effects of initial pH, humic acid concentration, and temperature on the removal of TC by anaerobic granular sludge from aqueous solution were investigated using the batch adsorption technique in 100mL flasks with 75 mL of work volume. The results showed that the highest removal ratio was 93% at pH 3 and the removal ratio at the neutral pH range (pH 6–8) was about 91.50%.[96] Adsorption characteristics of TC onto alumina were investigated according to series of adsorption experiments. The adsorption mechanism was dissected at molecular level by molecular dynamics simulation. Analysis of radial distribution function showed that TC could be adsorbed effectively by alumina mainly through non-bond interaction. The results illustrated that the absorption was influenced by alumina dosage, temperature, and oscillating frequency. The optional temperature was 25℃. The removal ratio of TC increased from 53.73 to 86.44%, which the alumina dosage was from 0.10 g/L to 2.00 g/L. The removal ratio of TC increased by 28.78%,which oscillation frequency was from 90 to 200 r/min.[97] Adsorption of TC onto activated carbon prepared from lign in by H3PO4 impregnated was studied.[98] The maximum adsorption capacity of TC calculated by the Langmuir isotherm model was 475.48 mg/g. The unsaturated polyester resin can be used as an effective and low-cost adsorbent to remove TC from aqueous solution.[99] In order to increase the adsorption of TC from aqueous solution, Fe-incorporated SBA15 (Fe-SBA15) with different contents of Fe (III) was synthesized. The results showed that Fe-SBA15 had better adsorption capacity of TC than that of SBA15.[100] The adsorption of TC onto silica particles was studied. The results showed that the enthalpy and entropy of adsorption were approximately – 16  and – 25 J/mol, respectively.[101]

Advanced oxidation processes
Advanced oxidation processes based on the oxidation of free radicals reaction technology. The technology for processing hard biodegradable organic matter in water and wastewater have the characteristics of high efficiency and no secondary pollution. The oxidation degradation effects of TC residues in pharmaceutical wastewater with H2O2, HClO4, and NaClO were studied. The degradation ratios of TC by H2O2, HClO4, and NaClO were 80, 88, and 100%, respectively.[102] Degradation of TC with Fenton reagent showed that the optimum reaction conditions were as follows: H2O2/Fe2+ of 10:1, pH 3.0 and H2O2 dosage of 1.58 mmol/L. Under these conditions, using a two-beam UV-Vis spectrophotometer to quantify TC at 360nm, finding that 0.10 mmol/L of TC degraded by 88.47% within 60 min of reaction.[103] In the experiment of ozone oxidation to remove TC from wastewater, the best process conditions are normal temperature, initial pH is 9.0 wastewater ozone dosing quantity is 400 mg/min, ozone oxidation time is 2h. Under this condition, the TC removal ratio is remarkable, TC concentration from 672 mg/L to below 50 mg/L.[104] The removal performance of the TC in water by using potassium ferrate was investigated. It was found that TC can be removed by ferrate efficiently and quickly, and the optimal pH value range for TC degradation is 9–10. The removal efficiency of TC and reaction ratio were increased with lager dosage of ferrate. During the first 60s, TC occurred the major degradation, over the next 10–20 min, TC occurred further degradation. At Fe (VI):TC molar ratios of 1:1 and 1:5, approximately 100% of the TC were removed after 60 s. Though conversion of TC is quick, TC only occurred a small reduction. It implicated that most of TC transformed into intermediate products without complete mineralization.[105]

Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: February 07, 2020, 07:15:57 AM »
Ktb's note -- don't feel like adding the graphics at this time. Exhausted. May return at a later date to upload the graphs/images.

Paper is paywalled.

A review on pollution situation and treatment methods of tetracycline in groundwater

In recent years, the use of drugs has increased yearly, and the situation of drug abuse has become more serious, which caused the drug remained in the environment. Meanwhile, the residual drug in the environment was relatively stable and difficult to handle by conventional methods. Among the numerous drugs which existed in the environment, antibiotics were widely used in the world.

In the past few decades, the use of drugs was growing rapidly. Tetracycline antibiotics (TCs) were the most common antibiotics all over the world. TCs are a family of broad-spectrum antibiotics produced or semi-synthesized by actinomycetes and they are effective against to Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria as well as against a variety of bacterial infections. TCs are a class of tetrahydrobenzene derivatives with a dibasic tetraphenyl base structure. TCs mainly contain TC, oxytetracycline and chlortetracycline. The overall structure of oxytetracycline was found by Woodward et al. (1947) by chemical degradation and infrared spectroscopy.[1] Chlortetracycline is isolated from the culture medium of Streptomyces spp. TC is obtained by getting rid of the chlorine atom of the chlortetracycline.[2] TC plays an important role in TCs, it’s also the largest proportion of in TCs. TC also has many advantages, such as, low prices, high quality. TC has also many advantages such as low production prices and could be synthesized with great purity. However, TC is difficult to be absorbed by animal metabolism, most of which is in the form of maternal compounds discharged into the environment by the excrement. It can be residual in the water for a long-term.[3] The amount of TC in most countries of the world has no clear rules. The uncontrolled usage of TC and its arbitrary released into the environment pose a certain threat to the ecological environment. TC affects the development of teeth, bones and also has certain hepatotoxicity. The researcher found that high levels of fecal waste might bring huge pollution problems once they came into groundwater.[4] TC excreted by human and animal enters the water environment. It could cause water pollution, after infiltration, leaching, and other processes. The contents of TC in surface water and groundwater were more than 100.00 ng/L in the wet season in Hanjiang plain.[4]

Research of TC pollution to groundwater and its treatment technology are great significance to human health. TC was detected at a concentration of 184.2 ng/L in shallow groundwater in china.[5] Although TC is not easy to cause acute toxicity in normal circumstances, long-term exposure to TC in water environment may be the potential for chronic toxicity to non-target organisms.[3] In order to solve the residual TC, researchers used variety methods to deal with TCs in groundwater.[6] Most removal methods of TC could not directly remove groundwater pollution. Generally, TC is removed indirectly by wastewater, and the methods also applied to drinking water. There were various methods of TC removal in water environment, and their degradation efficiency was different. This article described the commonly used TC removal methods included, photodegradation, microbial degradation, phytodegradation, adsorption processes and electrochemical processes.[7] The new methods of TC degradation include sludge digestion technology, membrane processes, advanced oxidation processes, hydrolysis process, ultrasonic degradation, low-temperature plasma technology and soil infiltration system.[8] This article indicated the status, amount, source, toxicity, and removal methods of TC in groundwater. It would provide a reference for the property and treatment of TC in groundwater.

Physicochemical properties of TC
TC is mainly synthetized as an odorless yellow crystalline powder. TC is slightly soluble in water, lower in alcohols (methanol, ethanol, etc.), and insoluble in organic solvents.[9] TC is dissolved in dilute acid and dilute alkali. TC antibiotic is stable in the air, but it is easy to absorb moisture. The case of sunlight can change the color of TC. The efficacy of TC will be significantly reduced or even produce toxicity. TCs have similar physicochemical properties, such as the similar chemical structure and molecular weight. The differences among TCs are the groups of R1 and R3, which are shown on Table 1. The main physical and chemical properties of TCs are shown in Fig. 1. TC mainly consists with four carbocycles, which contains dimethylamino group (N(CH3)2), acylamino group (CONH2), phenolic hydroxyl group (C-OH), a ketone group (C = O) and an enol group conjugate double bond system at the same time. TC is a kind of quaternary weak acid, there are four kinds of forms in aqueous solution. When the pH is less than 3.3, the dimethylamino group in the TC molecular structure is protonated, mainly in the presence of cation TCH3+. When the pH value is 3.3–7.7, the TC molecules in the phenolic ketone group lost protons, with zwitterions TCH2±. When the pH value is more than 7.7, the TC molecules is in the form of anion TCH2− or the divalent anion TC2-.[12,13] The different forms of TC according to pH are shown in Fig. 2.

Table 1. The molecular weight and molecular formula of tetracycline antibiotics.

CSVDisplay Table
Figure 1. The structural formula of tetracycline.

Display full size
Figure 2. The presence of TC in different pH conditions.

Display full size
The source and pollution conditions of TC
The amount of TC was not clearly defined in the initial. Therefore, the abuse of TC has emerged in the world. China’s total antibiotic production reached 21000 tons in 2009, accounts for about half the world’s consumption.[14,15] Because of the broad spectrum of antibacterial and stable naphthalene ball structure, TC was difficult to degrade.[16] A small fraction of TC came into the body to produce inactive products through metabolic reactions such as cleavage and glucuronidation.[17] The antibiotic metabolites that excreted from the body were still biologically active, and they could form a matrix in the environment and even produce more degraded substances than pre-degraded.[18,19] About 69–86% of the TC antibiotics were excreted through the urine and feces of the human body and animals, then they were released into the environment in an active form.[18] TC has a high degree of hydrophilicity and low volatility, with significant persistence in water environment. The inappropriate use of TC poses a threat to human health and ecological security. TC carried in the feces contacts the soil and further enters the surface water. In the long run, TC in surface water penetrates into groundwater. At present, the control of the groundwater environment is still not perfect. TC entering the groundwater is difficult to detect. It is difficult to identify the pollutants and sources when groundwater is contaminated. Therefore, it is imperative to study the source of TC and its pollution in groundwater.[20]

The source, the use, and the pollution situation of TC
The source of TC contamination is mainly from human and veterinary drugs. The main source of TC contamination is shown in Fig. 3. As for human drugs, TC enters into human body through the way of injection and oral consumption. However, due to the lack of restraint mechanisms, antibiotics were used without abstinence. The antibiotics were discharged randomly, and made the adverse effect. There are three main sources of antibiotic pollution. The first source is the unused expired antibiotic used from the medical institution. Secondly, medical institutions have left antibiotics in discarded medical devices. Thirdly, the excrement of patient’s also carries raw antibiotics and metabolized antibiotics.[21] These unused antibiotics discharge into the environment through the urban sewage system. On the one hand, the antibiotics in treated wastewaters infiltrate in soils and surface waters, and enters into the groundwater indirectly. On the other hand, they enter the urban sewage treatment system. The existing sewage treatment technology can not completely remove the antibiotics. The biochemical treatment of wastewater in the microbial growth has a strong inhibitory effect, so the antibiotics are difficult to degradation.[22,23] Once the antibiotic into the surface water, they will cause pollution of the water environment.

Figure 3. The migration of antibiotics in water environment.

Display full size
As for veterinary drugs, TC is often used as feed additives into animal. The use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and aquaculture are the two main sources of veterinary antibiotics. These antibiotics will also be into the water environment in the form of the animal excretion. According to the statistics, most of livestock and aquaculture exist in rural areas. Sewage treatment system is lacked in rural areas, so the fecal matter goes directly into surface water. TC issued from veterinary drugs does not reach directly groundwater. On the one hand, wastewaters containing TC are discharged in surface waters. Then, TC migrates to hyporheic zone and finally reaches groundwater. On the other hand, wastewaters can be discharged on soils and then they penetrate in the non-saturated zone. In consequence, TC infiltrates through the vadose zone before to reach groundwater.

In 1950s, the US Food and Drug Administration (UFA) formally approved the application of TC antibiotics to animal feed additives at first.[16] Because of the broad-spectrum and low prices, TCs has been widely promoted in the animal husbandry.[24,25] Statistically, the European Union annual production of antibiotics is about 5,000 tons, accounting for 46–50% of the total antibiotics.[9] Britain produces 438 tons of antibiotics each year, the production of TCs is 228 tons, accounting for 52% of the total antibiotics.[9] As for China, the production of TCs is about 97,000 tons, accounting for 46% of the total antibiotics.[9]

Antibiotics have created enormous economic benefits in human health and the development of animal husbandry.[26] TCs are widely used in veterinary drugs and treated for gastrointestinal tract, respiratory tract, skin infections, and sepsis and other diseases.[27,28] Taking TC veterinary drugs as an example, the total amount of TC antibiotics around the world is shown in Fig. 4. In recent years, people have found some new uses of TC antibiotics, especially non-antibacterial effects.[29] TC treatment of type Ⅲ prostatitis infected by Nanobacteria.[30] Injection of TC hydrochloride as a hardening agent, adjuvant treatment of malignant pleural effusion, treatment of liver and kidney cysts and other diseases.[31] TC and minocycline can be used as anti-osteoporosis drug.[32] Dr. Maria Amy (a medical researcher in New York State University) reports that Periostat (doxycycline monohydrate) is effective in the treatment of chronic gingivitis.[33]

Figure 4. The total amounts (tons) of TCs used for veterinary purposes around the world.

Display full size
The water pollution by antibiotics is a combination of point source and surface source emissions.[34] Because antibiotics are hydrophilic and low volatility, their main migration in the environment is through water and food transfer.[35,36] For instance, in China, most of groundwater pollution problems exist in the livestock and poultry breeding and aquaculture of rural China. There are several common problems, for example, the selection of farm site is not standardized, animal feces, and sewage discharge is not up to standard pollution prevention and control. The average content of residual TC in pigs is 9.09 mg/kg.[37] The Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China indicated that China’s annual livestock and poultry manure production is about 3.80 billion tons in 2016, however, the comprehensive utilization rate is less than 60%.[38] High levels of fecal waste might bring huge pollution problems once they come into the groundwater. These problems are superimposed on causing serious damage to TC antibiotics in surface water and groundwater of rural areas.[39]

At present, most countries and regions of the groundwater TC antibiotic pollution have not been systematically detected. And the literature of detection is very little. The researchers in Beijing Normal University, (2015) had a test to part of the surface water sampling in China.[40] They found that antibiotic content is amazing. The detection results of 19 kinds of sulfonamides, fluoroquinolones, TC, and macrolide in the Jianghan Plain in the surface water and groundwater in the dry season and the wet season shows that, the maximum concentrations of chlortetracycline in surface water and groundwater are 122.30 and 86.60 ng/L, respectively.[41] The contents of TC, ofloxacin, norfloxacin, and erythromycin in surface water and groundwater are more than 100.00, 135.10, 134.20, and 381.50ng/L, respectively.[41]

Effects of TC on aquatic animals in water environment
TC is difficult to cause acute toxicity, however, the long-term exposure to antibiotic in the environment may be the potential for chronic toxicity to non-target organisms. The widely use of TCs has caused the effect of micro-organisms in the terrestrial environment and plant growth.[42] The bacteria in natural environments can transmit antibiotic-resistant genes, which has the potentially threatens in ecosystem and human health.[43] on the other hand, the antibiotic resistance gene is found in the environment and it was characterized as a new type of contaminant. Zhu et al. (2017) published an essay in Science.[44] This article described the antibiotics as a pollutant during the water and soil microbial migration process. In order to resist antibiotics and other pollutants “threat”, the microbes had to occur gene mutation or gene lateral transfer. They gradually produce “resistance” to take the initiative to respond to a changing environment.[45] Therefore, the global antibiotic resistance problem has reached an urgent point.

Wollen-berger et al. (2000) conducted acute and chronic toxicity tests on freshwater crustacean large fleas in fisheries according to the standard protocol (ISO, 1989b) of the flea acute toxicity test.[46] This experiment used 9 kinds of antibiotics including TC antibiotics. The results showed that TC NOEC50 (No observed effect concentrations) was 340 mg/L (the highest effective concentration for parent animals and propagation was considered as NOEC). In acute toxicity experiments, the antibiotics had a mass concentration that affected the reproductive performance of large fleas, several times lower than the acute toxicity concentration. In the chronic toxicity test, the EC50 (concentration for 50% of maximal effect) of TC was 44.80 mg/L and the EC50 of oxytetracycline was 46.20 mg/L.[46]

Ferreira et al. (2007) conducted a toxicity test on the use of microalgae Tetraselmis chuii and the crustacean Artemia parthenogenetica.[47] TC can cause toxic effects on aquatic organisms. The results showed that IC50 (half maximal inhibitory concentration) of TC at 24 and 48h were 870.47 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 778.83–983.66 mg/L) and 805.99 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 650.71–1129.00 mg/L), respectively. And the NOEC and lowest observed effect concentration values were 637  and 828 mg/L, respectively.[47]

The research results above are mostly based on acute toxicity experiments, and they cannot fully feedback TC antibiotics toxicity. In recent years, due to the impact of experimental costs and ethics, the researchers use alternative research methods for acute toxicity test. Researchers try to reduce the use of larger animals such as fish and shellfish.[48] This is a method of innovation in TC antibiotics for aquatic animals. Sanderson et al. (2003) used quantitative structural relationships and compared the lowest predicted concentration to the highest detection concentration with obtain the ecotoxicity data of the contaminants.[49] The risk factor of a series of antibiotics (the ratio of the detected concentration of the predicted toxicity) can be obtained in this way. For example, the risk factor of TC was 6.88 × 10−6, and the risk coefficient of oxytetracycline was 2.13 × 10−5. The European Commission has proposed using the risk factor to evaluate the potential environmental risk of a drug by responding to the ratio of predicted environmental concentration to predict no-effect concentration. When the ratio is bigger than 1, it indicates a high risk.

Consequences / Re: Near Term Human Extinction
« on: February 02, 2020, 09:12:21 AM »
Sorry to hear b.c. Know that we greatly appreciate all you have contributed to this forum.

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: January 26, 2020, 01:02:59 PM »
Ktb & willi:
Still, I think nanning has rose colored glasses when he looks at noncivilized humans. And I also think the problems with Civilization are from its immaturity. Ten millennia is like ten minutes in the history of a species. Maybe when it grows up we will solve those problems.
Or maybe that is only theoretically possible but not practical. Maybe that is the answer to the Fermi Paradox.

If they got tired of being agriculturalists, if they found they didn't like where it was leading them in their particular adaptation, they were *able* to give it up. They didn't say to themselves, 'Well, we've got to keep going at this even if it kills us, because its the *right* way to live.' For example, there was once a people who constructed a vast network of irrigation canals in order to farm the deserts of what is now southeastern Arizona. They maintained these canals for three thousand years and built a fairly advanced civilization, but in the end they were free to say, 'This is a toilsome and unsatisfying way to live, so to hell with it.' They simply walked away from the whole thing and put it so totally out of mind that we don't even know what they called themselves. The only name we have for them is the one the Pima Indians gave them: Hohokam--those who vanished.
- Ishmael

And every time the Takers stamp out a Leaver culture, a wisdom ultimately tested since the birth of mankind disappears from the world beyond recall.
- Ishmael

As you say, only 10,000 years or so, perhaps as far back as 12,000. The blink of an eye vs 3+million years of hominid evolution.

We know that this/our civilization will never work. That it will always go on destroying the world.

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: January 26, 2020, 10:54:15 AM »
If the old ways were so good, why do all these tribes join Civilization when it arrives?

In most cases we do not give them a choice. Join us or perish. And once we have completely stamped out their old way, we have the audacity to say "See how the (insert native/aboriginal/original owner) drinks/is lazy/is dumb" etc, etc, etc.

Even when we gave the original landowners a choice of remaining in their own culture or joining ours, it was a false option. See native Alaskans. "You're free to keep practicing your way of life, but if you want to stay with your children you have to settle in this town over here."

Sanders +14 in New Hampshire since December!

Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: January 15, 2020, 12:58:39 PM »
Much of the debate surrounding the human-induced biodiversity crisis has focused on vertebrates3, but population declines and extinctions may be even more substantial in small organisms such as terrestrial arthropods4. Recent studies have reported declines in the biomass of flying insects2, and in the diversity of insect pollinators5,6, butterflies and moths1,7,8,9,10, hemipterans11,12 and beetles7,13,14. Owing to the associated negative effects on food webs15, ecosystem functioning and ecosystem services16, this insect loss has spurred an intense public debate. However, time-series data relating to arthropods are limited, and studies have so far focused on a small range of taxa11,13,14, a few types of land use and habitat12—or even on single sites1,17. In addition, many studies lack species information2 or high temporal resolution2,12. It therefore remains unclear whether reported declines in arthropods are a general phenomenon that is driven by similar mechanisms across land-use types, taxa and functional groups.

The reported declines are suspected to be caused mainly by human land use2. Locally, farming practices can affect arthropods directly by application of insecticides18,19, mowing20 or soil disturbance, or indirectly via changes in plant communities through the application of herbicides or fertilizer21. Forestry practices can also affect local arthropod communities via changes in tree species composition or forest structure22. In addition, local arthropod populations can be affected by land use in the surrounding landscape; for example, through the drift and transport of pesticides and nitrogen by air or water23,24, through the effects of habitat loss on meta-communities (source–sink dynamics25) or by hampering dispersal.

To disentangle the local and landscape-level effects of land use on temporal trends in arthropod communities of grasslands and forests, we used data from the ‘Biodiversity Exploratories’ research programme that pertain to more than 1 million individual arthropods (2,675 species) (Extended Data Table 1). Arthropods were collected annually at 150 grassland sites by standardized sweep-net sampling in June and August from 2008 to 2017, and at 30 forest sites with flight-interception traps over the whole growing period from 2008 to 2016. An additional 110 forest sites were sampled in 2008, 2011 and 2014 to test for trends across a larger number of sites. Both the grassland and the forest sites cover gradients in local land-use intensity. Land-use intensity was quantified in the form of compound indices that are based on grazing, mowing and fertilization intensity in grasslands26, and on recent biomass removal, the proportion of non-natural tree species and deadwood origin in forests27. To analyse landscape-level effects, we quantified the cover of arable fields, grassland and forest in circles, with a radius between 250 m and 2 km, around each sampling site. We modelled temporal trends in arthropod biomass (estimated from body size; Methods), abundance and the number of species separately for grasslands and forests, and tested for the effects of local and landscape-scale land-use intensity on these trends, accounting for weather conditions. Analyses were conducted for all species together, and for different dispersal and trophic guilds.

The total number of arthropod species across all sites (gamma diversity) was substantially lower in later than in earlier years in both forests and grasslands (Fig. 1). Gamma diversity, biomass, abundance and number of species fluctuated over time but revealed an overall decrease with strongest declines from 2008 to 2010, especially in grasslands (Fig. 1). Year-to-year fluctuations in arthropod biomass, abundance and number of species were partially explained by weather conditions (Extended Data Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 1-1, Supplementary Information section 2). Accounting for weather, fitted trends from our models showed declines in biomass of 67% for grasslands and 41% for forests, declines in species numbers of 34% for grasslands and 36% for forests, and declines in abundance of 78% for grasslands, with no significant change in abundances for forests (−17%) (Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 3-1). In grasslands, declines occurred consistently across all trophic guilds (herbivores, myceto-detritivores, omnivores and carnivores), although the trend for carnivores was not significant (Supplementary Table 1-1). In forests, the patterns were more complex: herbivores showed an increase in abundance and species number, whereas all other trophic guilds declined. Temporal trends of arthropods on the basis of data recorded in 3-year intervals from all 140 forest sites were similar to the trends based on the 30 sites with annual data (Supplementary Table 1-1). Sensitivity analyses that removed or reshuffled years showed that the decline was influenced by, but not solely dependent on, high numbers of arthropods in 2008. Fluctuations in numbers (including the numbers from 2008) appear to match trends that have been observed in other studies2, which suggests that the recent decline is part of a longer-term trend that had begun by at least the early 1990s (Extended Data Fig. 2, Supplementary Information section 3). Further sensitivity analyses showed consistent declines when data from individual sampling dates were not aggregated per year, and also showed that declines concerned all three regions that we analysed (Supplementary Tables 3-2, 3-3, Supplementary Fig. 3-1).

Fig. 1: Temporal trends in arthropod communities.
a–d, Gamma diversity (total number of species across all grassland or forest sites) (a), biomass (b), abundance (c) and number of species (d) of arthropods were recorded in 30 forest and 150 grassland sites across Germany. Gamma diversity shows mean incidence-based, bias-corrected diversity estimates (Chao’s BSS, that is, the higher value of the minimum doubled reference sample size and the maximum reference sample size among years29) for q = 0 and 95% confidence intervals derived from bootstrapping (n = 200). Non-overlapping confidence intervals indicate significant difference30. Box plots show raw data per site and year (n = 1,406 (grassland) or 266 (forest) independent samples). Solid lines indicate significant temporal trends (P < 0.05) based on linear mixed models that included weather conditions, and local and landscape-level land-use intensity as covariates. Shaded areas represent confidence intervals. Boxes represent data within the 25th and 75th percentile, black lines show medians, and whiskers show 1.5× the interquartile range. Data points beyond that range (outliers) are not shown for graphical reasons. Plots for biomass and species number have separate y axes for grassland and forest.

Full size image
Linking changes in biomass, abundance and the number of species to one another enables further inferences regarding the mechanisms that drive arthropod declines. In grasslands, both abundant and less-abundant species declined in abundance (Fig. 2), but loss in the number of species occurred mostly among less-frequent species (Fig. 1, Extended Data Fig. 3, Supplementary Information section 4). This suggests that the decline in the number of species in grasslands was attributable mainly to a loss of individuals among rare species. In forests, species that were initially less abundant decreased in abundance, whereas some of the most abundant species—including invasive species and potential pest species—increased in abundance (Fig. 2, Supplementary Table 5-1). The loss of species was, however, irrespective of their frequency (Fig. 1, Extended Data Fig. 3, Supplementary Information section 4). This suggests that the decline of arthropods in forests is driven by mechanisms that negatively affect the abundances of many species, which leads to an overall decline in biomass and the number of species but favours some species that are able to compensate declines in abundance.

Fig. 2: Changes in the dominance of species.
Rank abundance curves of arthropod communities for the first two (2008–2009) and final two (2016–2017 for grasslands and 2015–2016 for forests) years of the study, from 150 grassland and 30 forest sites. The insets show enlarged curves for the 30 most-abundant species. Data from the first two and final two study years were pooled (abundances are the total number of individuals of a species observed over two years). Declines in abundance are highlighted by yellow shading, and increases in abundance are shaded in green. The y axes are log-scaled, but show untransformed values.

Full size image
The magnitudes of declines in biomass, abundance and the number of species in arthropod communities were independent of local land-use intensity (Supplementary Table 1-1) as well as changes in plant communities (Supplementary Information section 6) at all sites. However, in forests declines in the number of species were weaker at sites with high natural or anthropogenic tree mortality, possibly owing to increased heterogeneity in local habitats (Extended Data Fig. 4). Landscape composition had no effect on arthropod trends in forests (note that forest sites covered only limited gradients of the landscape variables, Extended Data Fig. 5), but it mediated declines in the number of species in grasslands: the magnitude of the declines increased with increasing cover of arable fields, and marginally increased with cover of grasslands in the surrounding landscape (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table 1-1). This suggests that major drivers of arthropod decline in grasslands are associated with agricultural land use at the landscape scale.

Fig. 3: Landscape effects on arthropod decline in grasslands.
a, Temporal changes in biomass, abundance and the number of species for all arthropod species. b, c, Temporal change in biomass of species with high (b) or low (c) dispersal ability, conditional on the cover of arable fields in the surrounding landscape (1-km radius). The decline in biomass increased significantly with the cover of arable fields for weak dispersers, but not for strong dispersers. Slopes were derived from models that included weather conditions and local land-use intensity as covariates. The y axes are log-scaled, but show untransformed values.

Full size image
The interaction between a species and the landscape around its habitat depends on its dispersal ability, which ultimately determines its occurrence and persistence28. In grasslands, taxa of high and low dispersal ability (Methods) both declined, but an increasing cover of arable fields—although not of grasslands—in the surroundings amplified declines in the biomass of weak dispersers more strongly than it did declines of strong dispersers (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table 7-1). Weak dispersers may experience higher mortality during dispersal, and thus have a lower chance of (re)colonization of a particular site when arable field cover is high. In forests, strong dispersers declined in biomass, abundance and the number of species, whereas weak dispersers increased in abundance and biomass—but less strongly when grassland cover in the landscape was high (Supplementary Table 7-1). This suggests that the drivers behind arthropod declines in forests also act at landscape-level spatial scales.

We showed that arthropods declined markedly not only in biomass but also in abundance and the number of species, and that this affected taxa of most trophic levels in both grasslands and forests. Declines in gamma diversity suggest that species might disappear across regions. Our results also indicate that the major drivers of arthropod decline in both habitat types act at landscape-level spatial scales, but that declines may be moderated by increases in heterogeneity of local habitats in forests. Although the drivers of arthropod decline in forests remain unclear, in grasslands these drivers are associated with the proportion of agricultural land in the landscape. However, we cannot ascertain whether the observed declines are driven by the legacy effects of historical land-use intensification or by recent agricultural intensification at the landscape level; for example, by the decrease of fallow land and field margins rich in plant species, the increased use of pesticides or use of more potent insecticides (Supplementary Information section 3). Time-series data relating to changes in the use of agrochemicals or the presence of fine-scale arthropod habitats would be necessary to answer this question. Furthermore, the extents to which changes in climate have reinforced the observed trends in arthropod biomass, abundance and number of species is unclear (Supplementary Information section 2). Our results show that widespread arthropod declines have occurred in recent years. Although declines were less pronounced during the second half of our study period, there is no indication that negative trends have been reversed by measures that have been implemented in recent years. This calls for a paradigm shift in land-use policy at national and international levels to counteract species decline in open and forested habitats by implementing measures that are coordinated across landscapes and regions. Such strategies should aim to improve habitat quality for arthropods and to mitigate the negative effects of land-use practices not only at a local scale (within isolated patches embedded in an inhospitable agricultural matrix) but also across large and continuous areas.

Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: January 15, 2020, 12:49:50 PM »
In 30 forest sites with annual inventories, biomass and species number—but not abundance—decreased by 41% and 36%, respectively.

So over a third of the species are lost while abundance remains the same.
I wonder if they have a breakdown of species in the article.

I take it they only measured biomass in regards to decline.

"We showed that arthropods declined markedly not only in biomass but also in abundance and the number of species, and that this affected taxa of most trophic levels in both grasslands and forests." - Siebold et al 2019.

No they split it in three categories but sadly it is paywalled.

The difference between the forests and grasslands is interesting and i would like to see tables with a breakdown for both.

I have access to the paper. What would you both like to see?

The only reason I would vote 3rd party is if Gabbard gets the nomination. She’s on the right politically. Trump is far right.

But centrist/corporate Democrats are also on the right politically, because they serve their donors and not the American people. So, why would you vote for that? Any Blue won't do, when it isn't really Blue. Haven't the right-wing Clinton and Obama presidencies taught people anything? Identity politics doesn't make you left-wing, it's the economic policies. When these serve concentrated wealth, they are right-wing. Leftism has ceased to exist in the USA after Jimmy Carter. Only Sanders can bring it back.

Idk how many times I have to say this. I AM VOTING FOR SANDERS ffs. That being said, if he does not win the nomination I will begrudgingly support whoever comes up next.

I would rather have a centrist, status quo democrat than a right wing talking head.

That's how you get Trump. Why would you want that?

No obviously not. I'm voting for Sanders. But in the event where it is a centrist, status quo democrat or Trump, I'll be voting for the dem. In the event it is Tulsi (a literal right winger posing as a dem) or Trump, i'll be voting 3rd party.

When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.

- Maya Angelou

I cannot figure out who the dems that like Tulsi Gabbard are. Or why. She is not a good person.

Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: November 19, 2019, 11:07:07 AM »
I am sure it has been posted before, but making abortion illegal DOES NOT stop abortion. It makes abortion dangerous. Because it will still occur. Except now it will be by coat hangers, baseball bats, and assorted liquids purchased over the internet, instead of by medical professionals.

If people truly wanted to stop/decrease abortion, the way to go about it is better sex education and free, unlimited prophylaxis (condoms, the pill, IUD).

B_lumenkraft is not a Democrat, or a liberal. He is an angry, illiterate socialist whose only goal is chaos and misery for all. Because he is an angry, sad human being, everyone else should also be angry and sad. The same can be said for the majority of the far-left Democrats.

This is very sad. But what can I do about it? Educating them won't change anything because they cannot be educated, they are clinically stupid. So I suppose I will simply ignore them. Let them froth and rage. But do not be mistaken -- these people are the very reason Trump was elected, whether they voted for him, or not. They feed on anger, it is their only sustenance. And that is why they would not vote for a dyed-in-the-wool centrist who could restore the policies of the Obama and Clinton eras over Donald Trump. Because they actually don't even dislike Trump. They love him. They love to hate! It is sick. Truly, disgustingly, sick.

Before I say this, I read and enjoy a lot of Bbr's posts in other parts of this forum.

That being said: Nice ad hominem attack. Fuck you and your diatribe.

I change my vote to Bloomberg

"You know who is disenfranchised and needs more power? The 14th wealthiest person alive today!"

The forum / Re: ASIF Statistics
« on: September 23, 2019, 05:24:12 AM »
Does this count as statistics? I'm not sure, but I was bored and procrastinating work so here it is anyway:

How long will it take Tom_Mazanec to surpass AbruptSLR as the forums top poster?

A mere 60 years and 276 days

Science / Re: The Science of Aerosols
« on: September 21, 2019, 02:36:00 PM »
Glad everybody enjoyed the read. The presentation was fantastic. Excellent speaker.

The rest / Re: Climate, Agriculture and Other Pertinent Documentaries
« on: September 18, 2019, 03:13:50 AM »
Apparently Peter Wadhams is getting a documentary made about him.

From the Ice Itself

Consequences / Re: Prepping for Collapse
« on: September 16, 2019, 03:03:23 AM »
Here is why we will never reduce CO2 in time: I present the prisoner's dilemma. A classic game.

We have a multi person prisoner's dilemma in which any individual is pitted against the entire rest of the world. This prisoner's dilemma would hold true for the vast majority of people, i.e. if you replaced individual A with individual B from the "everybody else" section, this would still be true.

We look at the individual's preference ranking.

1st choice - Individual makes no, or minimal lifestyle changes. Individual does not attempt to reduce CO2 output. Individual makes no significant sacrifices. CO2 still reduced enough by rest of the world to avoid major consequences of CC.

2nd choice - Individual makes lifestyle changes to reduce CO2. Some lifestyle changes may cause discomfort. CO2 production by everybody else also decreases enough to avoid major consequences of CC.

3rd choice - Individual makes no, or minimal lifestyle changes. Individual does not attempt to reduce CO2 output. Individual makes no significant sacrifices. The rest of the world also does not reduce CO2 output. Climate change has severe and widespread impacts.

4th choice - Individual makes lifestyle changes to reduce CO2. Some lifestyle changes may cause discomfort. CO2 production by everybody else does not decrease by enough to avoid major consequences of climate change. Individual feels that he/she was played for a fool, made sacrifices for no reason.

Unfortunately, the dominant strategy here is for the individual to make no lifestyle changes. And indeed, we see that playing out with the vast majority of the general populace.

Consequences / Re: Prepping for Collapse
« on: September 11, 2019, 06:09:14 AM »
"We need to approach zero net emissions, globally, in the next three decades."

Transl.:  We have 30 more years to dick around.

Net zero by 2050 is a joke.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane Season 2019
« on: September 05, 2019, 05:10:45 AM »
The President of the United States altered a National Hurricane Center map with a sharpie to falsely extend the official forecast toward Alabama so he didn't have to admit he was wrong in a tweet.

It is a violation of federal law to falsify a National Weather Service forecast and pass it off as official, as President Trump did here.

18 U.S. Code § 2074

Truly breathtaking to watch this man work.

Science / Re: The Science of Aerosols
« on: September 05, 2019, 01:31:42 AM »

Did the question about a possible spike in warming from reduced aerosols with the reduction in fossil fuel burning come up?  If so, what was the answer?

Yes, I actually asked about Hansen et al.'s 2013 paper on aerosol masking, and the effect that immediately stopping production of sulfates via oil/coal/etc. Dr. Haywood said he respected Dr. Hansen, but believed that the warming effect would not be as great or as rapid as Hansen described. Additionally, Dr. Haywood said that sulfates would be replaced with other aerosols that occur naturally, the names of which escape me.

Science / Re: The Science of Aerosols
« on: September 04, 2019, 04:44:28 PM »
Having a million difficulties trying to upload the presentation as a PDF.

I tried to take detailed notes, and stuck around for the Q&A. I may be able to answer some basic questions if anybody has any.

Science / Re: The Science of Aerosols
« on: August 26, 2019, 01:12:38 PM »
Got to hear Dr. Jim Haywood from Exeter University and the Met Office speak today about Aerosol masking, clouds, and possible future geoengineering. He agreed to provide me his powerpoint presentation. I will try to upload it here when I obtain it.

Edit: Jim** Haywood

Arctic sea ice / Re: Are you hoping to witness a BOE?
« on: August 23, 2019, 08:11:20 AM »
I'm curious why so many ppl want a BOE as soon as possible.

Humanity is a plague. A failed experiment.

Consequences / Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« on: August 12, 2019, 09:14:48 AM »
Almost a decade ago I was taking an intro physics course. We were assigned a paper on energy production and what should humanity do to power the world.

I wrote a very dry paper on how humanity needs to shift from fossil fuels to nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, etc.

Once my teacher had graded them all, he announced that ZERO students had written about simply reducing energy consumption. That has stuck with me for 9 years. And it is still relevant today.

We built the dam, then we engineer a crazy fish shuttle and hire people to push fish through the entrance all day. All we actually had to do was not build the dam.

I think we have really forgotten the lesson that sometimes less is more. We create the problem, solve the problem in an absolutely insane way, and declare victory. But we had already won and been winning for thousands of years before the dam was built.

Consequences / Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« on: August 12, 2019, 04:50:02 AM »
A hyperloop for fish. ;) And it can cull out invasive species.

Whooshh Innovations' "Salmon Cannon" Gives Fish A Boost Over Dams
1-minute video.

In reality, all we need to do is not build the dam.

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: August 09, 2019, 05:21:22 AM »
I would say we have already eaten the planet, and now we are scrounging for any remaining scraps

Consequences / Re: Prepping for Collapse
« on: August 06, 2019, 12:28:12 AM »
Has anybody considered that even if everybody survived collapse, within 3 months about ~10% of the US adult population would be dead from lack of insulin. Stockpile now!

Not to mention all the other health conditions that would suddenly go untreated.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: August 01, 2019, 01:30:33 PM »
Semimonthly BOE evaluation

July 31 extent was 5,955,851 km^2. With on average 44 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -112,633 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

Total extent loss in July 2019 was -3,080,630 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -8,315,270 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -58,974 km^2. For the period from maximum to July 31st, this is the 3rd fastest rate of melt for the same period for the years 2007-2019. Barely squeaking in behind 2012, and lagging well behind 2010. (See Attachment 2). 
Additionally, if the melt season ended today, -58,974 km^2 would place 2019 as 3rd out of 13 for the years 2007-2019, once again behind 2010, with 2012 in first place.

Looking only at the month of July, we have averaged -99,375 km^2 per day. This average daily drop places July 2019 as 2nd out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily July melt. We needed a drop larger than 58k today to maintain 1st place in this category. (See Attachment 3).

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: July 31, 2019, 06:35:39 PM »
Currently putting the finishing touches on an essay regarding the vaquita. Extending trend lines, it has until 2030. But in actuality, 2020-2021 is my bet for extinction.

The IUCN, CIRVA, and CITES have all made their recommendations. Even the IWC weighed in here. The US, Mexican, and Chinese governments have attempted to halt trading of the totoaba to prevent gillnet use. The captive breeding program - VaquitaCPR - has failed.

This cetacean is going to follow the baiji into the stars.

Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: July 22, 2019, 09:55:22 AM »
After combing through the IUCN redlist, I have a minor update on the Global Amphibian Assessment 2:

Best estimates of percentage threatened species (with lower and upper estimates) for each group are: amphibians 40% (32-53%).

9 species of amphibians were confirmed to have become extinct, or extinct in the wild, since the 2004 assessment.

According to my own quick maths, since GAA1 in 2004: there has been a 1.6% increase in the number of amphibian species listed as vulnerable (from 628 in 2004 to 638 in 2019); a 29.5% increase in amphibian species listed as endangered (from 729 in 2004 to 944 in 2019); and a 39.2% increase in amphibian species listed as critically endangered (from 413 in 2004 to 575 in 2019).

Additionally, 137 of the critically endangered species are in a subcategory of CR(PE), or critically endangered (possibly extinct).

All data available from:

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 16, 2019, 06:50:58 AM »
Semimonthly BOE evaluation

July 15 extent was 7,496,597 km^2. With on average 60 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -108,277 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

Total extent loss thus far in July 2019 was -1,539,884 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -6,774,524 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -54,196 km^2. If the month of July ended today, this would be the 7th fastest rate of melt for the same period for the years 2007-2019. (See Attachment 2). 
Additionally, if the melt season ended today, -54,196 km^2 would place 2019 as 5th out of 13 for the years 2007-2019.

Looking only at the month of July so far, we have averaged -102,659 km^2 per day. If the month of July ended today, this average daily drop places July 2019 as 1st out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily July melt. (See Attachment 3).

I said in a previous post that we would need to have the strongest July melt ever in order for a BOE to occur. And while a BOE will likely not occur this year, we have still managed to have the strongest July melt so far.

Also, I have previously been posting the individual months for the first attachment rather than the excel sheet of the entire melt season. It allowed for us to be "on pace" at the first of the month if there was a big enough drop on the first, even if we were not on pace the day before. Confusion ensues.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 01, 2019, 11:03:57 AM »
KTB - I may have missed earlier messages - is your BOE  1m km2 or 0 km2 ? 

Why isn't 27 / 28th June showing as True where daily loss is albeit briefly > loss rate required for BOE ?

BOE is the "industry standard" i.e. 1M km^2.

Individual days that are greater than the minimum daily melt required at the START of the month are green, even if that day is not above the New Daily Requirement column.

For it to show TRUE, the cumulative melt until that point would have to be equal to, or greater than, the cumulative minimum requirement for a BOE. So by late June, to get TRUE results, we would have required melt of over 1M km^2 to catch back up.

Bad design on my part that we can be FALSE (not on pace) on May 31st, but be TRUE (on pace) on June 1st. This is because I have multiple spreadsheets, and really should only post the full melt season spreadsheet, while keeping the individual month spreadsheets to myself.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 01, 2019, 06:23:52 AM »
And for comparisons to other years:

The following attachment is for actual previous years daily average melt from July 1 to their respective minimums (Attachment 1).

The following section is for what the previous years would have needed for a BOE to occur: From July 1st to each years respective minimum, our current BOE requirement is the 7th highest value, of which 2010 is the leader (which makes sense for the record low at this time of year, and the length of its' melt season), while 2018 - solid 2nd place - continues to hold on in this aspect because of how insanely long its' melt season was. Keep in mind that 2018's minimum was reached on September 21st, and that 2010's minimum was reached on September 17th. (See attachment 2). End

As an aside, for a BOE to occur at this point, we would need to have the strongest June melt for the years 2007-2018 (and likely ever since the satellite record began), an above average July melt, the strongest August melt, and the strongest September 1st to minimum.

All I can do is parrot the ASIF gods by saying that conditions have favored melting. We shall see what July and August hold in store.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 01, 2019, 06:15:35 AM »
Semimonthly (I didn't forget you Tor) BOE evaluation

June 30 extent was 9,036,481 km^2. With on average 75 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -107,153 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

Total extent loss in June 2019 was -1,732,452 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -5,234,640 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -47,588 km^2, which is the 4th fastest rate of melt from the maximum to the end of June. (See Attachment 2). 

Looking only at the month of June, we have averaged -57,748 km^2 per day. This average daily drop places June 2019 as 9th out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily June melt. (See Attachment 3).

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 17, 2019, 08:14:08 AM »
Bimonthly BOE evaluation

June 15 extent was 10,187,233 km^2. With on average 90 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -102,080 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1). That's it guys, pack it in, we now require a century drop per day.

Total extent loss thus far in June 2019 was -620,026 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -4,122,214 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -42,940 km^2. (See Attachment 2). 

Looking only at the month of June, we have averaged -38,752 km^2 per day. This average daily drop places June 2019 as 13th out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily June melt. (See Attachment 3).

And for comparisons to other years:

As an aside, for a BOE to occur at this point, we would need to have the strongest June melt for the years 2007-2018 (and likely ever since the satellite record began), an above average July melt, the strongest August melt, and the strongest September 1st to minimum.

As I had mentioned previously, for a BOE to occur we would need the strongest June melt since at least 2007. Instead we have witnessed a well below average 15 days.

Consequences / Re: Worst consequence of AGW
« on: June 06, 2019, 08:13:38 AM »
The worst consequence will be utter and complete collapse of human civilization as we know it.

And to some above replies: redistribution of wealth still keeps society in the game/prison of capitalism. The bars must be broken and humanity set free in order to save the earth and ourselves.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: June 01, 2019, 07:04:18 AM »
Bimonthly BOE evaluation

May 31 extent was 10,768,933 km^2. With on average 105 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -93,037 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

Total extent loss thus in May 2019 was -1,536,443 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -3,502,188 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -43,777 km^2. We have experienced the 2nd fastest rate of daily loss from Maximum to the end of May -- behind 2010 at a whopping -57,318 km^2 per day. Impressively strong early season melt is still holding our average high. (See Attachment 2).

Looking only at the month of May, we have averaged -49,563 km^2 per day. This average daily drop places May 2019 as 8th out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily May melt (See Attachment 3).

Additionally: Note the significant lack of green in the first attachment at this point. We had 0 days of melt greater than the BOE requirement set on the first of the month (-83,128 km^2). So we fall further and further behind.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: May 28, 2019, 06:08:15 AM »
JCG, your updates make my updates easier! Please do not change!

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: May 16, 2019, 06:31:54 AM »
Bimonthly BOE evaluation

May 15 extent was 11,568,100 km^2. With on average 121 days to go until the end of the melt season on September 13th, we now require a daily drop of -87,323 km^2 for a BOE to occur. (See Attachment 1).

There have been many days of below average melt, and several days of above average melt. Total extent loss thus far in May is -739,276 km^2. And total extent loss so far this season is -2,705,021 km^2. This has resulted in the current average daily drop of -42,266 km^2. If the month of May ended today, this would the 3rd fastest daily loss from maximum to the end of May (behind 2010 at a whopping -57,318 km^2 per day, and 2014 at -42,541 km^2 per day). (See Attachment 2).

Looking only at the month of May (so far), we have averaged -49,285 km^2 per day. This average daily drop places May 2019 as 8th out of 13 (2007-2019) in average daily May melt (See Attachment 3).
Although we still have 16 days to go this month, and many of the ASIF gods are becoming worried about the high pressure setup forecast by GFS.

No 2nd post for mid monthlies, don't have the data calculated and I am traveling so even this post was unexpected for me.

Edit: was tired and missed 2,000 km^2 so the averages will be slightly lower. My mistake.

Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: May 02, 2019, 07:11:15 AM »
And for comparisons to other years:

The following attachment is for actual previous years daily average melt from May 1 to their respective minimums (Attachment 1).

The following section is for what the previous years would have needed for a BOE to occur: From May 1st to each years respective minimum, our current BOE requirement is the 2nd highest value, behind only 2018 with an average daily drop of -80,251 km^2. Keep in mind that 2018's minimum was reached on September 21st, and that 2016's minimum was reached on September 7th. (See attachment 2). End

Pages: 1 [2] 3