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 - nicibiene

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Teenagers are often able to put common interest before their own. This is mainly true as long as their parents are taking care of all the material aspects of life.

Thank you, etienne. As a loving mother, caring for my kids and the planet, I know that it is a basic instinct of children to think sometimes further than a lot of adults. They love nature, they have a natural sense for injustice-for humans and animals.

Kids on the street had not been influenced-here in Germany they are told about climate science, they are free to use their own brain and to raise their voice-even if some ministers of education already theatened them with sanctions.

Yes, every family should take personal action-but here in Germany awareness and action of private persons is al lot higher than in politics. We have politics, shameless influenced lobbyism of energy companies and car industry. All had been done to act in their interest, not in the interest of the young generation. 

And how should that generation have hope, what should them give optimism? There has to be political pressure. Maybe parents should join their kids-that would be the appropriate criticism.

2
Yesterday we had more than 20.000 protesting kids here in Germany-in 55 cities.  8)

https://twitter.com/fridayforfuture?lang=de

Even the news of "Tagesthemen" brought a 3 minute report:

<iframe src="https://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/video/video-495719~player_branded-true.html" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen width="800px" height="450px"></iframe>

3
There is an increasing movement among brave young people, children aged 10 years:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Gretathunberg
https://mobile.twitter.com/lillyspickup
https://mobile.twitter.com/elsie__luna

https://www.schoolstrike4climate.com/

Impressive speech of Greta Thunberg:



I try to support them by sharing their posts, leaving word to encourage them to do their walk and telling my children about them.

Maybe some of you here could support them too?  ;D




4
Consequences / Re: Decline in insect populations
« on: August 27, 2018, 09:01:24 AM »
In our region (upper Erzgebirge >600 m above sealevel) are no wasps this year... I wonder where they are all gone?! Usually in August, if sou have cake, ice, fruits or barbeque outside you have wasps around you. But actually it is completely silent. Ripe plums lie on the ground, a table full of sweet cake...no wasp.  :-[ :'( :o -Additionally we have the worst drought I could remember. Farmers have trouble in getting the cows fed. Grass has stopped to grow.

5
Science / Re: What about oxygen levels?
« on: March 01, 2018, 06:09:20 PM »
Quote
The oceans are an oxygen deposit, not an oxygen generator, methinks

Im afraid that is not the fact.
http://earthsky.org/earth/how-much-do-oceans-add-to-worlds-oxygen
http://www.nationalgeographic.org/activity/save-the-plankton-breathe-freely/

I read a book about ocean biology and chemistry of Stefan Rahmstorf: Phytoplancton you find in cold waters is very sensitive regarding temperature changes. If temperature increases they imigrate to lower, colder waterlevels. But that is limited by light they need for photosynthesis.  Too warm water means a steep decay in phytoplankton- exactly that is the problem.... phytoplankton also works as a biological carbon pump that drews CO2 as CaCO3 particles down to ocean ground. That mechanism gets disrupted by acidification additionally.  :-\

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-shows-oceanic-phytoplankton-declines-in-northern-hemisphere


6
Science / Re: What about oxygen levels?
« on: March 01, 2018, 11:43:59 AM »
Yes, gerontocrat, I know about the sad circumstances in the ocean... in the end all oxygen based life functions via physics and chemistry. We have the mechanism of diffusion-respiration of insects, birds, fishes is adapted to certain CO2 and O2 levels. All of the exchange depends on partial pressure of the gases and the temperature. Human takes out 5% of the oxygen content while breathing. Higher CO2 concentration in air means higher CO2 level in the blood-all is limited by physics.

The question I ask myself about insects for instance: they have no lungs, animals with lungs increase frequency and depht of breath when we are suffering of low oxygen or higher CO2 levels. Could insects adapt? What is the minimum/maximum humans need for health?

If there is solved less oxygen in the oceans due to higher water temperatures, it should be in the air-but it is not... more growth of plant biomass due to higher CO2 (that takes place to a certain level -when there is enough water) should produce more oxygen... but it decreases faster than CO2 grows.  :-\

Dropping water oxygen level is the first step to a "nice" down spiral of oxygen based life... I know ocean is the most important source of our planets breathable oxygen.

7
Science / Re: What about oxygen levels?
« on: February 28, 2018, 02:56:18 PM »
Just had a view in IPCC 2013 and found a plot regarding negative O2 developement. :o Pretty steep downwards curve...

If someone is interested-original plots and original datas are to find here:
http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/plots


8
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017/2018 freezing season
« on: February 04, 2018, 09:29:21 AM »
Great to see people coming out of hibernation for this event!

No hibernation here.  ;D Highly apprechiate to read the discussion and your amazing graphics here A-Team. I'm following the weather models, trying to learn and to think about (guess) what will happen next. Helpful to read all your information and opinions here. Thanx guys!  :-*

It could be a nice entertaining thriller, if it wouldn't be so scary realistic.... :'(

9
Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 20, 2017, 07:31:19 AM »
Quote
Answering my own question (about the possibility of a hurricane occurring around the time of the great Sept 19, 1985 Mexico City earthquake):
Powerful Hurricane Gloria was headed across the Atlantic on Sept 19, 1985 -- although it did not intensify into a hurricane until September 22, north of the Lesser Antilles.

Very interesting connection-just digged in Wikipedia: additionally to Gloria occured another tropical depression Henri northwards! Maybe a compairable situation....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Atlantic_hurricane_season

If you imagine that huge amount of water getting piled up there-just look at the dry beaches caused by Irmas power. Think that movement of water masses could trigger earthquakes like that...  :o

10
Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 12, 2017, 09:03:30 AM »

11
Permafrost / Re: Siberian permafrost hole/blowout
« on: September 12, 2017, 07:23:43 AM »
Quote
Much more, including video, photographs and further speculation, in The Siberian Times. (Usual caveats apply.)
http://siberiantimes.com/other/others/news/video-shows-methane-leaking-from-beneath-an-arctic-river-after-spectacular-eruption/

The russian humor (sarcasm?) about it is to admire in the video. Playing "Highway to hell" with earth turning upside down.  :o :o :o

13
Greenland and Arctic Circle / Re: Greenland 2017 melt season
« on: August 20, 2017, 10:05:09 AM »
As cc-reanalizer predicts Greenland seems to get a lot of rain and temperatures above zero:  :-[


14
Just reading my morning newspaper. Heavy thunderstorms in the Alps near Salzburg caused landslides this week and even created new new lakes in a valley (maybe filled with meltwater from higher altitudes?).

And the newspapers all around Germany and Austria come up with the same text and paradisic bluewater pictures, celebrating the beauty of the new landscape and the positive effects for tourism....

Welcome to the new world of euphemism!

Here the Google result for that:

https://www.google.de/search?q=neue+seen+salzburger+land&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=j-iXWcv4CY3KXu2Tg2g

15
Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: August 19, 2017, 09:25:35 AM »
Here is a nice NASA articles about the record smoke from Canada entering the Arctic, including nice links for further read.

Quote
“If and when the plume drifts over populated areas, it may turn day into night,” added Mike Fromm of the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory. “There’s that much aerosol in the air.”

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=90759&src=nha

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: June 19, 2017, 11:59:39 AM »
Thank you seaicesailor! Seems to be the right path. 😁 Easterly phase is told to have stronger winds, but I wonder a little 2016 they waited for QBO to change direction, now it obviously happened but if I look at the chart of maximum speed for easterly phase, 35 m/s (126 kmh) windspeed is max, but there seems to be even higher speed.

Climate models do calculate a weakining QBO inwarming climate due to growing tropical convection. Found a nice explaination and great pics here. http://www.jamstec.go.jp/e/about/press_release/20130523/

But as middle altitudes get as warm as the tropics, would there really be a weaker QBO? Nice brainfood to think about. 😁 

17
Arctic sea ice / Re: Stupid Questions :o
« on: June 19, 2017, 10:24:37 AM »
I watch the 10 hPa altitude for some time now. There are pretty high equatorial winds occuring there, compaired it with available 2015/2016. There was silence at equator. The windband over Northern hemisphere seems to be moved south and got more intensive.

I was already digging what is known about stratosphere (very low knowledge seems to be available about the connecting forces between weathermaking troposhere and stratosphere). Any ideas here, or links to learn something about it?

18
I always look this earthquake map, Svalbard was hit too. Connected? https://earthquakes.volcanodiscovery.com/

Jai, once I dreamed our steep hill behind the house (a mining halde, that creates streams in our garden when undermined by flooding rains or rapid snowmelt) starts sliding due to heavy rains...  :o Heard a week ago that there was indeed a landslide once, some years ago...not a pleasant dream.  :-X

19
Walking the walk / Re: What to do with PV electricity in excess ?
« on: June 14, 2017, 09:24:09 AM »
My dream would be to be able to process and store H2, and power a fuel cell, using the heat for heating. Biggest problem ist to store H2 effective and safe. Possibility could also be to make CH4 of it- but it would cost energy again. There are already systems available,  but still expensive. Recently I found a pretty interesting one, but I forgot to save the link/datas...

Next week we will install our 10kW PV with 10 kWh battery. We already have heatpump heating system (actually seperate powergrid because of inflexible price system, also it needs a lot electrical power to work -3 kW-, but there are already systems with flexible working compressors). Also we have a EV with 22 kWh. Will be very exciting how it all works and what we could achieve...


20
very nice presentation on the subject from 8 months ago by the authors

Already seen this....especially their obviously depressed mood during their presentation speaks a lot of words.  :'(

21
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: May 29, 2017, 07:56:59 AM »
Found a paper from Dec 2016, Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL071930/full

Quote
Abstract:

New calculations of the radiative forcing (RF) are presented for the three main well-mixed greenhouse gases, methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. Methane's RF is particularly impacted because of the inclusion of the shortwave forcing; the 1750–2011 RF is about 25% higher (increasing from 0.48 W m−2 to 0.61 W m−2) compared to the value in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2013 assessment; the 100 year global warming potential is 14% higher than the IPCC value. We present new simplified expressions to calculate RF. Unlike previous expressions used by IPCC, the new ones include the overlap between CO2 and N2O; for N2O forcing, the CO2 overlap can be as important as the CH4 overlap. The 1750–2011 CO2 RF is within 1% of IPCC's value but is about 10% higher when CO2 amounts reach 2000 ppm, a value projected to be possible under the extended RCP8.5 scenario.


22
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 24, 2017, 01:20:22 PM »
I knew the sedimentary layer was deep, but 20Km? That is what she said isn't it? 5min + 6:30


When I listen at either point I may hear 20Km, when watching her lips at 6:30 I see 3Km. 3Km seems more reasonable, but I wonder if a transcript is available?

Listened to it several times-would guess too, she said 3 km-which seems more realistic-but still a lot of stuff.. and there is a lot of mud full of organic material, coming from thawing Siberian permafrost with the rivers. That water additionally contains a lot of methane and nice microbes-no oxygen, as there are no fishes in that rivers any more.

Recently I read about a earthquake near Greenland that triggered methane outbreak:
http://arctic-news.blogspot.de/2017/05/earthquake-east-of-greenland-triggers-methane-releases.html

Maybe the Storega tsunami was also caused by a chain reaction of several circumstances? There is a lot going on deep in earth (glacial rebound) when the ice masses of Greenland melt down in a geologically seen tiny period of time, like it never occured before?  :-\

23
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 24, 2017, 12:47:14 PM »
Guys...20 km thick organic material, additionally a new discovered source of methane from below, a LOT of methane in Siberian rivers... sometimes I think it is mentally healthier to get less curious...

I just was digging a little into the website of Copernicus, compairing maps and having a closer look at their graphics. Here the actual surface methane, compaired with 2006 and 2012 and a nice view on the alterations they made regarding the colour scales and the values that stand for a certain colour  :o:



24
Fascinating upward lightning in Oklahoma May 18th 2017:


25
Consequences / Re: Peter Wadhams
« on: May 23, 2017, 12:03:31 PM »
All I can do is sigh and shake my head.
and I could scream all day long if I look at the general ignorance and inaction.

Hearing in the podcast how Wadhams, as a very experienced ice scientist, is blamed to be irresponsable to do any open warning prediction using measured datas is quite disturbing....

Here in Germany I got by coincidence in contact with a very related thing. All weather stations will get replaced by automatic ones and the green party started some protests against it. Our mountain station nearby in an altitude of 1214 m has a complete climate row of over 100 years. IMO the station is perfectly positioned at a mountainridge in east-western direction to watch and judge about occuring changes in cloud formations, athmospheric changes. There is no way to measure all things automatically (snowheights, sight distance, cloudforms)

As it will be automatic, the climate row will be disrupted - datas have to be without gaps to match the requirements of WMO for climate datas. The harsh conditions that are here in winter require qualified persons to maintain the instruments. A lot of german climate rows of already automatized stations have been destroyed sucessfully. The official person I saw there from german DWD (weather service, responsible for weather AND climate, standing under the ministery for TRAFFIC, that made "fine" lobby work regarding VW scandal!  ;D) told the interested public: measurements by humans are not neccessary any more: there are climate models to work with, satellites are available. It's general international standard.

And so the unconvenient real datas are getting eliminated like Wadhams shows! And the employees of the weather stations are not able to protest  or raise their voice, because they are officials, with guaranteed jobs and the duty to loyality.

26
Consequences / Re: Peter Wadhams
« on: May 23, 2017, 09:58:58 AM »
Give it a few months and I might describe that as a pleasant cruise rather than an expedition.
;D I'm so curious what they will report in our newspaper, that most times seems to be sponsered by fossil coal company ENVIA... They even gave it the headline, connecting recent weather extremes with "huge thaw of ice" and there are interesting institutes on board of Polarstern. https://www.awi.de https://www.tropos.de

Really remarkable....

27
Consequences / Re: Peter Wadhams
« on: May 23, 2017, 08:49:04 AM »
Very interesting podcast, showing the disagreement and conflicts in scientific sights of modellers and field scientists like Peter Wadhams, that goes out to make a prediction when sea ice will be gone, based on measurements-while modellers rely blindly in their computers.... I have the book here, stumbled about the chapter where he critizizes IPCC predictions from 2013 -ignoring past real datas completely, taking modelled datas, stopping history in 2005 -working with RPC2.4, that is completely unrealistic....  :-X It is really incredible what is done there

I just felt urged to translate the chapter into German and sent it to my newspaper that reported yesterday about a starting expedition to Northpole under german administration here from Saxony.

28
Consequences / Re: Where have all the Insects gone?
« on: May 18, 2017, 11:42:43 AM »
After I already read about the possible effects of rising CO2 on plants I had to learn, that there is nothing to hope that we will get a nice fertilized greenhouse full of life. One effect is, that not only the plant as a whole, but also the nutritiousity of pollen seems to decrease drastically. https://phys.org/news/2016-04-co2-protein-crucial-pollen-source.html

I have found also a very large article that seems to be not so bad to get into the entire thing a little: http://what-when-how.com/insects/greenhouse-gases-global-warming-and-insects-insects/

All is a system. If plants change due to changing athmospheric composition, the question is, if it wouldn't harm the insects first, birds second and us third. As here in my case is no agricultural industry to blame, there must be other reasons for insects disappearance too....

Another interesting question is how elevated CO2 levels might change the behaviour and health of insects generally? They seem to have a strong sense for that gas, helps them to find plants or humans (mosquitos). Maybe they get confused In their senses basically?  What about their breathing system? As they have no lungs they are not able to increase their frequency of breathing actively, like we do... unfortunately not free available:
http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093402

Also nice to read (if I find sone time) http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-566X2011000200001

29
Consequences / Re: Where have all the Insects gone?
« on: May 18, 2017, 10:12:16 AM »
We live here in a natural, colder mountain area in the east of Germany with no big agricultural farms around. Most farms have cows here, there are a lot of meadows with wildflowers.

Last week our cherries flowered, these days the apple trees start and a lot of dandelions glowing yellow in the sun. But there are frightening low insects visiting our meadow and our trees.  :'( Just wondered last week and yesterday I realized the empty dandelion and decided to have a closer look today... only a few insects on tour...

30
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 16, 2017, 12:58:24 PM »
As I found that nice paper about "Effects of climate change on methane emissions from seafloor sediments in the Arctic Ocean"

Quote
Here, we review the principal physical and biogeochemical processes that regulate methane fluxes across the seabed, the fate of this methane in the water column, and potential for its release to the atmosphere. We find that, at present, fluxes of dissolved methane are significantly moderated by anaerobic and aerobic oxidation of methane. If methane fluxes increase then a greater proportion of methane will be transported by advection or in the gas phase, which reduces the efficiency of the methanotrophic sink. Higher freshwater discharge to Arctic shelf seas may increase stratification and inhibit transfer of methane gas to surface waters, although there is some evidence that increased stratification may lead to warming of sub-pycnocline waters, increasing the potential for hydrate dissociation.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lno.10307/full

I get again confronted with a picture of one worrying mechanisms of methane in water:


And as the abstract tells-the ongoing reaction down there could warm up the ground and increase the hydrate dissociation... another positive feedback again. And if there is a stronger stratification due to more freshwater methane is trapped is lower water levels. Could that also lead to a loss of oxygen in ocean layers that usually contain oxygen, increasing AOM?

Since I read about AOM and I can´t find a map about the methane in athmosphere (I just found one very good data source, provided by Copernicus satelites -link in the post above) I watched a little at nullschool for possible remarkable SO2 traces, that could be a sign for increasing methane that is consumed by microbes, producing H2S.

And suddenly, in January/February 2017 I found more and more spots of SO2-especially in Eastern Siberia-in permafrost. They appear in a massive way-out from nowhere. There are also traces near Greenland, North Canada, Alaska.  I already mentioned that as the meltseason thread touched methane... now I waited a little-and crashed again into it.

So what do you mean about that strange spots? (BTW: I switch the actual date in Nullschool with jumping one day back and changing the date in url) 

31
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 16, 2017, 12:01:14 PM »
There are other processes that will also increase upwelling as the surface ice continues to decrease but the notion that this increased production will result in a vastly increased carbon sink is dubious IMO.
Does darkening of surface water really result in "less" heat absorption? Does upwelling and surface mixing potentially increase water column heating via insolation ?  Does the increased biological production contain higher or lower percentages of carbonate forming phytoplankton as the Arctic water continues to acidify? Other studies have shown decreases of calcium carbonate forming phytoplankton as acidity continues to increase. This will negatively affect ballasting and settlement of calcium carbonate into sediments. Calcium carbonate lasts much longer than labile organic material that settles to the bottom because like I said before bacteria can quickly remineralize organic material.]

I totally agree with you - I know about the importance of carbonate pump, producing calcium carbonate that sinks to the ground. But as all is getting more acidic that system gets problems too.

Quote
nicibiene, Maybe those of us interested enough to read and learn and worry are all a bit alien. I do appreciate that there are fellows travelers that frequent this site and give me things to think about. I appreciate your company and I wish I had more friends that kept up with what is happening but mainstream news is completely devoid of information that might inform the masses and somehow they bury their heads when the subject does get a little too close to home. It's sad, it's lonely and I fear for how this all turns out. 

 :-* for that reason I highly appreciate that kind of forum here, where you feel a little more normal and not so lonely when worrying about the future and asking question nobody else seems to be interested in. Sometimes it feels like looking straigt into hell ground-but somehow I´m more interested in facing that, than bury my head in the ground.  ;D

Quote
It pains me that the way you describe German media, the selling of terror fears etc. mirrors so much the American experiance. ... The marketing of fear but the complete vacuum of information on how we are collectively precipitating a climate disaster. And more importantly what we as individuals might do to reduce our contributions .

Maybe it is some kind of plan behind it? As the governments know about the mess we are going in (and I think even Trump knows exactly) it will be helpful to have people that are perfectly controlled and busy with their ordinary life of consumption. Feeling safe in illusion, as long as possible.... :o

It can not be said that information is hidden-you can learn anything you want--and thats it. Learn, see, ask and act hopefully preventing a crash OR believe, act hopefully blind and get crashed...? Or to say it with Mr. Hamlet: To be or not to be?

Even found a nice map about the current methane values in athmosphere. Seems there is getting a new colour scala necessary?

http://www.gmes-atmosphere.eu/d/services/gac/nrt/nrt_fields_ghg!Methane!Surface!00!Global!macc!od!enfo!nrt_fields_ghg!2017051400!!/

32
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 16, 2017, 08:58:59 AM »
Fishes, seaweed, sharks, and whales take on carbon as cleaners of the oceans. That's their job. An extra bit of carbon won't hurt them, or anyone who eats them. The biggest problem there is the over-fishing of the ocean, and also plastic particle soup in the ocean, turning them acidic. Also Fukushima could be bad. Also pollution dumped directly into ocean by cities and international shipping. And, of course, the oceans do absorb carbon from the atmosphere, so become more acidic.

 ;D maybe I expressed it a little unclear. I'm not afraid fishes could be harmed by some extra carbon.  ;D The problem is, that there are not so much fishes, sharks or whales left to let the biological carbon pump work.  There are more and more algae blooms that even kill fishes! Especially those algae that get along with nitrogen... So it would be also interesting what kind of algaes appeared at the methane spots?

As Bruce writes, it would be interesting, what was measured regarding phytoplankton driving the carbonate pump? As water gets more acidic that doesn't work well too. As far as I read (Rahmstorf book) phytoplankton is specialised on water temperatures. When suface water gets warmer it emigrates to lower, colder waterlevels - but there is less light, so it all has natural borders. And if there are algaes are darkening the water surface, catching sun energy, maybe it would have not that nice effect in the established ecosystem....and the foodchain that starts in cold Arctic waters.

Quote
They did say it in the article about the dark winter (at the very end).

Sciencemag does, but not the german GEOMAR version.

Quote
The whole fear of melting icepack is that in the summer it could lead to more methane release. In the past, the large summer icepack would trap methane before it is released, and it was quickly absorbed by natural mechanisms. Now, that icepack is more and more open in summer, shallow seabed regions more likely to melt. As far as I know, winter is not as big an issue, due to icepack cover over the Arctic Ocean

I think it is also a problem of growing ongoing release in winter, trapped under the ice...and what is happening with the methane there?

Very interesting read regarding methane seeps from ocean bed is this publication, from 2016:
https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lno.10307/full&ved=0ahUKEwj40eGu3fPTAhUsDZoKHamyAfsQFghJMAs&usg=AFQjCNHPWdTLBbJKsDl8Ok1BM9AIPh65sA&sig2=rJ80UrDKO9eOclaMA4JYOA



33
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 15, 2017, 02:39:57 PM »
Indeed, Terry, it is nice to hear some good news at all-how tiny they might be in the end.

But on the other hand better sounding news than the real scientific results tell are produced by the german institute. And press takes them and makes them sound much more positive. All gets filtered and painted white.
 
There is a tendency in our press I really don´t like. There is all about a far terrorism, producing fear, let people call for control and observation. But you hear nothing about severe weather events. Nothing about US, no Canadian flood, not even somehing about flash floods or severe weather events here in Germany.

Nothing is done to let people think, how they could change their personal life, no perspectives, no solutions, no visions... All the German official climate politics is a big lie if you have a closer look at it.

Most people here are not really informed at all, or they ignore it. Don´t know. But I can´t explain myself why the green party in times of more floods, droughts and negative climate effects like the spring freeze gets results of 6%, while pro fossil coal parties win elections...

That leaves me with more fear than facing the truth about methane - the lethargy of the people.
Maybe it is all natural and human. And I´m an alien?  ;D

34
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 15, 2017, 01:16:52 PM »
As I was afraid of there are appearing the first press articles about the Sciencemag article....

It is interesting to read the german version of the GEOMAR institute press release: http://www.geomar.de/news/article/methanquellen-vor-spitzbergen-verringern-treibhauseffekt/

There is emphasized the relationship of 1:2000 - one part upwelling methane could trigger the photosynthesis uptake of 2000 parts CO2. (Sciencemag writes about 1:1900?) That the photosynthesis in the end is only doubled compared with the water enviroment is not said exactly.

I don´t believe the algae will be a real sink for carbon - most of them don´t sink down and as a lot of fishes and other marine life is extremely threatened, the foodchain is disrupted...(more algae means also warmer water...)

That the algae effect will not work in dark winter is also not told by GEOMAR-also it is transfered to areas with shallow waters... It is even told that methane is not proven to cause the upwelling of nutrisious waters-in contrast to Sciencemag article.

In the end the german press takes the german version - of course celebrating the large cooling effect and the relationship of 1:2000.

http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/klima-methan-quellen-verringern-ueberraschenderweise.2850.de.html?drn:news_id=742982

 

35
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: May 11, 2017, 04:28:13 PM »
"Are methane seeps in the Arctic slowing global warming?"

I already stumbled over that article and wondered about its sound full of hope...as if the methane hydrates problem could be no threat at all. And further it declares the methane even as a solution for the CO2-problem? I could imagine that there is some mixing going on by the upwelling bubbles-might bring a fertilizing effect for more algae growth and declining CO2 levels in water. But what effect brings that not normal mixing of polar ocean layers-especially for the ice growth in the dark times?

Just looked a little at the website of mentioned USGS institute https://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/pubsearch/year_list.php?year=2017

Found also that publication: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016RG000534/abstract;jsessionid=F9E3CA404D7ED75C5593ED4D7E25E928.f04t04

I´m not an expert in that, but it seems there are some nice people at work, that try to spread doubts in the basics of the methane hydrates threat many scientists clearly see:

Quote
In addition, large-scale gas hydrate dissociation is sometimes portrayed not only as a consequence of warming but also as a potential synergistic driver for enhanced warming if the CH4 released from gas hydrates reaches the atmosphere. These dual roles of gas hydrate dissociation—as both an effect and possible contributor to global warming—have led some to adopt a catastrophic perspective on the interaction of the climate system with the global gas hydrate reservoir

It is also doubted in the assumptions of methane growth included in the IPCC-reports (some also say they are much too low) - e.g it is doubted in Shakhovas research:

Quote
The values quoted by the various IPCC reports have never been based on observational evidence for CH4 emissions derived from gas hydrate dissociation since no such measurements exist. A few examples underscore this point: The clearly identified assumption of Cicerone and Oremland [1988] that 5 Tg yr−1 CH4 reached the atmosphere from gas hydrate dissociation has set the stage for the subsequent quarter century. The third IPCC [2001] cites the Fung et al. [1991] forward modeling study, which merely assigned a value for the contribution to atmospheric CH4 emissions from gas hydrate dissociation. This was also the case with Lelieveld et al. [1998], which assumed 10 Tg yr−1 CH4 emissions from gas hydrate for one scenario, a number that was then adopted by the third IPCC [2001]. The Wuebbles and Hayhoe [2002] study cited by the fourth IPCC [2007] is sometimes considered the observationally based source for the now oft-used 5 Tg yr−1 CH4 estimate for atmospheric CH4 flux from gas hydrates. That study in turn cites Judd [2000], which is a geologic methane seepage study that does not provide an independent estimate for emissions derived from gas hydrate dissociation. Cranston [1994], on which Judd [2000] relies for his hydrate-related flux discussion, estimates the sum of global diffusive and ebullitive fluxes from marine sediments to the atmosphere to be ~1.3 Tg yr−1 to 13 Tg yr−1 CH4 considering all sources, including shallow-water seeps and deepwater gas hydrates. The Denman et al. [2007] study cited in the fifth IPCC [2013] is the climate coupling chapter from the fourth IPCC [2007] and not an independent source of information. The fifth IPCC [2013] also refers to Dickens [2003b], which is a book review of Kennett et al. [2003] that did not provide an estimate for CH4 flux to the atmosphere from dissociating gas hydrates, as Dickens [2003a] also did not. Shakhova et al. [2010a], also given as a source for the hydrate-derived atmospheric CH4 flux in the fifth IPCC [2013], did not attribute the 7.98 Tg yr−1 CH4 flux that they calculated for the East Siberian Arctic shelf to gas hydrate degradation, rather considering a range of potential sources.

 ;D wish I would have some more time to dig in-but I think it is not worth it. Intention seems to be to spread doubts and to give the mainstream media with the Sciencemag article stuff to tell some good news about methane.
 

36
The rest / Re: Human Stupidity (Human Mental Illness)
« on: May 11, 2017, 02:13:44 PM »
As it is a OT area and has to do a lot to do with stupidity, greed and its consequences for all of us: I watched a report about a german doctor from Leipzig University, struggling with antibiotica resistent microbes. He made a trip to India where the pharma industry produces cheap antibiotica, leaving us with the nice gift of MRSA...

Really terrible what they found out....

http://mediathek.daserste.de/Reportage-Dokumentation/The-invisible-enemy-deadly-superbugs-f/Video?bcastId=799280&documentId=42690832

37
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: May 05, 2017, 02:16:59 PM »
As you mention methane here I would like to ad an observation I made. (although a little OT) There are more and more SO2-spots to watch at nullschool-maybe also a product of that microbes and a sign of growing thawing methane hydrates-SO2 can be a product when microbes work under  anaerobic conditions. Also thought about a kind of whirlpooleffect of bubbling methane, regarding mixing usually temperature layers of the ocean...

I already shared that observation at stupid questions thread regarding eastern Siberia-now there are more spots at east coast of Greenland, some northern Canada and Alaska.

Made a compairing picture 2016/2017:



 

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: May 05, 2017, 10:35:57 AM »
Stunning aprupt upwards movement of the Extent Graph of Bremen...  :o



And a huge crack north of Canada appeared yesterday:

39
Consequences / Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« on: May 03, 2017, 08:06:47 AM »
All about Europe farmers have been affected by the freezing April following the warmest March ever. Vine, apples, strawberries, cherries, plums others berries. Farmers worked with emergency programs like burning fires, spraying water to freeze the blossoms, at the Bodensee region they even tried flying helicopters to mix the sky layers. Mostly all got in spite of the efforts a victim of the cold outbreak of the last weeks. (fortunately I'm living in a rough area where nature was not so far....thinking about planning some more trees here.  8)

http://www.newsweek.com/spring-freeze-damages-french-wine-production-591467
https://dobianchi.com/2017/04/21/freezing-temperatures-vineyards-italy/
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/2017/04/europe-late-spring-freeze-170422083859329.html

40
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: May 02, 2017, 04:45:34 PM »
A nice explaination regarding the difference between solid/fractured ice regarding meltrate is to find in that video of Paul Beckwith minute 7:40

Beside other facts about Arctic feedbacks  - videos of him are worth to see for newbies. 😁

41
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but Germany ....
« on: May 01, 2017, 04:11:46 PM »
Additionally I highly recommend the website of Fraunhofer institute-here you can find everything about Germanys power production, prices, export... -a kind of magic that site, even in full english available. :)

There I found about the increase of the export first after I did some resarch powered by my curiotisy. - but I actually find that there are no more that nice interactive cake diagrams for export/import since 2015 - I could swear there were the 2016/2017 too recently! I also can not find any monthly datas about export since Feb. 2017-  :-X maybe another try to hide some unconvinient datas-preparing the upcoming election?

https://www.energy-charts.de/power.htm

Another aspect is a total stagnation of installation of new PV since 2013/2014 due to drastic cuts in the guaranteed prices.



graphic shows the guaranteed payment decreased more than the system prices and so it got all pretty unattractive for bigger players or investors.

As I´m planning my own PV I had to realize that the guaranteed price is very, very close to my costs-no bonus profit for capital investment risk to get anymore-as it was in the beginning of EEG (about 20% profit I think). The entire thing is only "profitable" for people that could consume the electricity directly when it is produced. Otherwise it is a nearly null game or a thing of idealism-with the investion risk you have to carry. The investion pays off after 10 years.

Beside there are nearly no banks that offer KFW-credits for PV for privates. As bank houses earn generally nothing due to the low level of interests they are not willing to do the unprofitable business with low-interest KfWloans.

Another thing is the absolutely complicated -and expensive- tax administration of every single little PV power plant. You even have to pay VAT on the energy you use directly - calculated on the basis of the price you would have to pay if you buy it expensive at a supplier. Of course you have the choice to do the small buisness without VAT, but then it makes the thing even more expensive, because you loose the chance to get the VAT from your installation invoice...

All in one all is done to make the thing absulutely unattractive for people, to let the people feel angry about the renewable idea as a whole - and the communication about climate change is nearly not taking place in the public, newspapers or TV.

42
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but Germany ....
« on: May 01, 2017, 11:36:54 AM »
I'm not sure that makes any sense at all if the goal is to lower CO2 emissions.  Roll the subsidies back onto general tax dollars and quit adding VAT (sales) tax to retail electricity.  Germany has a disincentive program for getting off fossil fuels in place.

In my heat pump compairision was VAT even excluded. The financial ministry even earns much more VAT on the higher taxes of renewables!  :o (what the hell is the sense in there?!)

Quote
Much bigger focus required outside the electricity sector, on transport (oil) and heating (gas):

Indeed that is the problem! The price system in place is a disincentive system for private costumers that are not common with the urgent problem of climate change. The private sector currently has to carry ALL the costs of renewables. All high energy industry (and the rules for that got lower and lower) has not to pay anything.

If you want to get a movement into transport and heat you either need a well informed public that is willing to install the new techniques, drive an EV or you need a price system that could make a guiding job.

At the moment, if you turn your energy consumption to renewables, or even install own PV, you are the biggest looser ever. Blamed a) having too much money to "waste" b) causing high energy prices. Beside that the system serves the well established german envy factor.  :D

The transistion of all -energy, transport, heat- is a transistion to electricity. Why not dividing the costs through the wider basis of fossil fuels? The costs could be also lower if there were no import duties on chinese solar panels, protecting the European factories (and prices)....

The low market price of energy, and so the costs causing gap to guaranteed price for renewables is caused by overproduction of coal powered energy... but the mechanism of the price system is well hidden, and the media does NOTHING to explain it. It is told: higher amount of renewables is causing higher EEG-Umlage, grids have to be built out due to renewables = higher costs for your electricity - no alternative.

All that mess is no coincidence, but the work of thousands of fossil lobbyists and industry close politicians, that are not willing to change a failing system obviously giving no answers for the future.

By the way: my posted chart refered to the last chart before tCO2/TW it was about the development of gCO2/kWh.

43
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but Germany ....
« on: April 30, 2017, 11:40:07 AM »
Here my pdf-calculations regarding driving an EV. It's in german, could translate -but maybe it is obviously also in german.

And if I compare the costs of my (much more expensive) heat pump with a conventional oil heating:
costs renewable energy from my supplier 2016: 1,040 EUR/y
costs for oil with same energy content 2016: 1,206 EUR/y
energy fees and charges: renewable 630 EUR/y vs. oil 127 EUR/y

changed:  "." toanglo "," 😁 .


44
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but Germany ....
« on: April 30, 2017, 11:26:08 AM »
Got this chart from official website of German government. Can't discover that kind of decline your chart shows. (BP 2016=Oil concern provided?!  :o) To be more precisely-we are not burning "more dirty coal than ever", but much more dirty coal than neccessary. In my opinion it is the religious believe that free, unregulated markets will heal all on their own....

In contrast to the official goals we find the absurd situation that the current market price structure
makes puzzlestone like pump storage and flexible modern gas power plants unprofitable.

And as a private user, if you decide to heat your house with effictive heat pump or you drive a EV, both powered with renewable energy  - you have to pay all the fees for energy transition too, more fees than you would pay if you use fossil oil or energy.... so you get laughtered as an idealistic fool, doing that investions that do not pay off financially.

45
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but Germany ....
« on: April 29, 2017, 08:46:30 AM »
EU decided to have more sharper limits for conventional  power plants - against Germany. The German government was concerned about the high investions the fossil Power Industry would have to make....  :-X

https://m.heute.de/detail/47070126

I just say: Germanys "Energiewende" is a big foul egg. We are burning more dirty coal then ever, producing more energy than needed. a) to enlarge the amount of energy, to press marketprices down, to let the dirtiest coal power plants earn their money as long as possible b) to produce a large gap between market prices and guaranteed prices for renewables. The gap is to be payed by private costumers only, that are told to save energy. So you have an exploding EEG reallocation charge, exploding energy prices - and a negative mood in the public regarding renewables, that are blamed by media to be the cause for the prices explosion.

All is a nice coal powered steam engine. lot of heat, lot of steam, but no movement....

46
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: April 26, 2017, 09:56:40 PM »
Yes, @johnm33, that Project.  :D The video of theatlantic-link was also nice, although it was more heroic and did not tell about the difficulties in nourishing the animals, with always earlier and higher Siberian snowpack. Seems to be more a crowdfunding advertising trailer somehow.  ;D

I'm afraid there are only very few existing grassland adapted animals that could survive the Siberian winter... :'( Weren't North American bisons a kind of nomades? That might also be to main problem of the ambitious project. Human societies think in static territories that "belong" to a certain family, tribe, nation, state (a strange human logic, that seems not to work really good). Human society, as it exists, is not able to think in flexible moving living areas, a borderless, peacefull unity of all living things. The human idea of a static "park" doesn't match nature-and I think those are also the thoughts of the Russian scientist.... but fortunately in Russia there are not that borders, only a few people live there - so why not give it a try?

All in one very inspiring those people! The are so grounded, just doing the things their intuition tells them. Like it!!! Never thought about forest/grassland/wilderness that way before.

47
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: April 26, 2017, 05:29:22 PM »
Just watched a nice documentation about a Russian Scientist and his tries to prevent the Permafrost from thawing by bringing animals to the Tundra. Unfortunately the video is in German, but maybe some of you understand it.

The film mentions several here discussed details, beside methane. Growing isolating snowcover, mud in rivers thats are getting warmer, methane in lakes, tons of undecayed  biomass:

http://www1.wdr.de/fernsehen/weltweit/sendungen/die-klimaretter-der-arktis-100.html

Here also a link to the website of the mad project called Pleistocene park: http://www.pleistocenepark.ru/en/news/25/

48
Walking the walk / Re: Sourcing solar panels and batteries
« on: April 24, 2017, 05:45:33 PM »
Don't know about the sources in Canada, but I just was busy with making my own decision regarding PV & storage. I took a LG RESU 10 kWh, not a Tesla. Prices are a difficult thing to compare - I assume there is a lot of orientation on the subventions and energy prices of each country. In the end it seems to be a reverse calculation.  :o

49
Antarctica / Re: Sea Ice Extent around Antarctica
« on: April 24, 2017, 01:39:39 PM »
Quite warm in Antarctica too at the moment....

Also a remarkable anomalies in albedo warming potential- here a site with compairision of several years:
https://sites.google.com/site/cryospherecomputing/warming-potential/Albedo-Warming-Overview

50
Science / Re: Adapting to the Anthropocene
« on: April 23, 2017, 10:22:09 AM »
@sigmetnow recently we had an article here in newspaper about fogcatchers in Peru.

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/33507/20161205/oceans-sky-fog-catcher-gives-clean-water-poor-peru.htm

By the way nobody cares about the strange new trend of asparagus from Peru all winter long in our supermarkets. Early asparagus from Greece seems to be replaced by groundheated, foil protected (tons of plastics) german cultures-harvested by low paid workers from Poland or other eastern european countries...

Maybe it would be one step in adaption to get aware of the stupidity we all act as costumers? But that will never happen, we never pay the TRUE cost. Not for energy, not for food, not for clothes or other things we are told to need...   >:(

Pages: [1] 2 3