[RonMN]

I'm not sure what you mean by "in parts of it's curve"...but i'm reading here that water does expand when it gets warmer.

http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/541.html

Quote:
Scientists predict that in coming decades an enhanced greenhouse effect will cause not only a warmer atmosphere, but warmer oceans too. And ocean water, like other materials, expands as it stores more heat.* Scientists are not sure how much heat energy the oceans will absorb and how that heat energy will be distributed throughout the world's ocean waters, so they don't know exactly how much the oceans will expand.

[pedalling_faster]

i took the train yesterday to visit a friend. we saw the pink panther & went to a japanese sushi-sashimi restaurant. too tired to draw a curve right now.

steve martin's last great movie ?

wonderful, wonderful water

ice, density @ 0 C
0.9150

liquid water, density @ 0 C
0.9999

liquid water, density @ 4 C
1.0000

the weight of one cc of water = 1 gram, part of how
the metric system was established.

liquid water, density @ 20 C
0.9982

liquid water, density @ 40 C
0.9922

this is at STP, standard temp & pressure.

secondary effects - water is slightly compressible. extra weight of water reduces volume of water.

references
http://www.simetric.co.uk/si_water.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice

wouldn't worry about water expanding as it gets warmer. either way, the citizens of Vanuatu (spelling ?) will need to be accepted as environmental refugees by new zealand - they have already applied because their island is well, not exactly sinking, but, close enough.

still would like to see a re-spin on the "sea level rising" articles.

[dooberheim]

Perhaps since they are only talking about changes of 2-3 C in the water temp, they figure the thermal contraction is negligible in comparison to the amount of water flowing from the polar ice.

But I agree, I am sure the latent heat of fusion of water is a significant buffer to temperature increase. Also, in winter, the freezing of water will tend to keep the air temperatures higher then they otherwise might have been.

DK

[bobcousins]

wouldn't worry about water expanding as it gets warmer. either way, the citizens of Vanuatu (spelling ?) will need to be accepted as environmental refugees by new zealand - they have already applied because their island is well, not exactly sinking, but, close enough.

still would like to see a re-spin on the "sea level rising" articles.

Ok, I am confused. The sea level data says that the sea level has been rising has it not?? If your theory is that the sea volume should be contracting, how do you explain sea level rise? Either way the net effect is sea level is rising.

As for heat absorption, I believe it makes no difference to the atmosphere whether the heat is absorbed by water or ice. The rate of abosrption is generally proportional to the difference in temperature. What it does mean is that sea temperature is not increasing as fast due to melting ice. When all the ice is melted, sea temperature rise will accelerate.

I had a look on realclimate, and I didn't see much directly about this issue, apart from the comment

The largest contributions to sea level rise so far are estimated to have come from thermal expansion, with the melting of mountain glaciers and icecaps being of second order.

[Ibon]

During the past glacial and interglacial periods sea levels varied dramatically. The northern ice sheets are a major influence and how quickly they melted or froze. Without the human effects of global warming there have been instable climatic periods with large fluctuations in sea level in the past. Due to the complexity of climate and the effects of ocean currents etc. it is important that climatoligists first understand the inherant stability of past interglacial periods like the one we are in now and then try to anticipate the consequences of the human effects of global warming. Here is one study being done on this topic that is related to your inquiry

http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/res ... 5curry.htm

What is the significance of this research for others working in this field of inquiry and for the broader scientific community?
Rapid and substantial sea level change implies similar changes in global climate and continental ice sheets. Present ideas about rapid climate change often invoke surges of ice or melt water from large northern hemisphere ice sheets. If such changes were indeed occurring during the Last Interglacial, a time of minimum northern hemisphere ice, it will require a different explanation. Rapid fluctuations in ice sheets also present a challenge to those working on glacier dynamics. In addition, if the new approach to coral dating proves to be robust, it will lead to significant improvements in chronologies for the past 600,000 years, benefiting all who work in this interesting period.

What is the significance of this research for society?
Today’s interglacial climate appears to have been relatively stable over the last several thousand years, in sharp contrast to the most recent glacial period where rapid and substantial climate changes have been well documented. In light of the increasing human impact on Earth’s climate, it is important to understand whether our modern climate is inherently stable, or if it might be susceptible to rapid change

[dohboi]

Pedalling_faster--your opening post is very interesting and troubling.

I can't follow your argument about water expansion, though. Your data after "wonderfull water" merely shows that ice (and water about to become ice) is lighter than liquid water, something we already know--ice floats.

But this is the only "curve." At all the relevant temperatures (above 4 degrees C) you show water expanding (getting less dense) as it warms.

Am I missing something? Does salt water behave differently? Is all or most sea water below 4 degrees C?

I don't see how you can be wrong, though, in claiming that once the major ice-sheets melt, temeratures are really going to take off (however much I hope you are wrong here).

[aflatoxin]

If you had a relaible estimate of the amount of ice on the poles, it would be a pretty simple task to calculate the amount of energy required for the phase change. Figuring out the amount of energy required to get to that point would be a challenge

Bear in mind that it is a problem that only concerns the surface layer of solid ice and water on the surface of the ice. This complicates the problem.

[grabby]

The "heat" absobed by melting Ice is 80 times as much as just heating water.

But, when Ice MELTS it "ABSORBS" this heat, it doesn't give it off.

so actually melting ice will prevent global warming by buffering the temprature change, this actually COOLS the air passing over the ice, this in facts COOLS the wind and the air
(This is why blowing a fan over an ice block makes cold air, all the heat is removed.)

Actually it would be a most efficient air conditioner to let water freeze in the winter then store it in a nice ice house where air passes through into the kings mansion.

I think it would take about a hundred slaves to keep the ice house stocked with enough ice to cool one king for one summer.

I don't know, we'll have to wait until we reach the Peasant/King stage of american society ( a little while after peak oil) to see how many actually have these air conditioners.

Think of Ice as a HEAT SINK where lots of heat goes.

The problem is, once the ice is melted, that massive amount of heat will not have anywhere else to go but increase the temp of the earth 80 times faster than ist is today.

so there will be a global warming CLIFF, once tha last bits of ice is nearly gone the heating will be exponential. Thus, curtains act four.

The ice is our heat sucker and it is doing its job very well.

[backstop]

Grabby -

For a first-hand account of the construction, operation and great utility of ice-houses see if you can find a book called:

- Cottage Economy -

by William Cobbet

Written in 1821, it gives an arcadian radical's view of the options for the cottager's wellbeing,
both in very practical accounts rural living and in the politics of the day.

The book has rarely been out of print and, if it is, then a 2nd-hand copy shouldn't be hard to find.

With regard to the melting of the great Ice Caps, a concept you may find interesting is that of "thermal mass"
which may be eroded at rates influenced both by the scale of its extant ice
and by the vagaries both of the accretion of snowfall and the diverse elemental vehicles of warming.

Perhaps the most that may be said as a forcast is that if their melting is not halted by one or more 'climate flips,'
such as the North Atlantic Conveyor cutting out,
or by the necessary & sufficient (i.e. legislated & implemented) global action to halt & reverse GHG emissions from industry & from deforestation,
then there will be a continued acceleration of the Ice Caps' meltwater outputs.

What fraction of global temperature forcing this will "offset" (which concept is a very moot point) at which stage, is a moot point,
given the information provided by Hansen regarding the exponential acceleration of melting (thermal mass loss)
to a point of what he called "explosive fragmentation."

Here is the article he wrote published in the UK's "Independent" on Energy Bulletin.

http://www.energybulletin.net/12922.html

He used the term explosive with reference to the normal pace of glacial change -
i.e. in the sense of a significant remaindered proportion of an Ice Cap being shed within a few decades or years, as opposed to millenia or centuries.

However I've yet to see his explicit understanding of when such fragmentation is liable to occur on the curve of an Ice Cap's overall decline.

For a better informed view than I can provide, have a look at :

www.climate.org

regards,

Backstop

[grabby]

How long have we got? We have to stabilize emissions of carbon dioxide within a decade, or temperatures will warm by more than one degree. That will be warmer than it has been for half a million years, and many things could become unstoppable. If we are to stop that, we cannot wait for new technologies like capturing emissions from burning coal. We have to act with what we have. This decade, that means focusing on energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy that do not burn carbon. We don't have much time left.

Ah, no problem then!

I PROMISE as an old grabby promise, that our CO2 worries will be over in ten years.
But I don't think the global warming issue is over, we will be very warm far sooner than ten years if we are tipping now.

anyway, trying to limit carbon consumption is not a worry, our limits will be automatic, we will burn far less carbon in 5 years than today like it or not.

[backstop]

Grabby -

There seems to be a substantial error in your post in attributing the quote to me -

Not only do I not recall writing it, I don't agree with some of it either in principle or in recommended practice !

I'd be obliged if you'd edit correct the attribution asap, as there's enough confusion around already.

regards,

Backstop

[grabby]

Windows did it.

All fixed.

[uNkNowN ElEmEnt]

(Well there goes the skiing season)

Europe's Alps could lose three-quarters of their glaciers to climate change during the coming century.

That is the conclusion of new research from the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) in Zurich.

Scientists base their conclusion on forecasts of temperature and precipitation changes in a new computer model of Alpine glaciation.

Glaciers are crucial in providing fresh drinking water, and are also key for tourism, irrigation and hydro-power.

There is already strong evidence of a major ongoing melt.

In the 1850s, according to WGMS data presented at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) annual meeting in Vienna, nearly 4,474 sq km of the Alps were glaciated.

By the 1970s, the area covered had fallen to just under 2,903 sq km, and in 2000, it was down to 2,272 sq km.

"From 1850 to the 1970s, there is an average loss of 2.9% per decade," WGMC's Michael Zemp told EGU delegates.

"From the 1970s until 2000 it is 8.2% per decade, and we see most of that increase since 1985," he said.

Warm projections

As temperatures rise, the minimum altitude at which glaciers form also rises.

To some extent that can be mitigated by changes in precipitation; more snow in winter will help glaciers accumulate more ice.

The WGMS has developed a computer model which calculates what projected temperature and precipitation changes for the Alps will mean for the glaciation altitude.

According to the OCCC, a national Swiss scientific grouping, summers are likely to get warmer by about 3C before the end of the century, and precipitation is likely to increase by about 10%.

"The summer temperature increase is 3C, which is very bad for glaciers," Dr Zemp told the BBC News website, "and the annual precipitation increases, which creates a bit better conditions for glaciers.

"You get a rise of 340m in the level that enables glaciation."

Across the Alps, this would mean a loss of 75% in the glaciated area.

Summer needs

This is only one projection for future Alpine climate, albeit one endorsed by an august scientific panel.

Summers could be cooler, winters could see higher snowfall.

But, commented Michael Zemp: "Even a rise of just 1C would see a loss of 40%.

"And even if you halted climate on today's level, glaciers would continue to retreat because of very bad years in the last two decades."

Melting of glaciers could be serious news for people living in or near the Alps.

They act as freshwater reservoirs, storing winter snowfall and releasing it over the summer, when it is most needed for drinking and agriculture.

Without them, the stored water would descend in a rush in spring, as soon as the snow began to melt.

[Anthrobus]

hi,

add another danger: rockslide. If glaciers are melting, so is undergrund ice, loosening masses of rocks and soil and possibly bringing whole mountainsides out of balance (Some giant landslides occured in the alps at the end of the last ice age). Also, large amounts of formerly ice-covered rocks and gravel are set free and are washed downstream. The landscape might severely change in some areas. You notice it, when you visit some areas regularly.

All the mountain ranges have been made accessible
all the streams have been bridged
insecurity and danger are merely a legend now ...

Aelius Aristides (AD 117 - 181) "Roman Oration"

[Zardoz]

The speed of the melting is phenomenal:

Tourists flock as warming Alps crumble

Glaciers in the Alps may have lost up to a tenth of their volume in the hot 2003 summer alone, researchers at Zurich university have said, and the ice now only occupies between half and a third of its volume in 1850.

[ohanian]

Really? I was under the impression that global warming causes ice age in Europe.

[TorrKing]

Really? I was under the impression that global warming causes ice age in Europe.

Probably needs some time before that kicks in....

And I see it to be very possible that our climate will fluctuate between subtropical and arctic weathers. Inconsistency I think will be the name of the game.

Torjus Gaaren

[Zardoz]

Really? I was under the impression that global warming causes ice age in Europe.

The thinking is that the melting of the Artic and Greenland will pour so much cold fresh water into the North Atlantic that it will slow the Gulf Stream to a crawl, or even stop it completely. It has already slowed significantly.

Without that warm water circulating into the North Atlantic, the winter climate of Europe could be far colder.

[Heineken]

With global warming in Europe one of the big impacts will be collapse of the continent's rivers, many of which are heavily fed by melting glacial water and, especially, melting snowpack at higher elevations. As the glaciers and snowpack disappear, the rivers will shrink or actually dry up (a process aided by the ruinous droughts and higher temps that are appearing). This will vastly decrease Europe's carrying capacity for people.

Collapse of the Gulf Stream would solve that problem but create even worse ones for Europe.

[mekrob]

Without that warm water circulating into the North Atlantic, the winter climate of Europe could be far colder.

So it will be Russian Winter for all in Europe? That's grand.