Peak Oil News and Message Boards

Posted: **Fri 22 May 2020, 11:10:21**

Microplastic pollution in oceans vastly underestimated – study

Particles may outnumber zooplankton, which underpin marine life and regulate climate

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ated-study

Posted: **Thu 18 Jun 2020, 23:55:15**

rockdoc123 wrote:why use the term "acidification" when "reduced alkalinity" is accurate?

Why use the term "warming" when "reduced coolness" is accurate?

Posted: **Fri 19 Jun 2020, 15:21:28**

Why use the term "warming" when "reduced coolness" is accurate?

simply because warm is a relative term. -45 C is warmer than -50 C. A temperature rise from -50 C to -45 C in a decade hence demonstrates warming at a rate greater than if the same increase occurred over 3 decades.

Acidity, on the other hand is not a relative term when compared with the defined terms of "neutral" (ph=7.0) and alkaline (ph > 7.0). A solution with a pH of 5.0 would be more acidic than a solution of 6.0 although both are acidic. A solution with a pH of 7.5 is less alkaline than a solution with a pH of 8.0 although both are alkaline.

Posted: **Wed 01 Jul 2020, 19:56:56**

The BLOB, that sink hole in the North Atlantic sea, portends some sinister events about to unfold:

Why Earth has a stubborn spot that's cooling
https://mashable.com/article/cold-blob-atlantic-ocean-climate-change/

I didn't quite connect with the article, but it's like the belly button of the Oceans.

Of course, that begs the question of where the asshole is located??

That could be distributed, though, maybe everywhere.

Posted: **Wed 01 Jul 2020, 20:38:32**

As I understand it, it is partly driven by Greenland Ice Sheet melt, which has been going off the charts this year.

Posted: **Wed 01 Jul 2020, 22:13:21**

dohboi wrote:As I understand it, it is partly driven by Greenland Ice Sheet melt, which has been going off the charts this year.

That is my understanding, too. The fact that the melting Greenland ice sheets are made of freshwater while the ocean's water is saltwater is a factor in this, too, IIRC. The colder freshwater stays close to the surface while the hotter saltwater is underneath it because it is heavier.

Posted: **Thu 02 Jul 2020, 17:46:14**

It is not simply some fresh water flux from Greenland. The atmospheric storm tracks (baroclinic eddy statistically populated pathways) are changing too. This interacts with the ocean to change the THC. Warming is a multi-variate problem that has shown almost no negative feedback channels.

The oft-mentioned salinity dilution effect on the THC has become an idee fixe with nothing else getting attention. If you notice the cold anomaly is rather far from the Greenland Sea where the salinity-driven component of the THC in the form of very narrow columns of downwelling is concentrated. And since this is not a single variable problem, raising other effects is not denying the salinity dilution contribution. This isn't retarded politics with its zero-sum retard-think.

One of the most prominent features of the coupling of the storm tracks with the ocean in the North Atlantic and North Pacific are the associated "oscillations" in sea surface temperatures and sea level pressure (NAO, NPO). These features are nonlinear since the sea surface temperatures also affect the storm tracks.

Upthread we have the number of 10,000 years thrown around for the current global ocean warming. This is a very misleading number. The seabed core analysis in the Barents Sea by a team of German climatologists has revealed warming not seen since the Miocene which is over 15,000 million years ago. The polar ocean regions are a more useful indicator of climate change than low and tropical latitudes since the relative change at low latitudes is tiny.

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 08:49:54**

By Santiago Arcos ABOARD ECUADOREAN NAVY AIRCRAFT, Aug 9 (Reuters) – Ecuador’s navy is conducting surveillance of a massive Chinese fishing fleet that is operating near the protected waters of the Galapagos Islands, amid concerns about the environmental impact of fishing in the area of the ecologically sensitive islands.

The navy conducted a patrol mission on Friday that included a flyover of the region where the hulking vessels are fishing, as well as reconnaissance by military patrol ships. A total of 340 vessels are currently in the area, the navy said, compared with some 260 reported last month.

https://gcaptain.com/ecuador-navy-surve ... galapagos/

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 10:32:43**

No matter how we slice or dice things, the planet is warming, ice is melting, sea levels are rising, weather is changing, and human behavior, collectively, will continue to contribute to these processes until economic and natural forcing changes that.

No collective hive mind. Only collective consequences.

I don't post here much lately. Grew tired of the nauseatingly self-serving rationalizations day after day.

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 11:56:20**

GHung wrote:No matter how we slice or dice things, the planet is warming, ice is melting, sea levels are rising, weather is changing, and human behavior, collectively, will continue to contribute to these processes until economic and natural forcing changes that.

No collective hive mind. Only collective consequences.

I don't post here much lately. Grew tired of the nauseatingly self-serving rationalizations day after day.

Just what course of action do you propose to solve this dilemma?
While the problems you state are real viable solutions are few or even none existent.

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 12:22:21**

GHung wrote:No matter how we slice or dice things, the planet is warming, ice is melting, sea levels are rising, weather is changing, and human behavior, collectively, will continue to contribute to these processes until economic and natural forcing changes that.

No collective hive mind. Only collective consequences.

I don't post here much lately. Grew tired of the nauseatingly self-serving rationalizations day after day.

I fully understand that.

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 19:19:46**

vtsnowedin wrote: While the problems you state are real viable solutions are few or even none existent.

I think honestly everyone knows there are no solutions except the consequences themselves that will collectively put us through the gristmill of an increasingly volatile biosphere with repercussions on food production, pandemics, geopolitical conflicts, etc. And thus we will grind down to some new carrying capacity as a species having brought with us some cultural adaptations along the way that may or may not embed a set of morals and ethics that will enable us to persevere this experiment of a modern technological civilization. Or we may fall to a level of complexity resembling the middle ages.

There is no silver bullet solution, just the catalytic nature of the consequences themselves.

We all know there is no "solution"

Posted: **Wed 12 Aug 2020, 19:39:18**

Ibon wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: While the problems you state are real viable solutions are few or even none existent.

I think honestly everyone knows there are no solutions except the consequences themselves that will collectively put us through the gristmill of an increasingly volatile biosphere with repercussions on food production, pandemics, geopolitical conflicts, etc. And thus we will grind down to some new carrying capacity as a species having brought with us some cultural adaptations along the way that may or may not embed a set of morals and ethics that will enable us to persevere this experiment of a modern technological civilization. Or we may fall to a level of complexity resembling the middle ages.

There is no silver bullet solution, just the catalytic nature of the consequences themselves.

We all know there is no "solution"

But yet there are constant calls to action even though those actions are known to be fruitless.
All possible solutions that avoid major climate change start with killing off two to three billion people by some none nuclear war means. Of course no country is willing to stand up their billions as sacrificial lambs willing to die for the good of the planet.
So we must wait until climate change chooses who dies while dealing with the consequences deriving from their belated departure. Perhaps that will result in some five or six billion deaths and no one can say if they or their family will be winners or losers in this lottery.
In the mean time you might install some solar panels and switch to an electric vehicle charged from them if you calculate that that course might be a slight help and improve you and yours chances of surviving.
Other then that I know of no course that is more then eyewash and a waste of resources and money. (Yes I'm talking about the Green new deal).

Posted: **Thu 13 Aug 2020, 05:51:55**

vtsnowedin wrote: But yet there are constant calls to action even though those actions are known to be fruitless

Yea, I would say the call to action is delusional becuase the science is not honest. Yes, the science of the problem is honest but not the solution science. In nearly all cases the call to action is tech based not behavior. Degrowth of consumption and population is required. This means more poverty because the macro EROI is lower with renewables and other low carbon capture. The costs are higher to retrofit when diminishing returns of intermittency kicks in to the energy transition. The closer you get to 100% renewables the more nonlinear the price increase. We could learn to live with intermittency but that again means a type of degrowth which points to behavior. Behavior changes don't sell at the ballot box and the checkbook. More pannels or EV's will save the day is the hype and the ugly thought of less prosperity is diminished in the call to action. I have $20K invested in solar and batteries. I love my system but know differently about the hype.

vtsnowedin wrote:All possible solutions that avoid major climate change start with killing off two to three billion people by some none nuclear war means.

Population is a key variable as is consumption levels. The other issue is the carbon trap of it all. Economies of scale of large populations generates the kind of activity and specialization from education that allows the tech to do what it has done to our modern world. Reduce those and it is debatable if we can maintain the tech and the growing supply to power a transition and remain prosperous. Overshoot takes lots of prosperity to support. In any case renewables are dirty. You can't green up modern life much. It is naturally dirty becuase it does not scale to nature. The car culture is a significant problem but also the key trap variable becuase of delocalization of the local.

vtsnowedin wrote:In the mean time you might install some solar panels and switch to an electric vehicle charged from them if you calculate that that course might be a slight help and improve you and yours chances of surviving.

I have been declining in place with localism and low carbon capture. It only goes so far. I have the money and time but many people don't. Life is one big trap. I have bought myself some time and my mentality is adapted. I would say that the mentality part is huge becuase if decline or collpase hit I already have a meaning to fall back on. This does not mean the pain will not hurt, it just means I will be more accepting of it. The trap is macro so even though I am a green prepper I am still trapped becuase my community and species is trapped in the Anthropocene of decline.

vtsnowedin wrote:Other then that I know of no course that is more then eyewash and a waste of resources and money. (Yes I'm talking about the Green new deal).

Yea, the Green New Deal is a progressive joke from people who are unwilling to downsize and instead just want to do income transfer to their people for marginal benefit. That said a greatly reduced Green New Deal is in order. If a behavior change could be educated that would be good too. What I mean by this is there are so many bad behaviors promoted by the marketing of Capitalism. Do we need Nascar races? Do we need all the Hollywood? All the gadgets? There is tech changes that would be beneficial on the way down and lots of lifestyle changes on the fun side of life.

Posted: **Mon 24 Aug 2020, 06:57:46**

“Sea-level rise linked to higher water tables along California coast”
https://phys.org/news/2020-08-sea-level ... ornia.html

“In the first comprehensive study of the link between rising sea levels and inland water tables along the California coast, researchers found an increased threat to populated areas already at risk from rising water tables, and the possibility of flooding in unexpected inland areas. In the new study, researchers modeled the effects of rising sea level along the entire California coastline. While results varied with local topography, the study indicates rising sea levels could push inland water tables higher, resulting in damage to infrastructure and increased severity of flooding. "Increased roadway fatigue, reduced sewer and septic drainage, and the potential for mobilizing contaminants in soils currently above the water table will eventually be triggered farther inland as the water table rises with higher sea levels," researchers concluded. Kevin Befus, assistant professor of geosciences at the University of Arkansas, is the first author of the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. While many coastal areas are focused on overland flooding as a result of sea level rise, the threat of rising groundwater tables, known as "shoaling," is not as well known or understood. Shoaling occurs when rising seawater pushes inland. The denser marine water underlies shallow freshwater aquifers, pushing them upward. In some low-lying areas, shoaling could force groundwater water to the surface, increasing the likelihood of flood damage.”

Posted: **Thu 27 Aug 2020, 09:08:45**

The only solution to global warming is to stop the 30+ billion tons of human CO2 emissions per year. And it is already too late for it to be a full solution since we would be riding out the locked in accumulated effect for thousands of years. But, predictably, humanity will keep pumping its precious garbage-factory GDP until it can no longer physically do so. Then natural correction in the form of mass dieoff is inevitable.

Calling the tech "solutions" science is not justified. It is engineering. Any tech fix is extremely short lived and requires ongoing maintenance that will eventually break the bank. A lot of these tech fixes are just idiotic, like ones suggesting SO2 injection via commercial aircraft. That is utterly pointless since these aircraft fly under 12 km and mostly outside the tropics. The SO2 needs to be injected above 30 km in the tropics to have the induced sulfate layer to cover enough of both hemispheres to matter. Over 10 million tons per year need to be injected. But this is a current estimate. BAU will drive it much higher. And we will be losing the ozone layer in the process since the sulfate acts as heterogeneous chemistry agent for catalytic break down of ozone.

Posted: **Fri 04 Sep 2020, 10:26:16**

“Crippled Supertanker Off Sri Lanka Could 'Explode Due To Fire'”
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/cripp ... e-due-fire

“New Diamond, a very large crude carrier (VLCC) measuring 333 meters, is engulfed in flames about 20 nautical miles off the east coast of Sri Lanka, Refinitiv data showed. The supertanker is fully loaded with about 2 million barrels of oil. The Sri Lanka Air Force took pictures and videos showing the extent of the damage. The Sri Lankan Navy is assisting the crippled supertanker. Fire spreads to the vessel's bridge. Video shows Sri Lanka Air Force dropping water on the fire via a helicopter water bucket…The tanker is powerless, drifting off the Sri Lankan coast at a speed of 0.7 nautical miles per hour and could arrive onshore by Sunday, Terney Pradeep, general manager of the Sri Lanka Marine Environment Protection Authority, said on local television. "If an oil spill happens after it reaches near the coast, there could be massive damage on the beach. "The damage could rise further if the ship explodes due to the fire. If that happens, there could be huge damage," Terney warned.”

Posted: **Fri 04 Sep 2020, 13:08:40**

dissident wrote:The only solution to global warming is to stop the 30+ billion tons of human CO2 emissions per year. And it is already too late for it to be a full solution since we would be riding out the locked in accumulated effect for thousands of years. But, predictably, humanity will keep pumping its precious garbage-factory GDP until it can no longer physically do so. Then natural correction in the form of mass dieoff is inevitable.

Calling the tech "solutions" science is not justified. It is engineering. Any tech fix is extremely short lived and requires ongoing maintenance that will eventually break the bank. A lot of these tech fixes are just idiotic, like ones suggesting SO2 injection via commercial aircraft. That is utterly pointless since these aircraft fly under 12 km and mostly outside the tropics. The SO2 needs to be injected above 30 km in the tropics to have the induced sulfate layer to cover enough of both hemispheres to matter. Over 10 million tons per year need to be injected. But this is a current estimate. BAU will drive it much higher. And we will be losing the ozone layer in the process since the sulfate acts as heterogeneous chemistry agent for catalytic break down of ozone.

Aside from the science which I don't follow I agree. We are screwing the pooch and the pooch is we.

Posted: **Fri 04 Sep 2020, 13:12:25**

Real,

More on that story here.

https://gcaptain.com/vlcc-carrying-2-mi ... sri-lanka/

Posted: **Fri 04 Sep 2020, 14:48:21**

vtsnowedin wrote:real viable solutions are few or even none existent.

Translation: The american way of life is non-negotiable.

Ibon wrote:I think honestly everyone knows there are no solutions

It is also convenient to strike this tone when you don't want to make any changes to your lifestyle. I think we know that's the main motivating factor here...

Peak Oil News and Message Boards

THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3

Re: THE Oceans & Seas Thread pt 3