Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 19 Feb 2019, 23:37:07

Previdi, M., B.G. Liepert, D. Peteet, J. Hansen, D.J. Beerling, A.J. Broccoli, S. Frolking, J.N. Galloway, M. Heimann, C. Le Quéré, S. Levitus, and V. Ramaswamy, 2013:

Climate sensitivity in the Anthropocene.


Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 139, 1121-1131, doi:10.1002/qj.2165.

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/d ... 02/qj.2165

Abstract:
Climate sensitivity in its most basic form is defined as the equilibrium change in global surface temperature that occurs in response to a climate forcing, or externally imposed perturbation of the planetary energy balance. Within this general definition, several specific forms of climate sensitivity exist that differ in terms of the types of climate feedbacks they include. Based on evidence from Earth's history, we suggest here that the relevant form of climate sensitivity in the Anthropocene (e.g. from which to base future greenhouse gas (GHG) stabilization targets) is the Earth system sensitivity including fast feedbacks from changes in water vapour, natural aerosols, clouds and sea ice, slower surface albedo feedbacks from changes in continental ice sheets and vegetation, and climate-GHG feedbacks from changes in natural (land and ocean) carbon sinks. Traditionally, only fast feedbacks have been considered (with the other feedbacks either ignored or treated as forcing), which has led to estimates of the climate sensitivity for doubled CO2 concentrations of about 3°C.

The 2×CO2 Earth system sensitivity is higher than this, being ∼4-6°C if the ice sheet/vegetation albedo feedback is included in addition to the fast feedbacks, and higher still if climate-GHG feedbacks are also included.

The inclusion of climate-GHG feedbacks due to changes in the natural carbon sinks has the advantage of more directly linking anthropogenic GHG emissions with the ensuing global temperature increase, thus providing a truer indication of the climate sensitivity to human perturbations. The Earth system climate sensitivity is difficult to quantify due to the lack of palaeo-analogues for the present-day anthropogenic forcing, and the fact that ice sheet and climate-GHG feedbacks have yet to become globally significant in the Anthropocene. Furthermore, current models are unable to adequately simulate the physics of ice sheet decay and certain aspects of the natural carbon and nitrogen cycles. Obtaining quantitative estimates of the Earth system sensitivity is therefore a high priority for future work.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 10:17:39

dohboi wrote:Previdi, M., B.G. Liepert, D. Peteet, J. Hansen, D.J. Beerling, A.J. Broccoli, S. Frolking, J.N. Galloway, M. Heimann, C. Le Quéré, S. Levitus, and V. Ramaswamy, 2013:

Climate sensitivity in the Anthropocene.


Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 139, 1121-1131, doi:10.1002/qj.2165.

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/d ... 02/qj.2165

Abstract:
Climate sensitivity in its most basic form is defined as the equilibrium change in global surface temperature that occurs in response to a climate forcing, or externally imposed perturbation of the planetary energy balance. Within this general definition, several specific forms of climate sensitivity exist that differ in terms of the types of climate feedbacks they include. Based on evidence from Earth's history, we suggest here that the relevant form of climate sensitivity in the Anthropocene (e.g. from which to base future greenhouse gas (GHG) stabilization targets) is the Earth system sensitivity including fast feedbacks from changes in water vapour, natural aerosols, clouds and sea ice, slower surface albedo feedbacks from changes in continental ice sheets and vegetation, and climate-GHG feedbacks from changes in natural (land and ocean) carbon sinks. Traditionally, only fast feedbacks have been considered (with the other feedbacks either ignored or treated as forcing), which has led to estimates of the climate sensitivity for doubled CO2 concentrations of about 3°C.

The 2×CO2 Earth system sensitivity is higher than this, being ∼4-6°C if the ice sheet/vegetation albedo feedback is included in addition to the fast feedbacks, and higher still if climate-GHG feedbacks are also included.

The inclusion of climate-GHG feedbacks due to changes in the natural carbon sinks has the advantage of more directly linking anthropogenic GHG emissions with the ensuing global temperature increase, thus providing a truer indication of the climate sensitivity to human perturbations. The Earth system climate sensitivity is difficult to quantify due to the lack of palaeo-analogues for the present-day anthropogenic forcing, and the fact that ice sheet and climate-GHG feedbacks have yet to become globally significant in the Anthropocene. Furthermore, current models are unable to adequately simulate the physics of ice sheet decay and certain aspects of the natural carbon and nitrogen cycles. Obtaining quantitative estimates of the Earth system sensitivity is therefore a high priority for future work.


DUH! This is the tipping point/step-wise function effect I have been harping about for years and years! The system does not slowly change from CO2 increase over a smooth integral from interglacial to hothouse conditions. You hit a tipping point and get a massive shift in albedo which in turn triggers a great change in surface general conditions.

The albedo shift works in both directions, as the climate goes through cooling the summer snow cover gradually increases in the Northern Hemisphere until you hit the point where reflectance of incoming energy exceeds the tipping point, and then rapid freezing of a vast area ensues because the winter snow from the next year doesn't all melt triggering the formation of massive ice sheets.

We are working towards the opposite trigger when the Arctic Ocean will hit an effective zero sea ice level and solar radiance will be absorbed at a massive rate compared to interglacial conditions. In point of fact the tipping point isn't actually the blue ocean event per se. The tipping point is when enough ice cover has melted early enough in the season for the remaining sunny season energy capture to cause the BOE. IOW the BOE is proof that the tipping point has already passed, not the actual tipping point itself.

Once this happens the first time the energy stored by the sea that summer will make a recurrance of the event more likely in subsequent years. Once the second and third episode have happened no matter if it is three in a row or three over a decade the energy building up in the just below surface layer will make every year after less likely to have ice survive until freeze up.

The first BOE will also mean that the vast majority of the sea ice the next year will be first year ice, easily melted compared to conditions in say 1988 before we passed 350 ppmv CO2. The thinner ice not only melts easier, it is also more translucent so it allows more solar energy to pass through into the water below even before the ice melts.

It all adds up to the same thing, while CO2 directly may only trigger 3C of change its knock on effects will double that. Do we have evidence of this? Absolutely! The common statement is that CO2 warming is about 3C per doubling, which would mean 3C at around 540 ppmv CO2 and 6C at around 1080 ppmv CO2. HOWEVER we know from paleoclimate studies that around 450 ppmv CO2 in the current general arrangement of continents the Northern Hemisphere was ice free from 34 MM-BC to 3.3 MM-BC. IOW Greenland is highly likely to melt completely (though it may take a thousand years in the long scenario) as we get into the range 450 ppmv +/- 45 ppmv. IOW we are already in the zone where melting of Greenland is likely to be significant, and the closer we get to 450 ppmv the more likely it is. Even moreso the 3C model predicts that there will be a relatively mild 6C of warming at 1080 ppmv while the climate record clearly shows that above 780 ppmv the entire planet was ice free. I don't know where the reporters in the MSM learned math, but in my world 780 ppmv is a heck of a lot lower than 1080 ppmv and the effect signifies a 10 C change from 270 ppmv to 780 ppmv and much lower than two doublings.

All this nattering on about 1.5 C vs 2.0 C is pure political rhetoric. We are already above 410 ppmv on an annualized basis and we are increasing that level at an accelerating rate. The politics of pretending we can stop the increase before we hit 450 is prima facia laughable. This has just been declared an El Nino year and those who pay attention all know CO2 levels increase at nearly double the average rate in El Nino conditions because the quantity of cold surface water present to absorb CO2 is greatly reduced. Even without El Nino we would be hitting around 425 ppmv in 2024 and 435 ppmv around 2029. That is presuming the next decade has no greater growth than the last decade despite the fact that China and India are now massively increasing their coal burning electricity power fleets and their liquid fuel consuming private ICE vehicle fleets.

China is now adding more than 25 Million new ICE vehicles to its fleet on an annual basis and removing well under 1 million old vehicles at the same time. The USA on the other hand adds about 16 million a year but also scraps about 15.5 million a year with the difference being population growth of half a million drivers a year. So if under some miracle condition the USA goes all electric in new vehicle construction in 2020 that will reduce the number of ICE vehicles here about 15.5 million a year as old vehicles get scrapped. At the same time China and India which still do not have enough electricity to meet regular needs will keep adding 25-35 million ICE vehicles a year to the world supply.

What do you honestly think that is going to do to CO2 growth rates? When we entered into free trade agreements with China in 1998 their economic growth rate went bonkers and world annualized CO2 rate of increase went from 1.5 ppmv to 2.0 ppmv by 2010. Between 2010 and 2018 it climbed another 0.5 to total 2.5 ppmv average per year rate of increase. IOW in less 20 years we went from 1.5 ppmv to 2.5 ppmv, a 60% acceleration in the rate of CO2 level increase. Now India and Indonesia are joining the parade in a large way. How can any mildly rational person believe CO2 levels are going to stabilize or go down any time in the next 2 decades baring total civilization collapse? At that 2 decades of continued growth is extremely optimistic. Then once growth ends does anyone realistically expect a widely distributed technology to draw down the then current CO2 levels to below 350 ppmv as urged?

No, it is time to invest our efforts into adaptations and stop fantasizing about a post fossil fueled world.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15538
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 11:24:22

"This is the tipping point/step-wise function effect I have been harping about for years and years! The system does not slowly change from CO2 increase over a smooth integral from interglacial to hothouse conditions. You hit a tipping point and get a massive shift in albedo which in turn triggers a great change in surface general conditions."

Well put. Can't find it right now, but studies have shown that when the Arctic Ocean has gone ice-free in the past (BOE or Blue Ocean Event that T refers to above), or nearly so, local temperatures in Greenland shot up immediately by some 16 degree C, irrc. That is going to put sea level rise into hyperdrive, and of course further accelerate the loss of the last major source of albedo in the northern hemisphere.

And indeed we do seem to be barrelling toward our own demise in the mean time by continuing to pump more and more carbon into the system, taking much of the rest of complex life with us.

I'm not sure there is much to do to prepare for it or 'adapt.' But it's always good to get out of debt, and to develop local sources of food, etc, if possible. And of course new developments any where near the coast should be outlawed.

I still think this does not dismiss our own moral obligation wrt how much we are contributing to the catastrophe.
Last edited by dohboi on Wed 20 Feb 2019, 11:31:16, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Cog » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 11:27:24

And when sea level rise for 2019 is about the same for 2018 what will be the excuse then?
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12784
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Ibon » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 13:39:27

Tanada wrote:What do you honestly think that is going to do to CO2 growth rates? When we entered into free trade agreements with China in 1998 their economic growth rate went bonkers and world annualized CO2 rate of increase went from 1.5 ppmv to 2.0 ppmv by 2010. Between 2010 and 2018 it climbed another 0.5 to total 2.5 ppmv average per year rate of increase. IOW in less 20 years we went from 1.5 ppmv to 2.5 ppmv, a 60% acceleration in the rate of CO2 level increase. Now India and Indonesia are joining the parade in a large way. How can any mildly rational person believe CO2 levels are going to stabilize or go down any time in the next 2 decades baring total civilization collapse? At that 2 decades of continued growth is extremely optimistic. Then once growth ends does anyone realistically expect a widely distributed technology to draw down the then current CO2 levels to below 350 ppmv as urged?

No, it is time to invest our efforts into adaptations and stop fantasizing about a post fossil fueled world.



It is only in the past 10-15 years that over 50% of the worlds population (BRIC nations) first had the opportunity to ramp up their standard of living. We are not talking about 4th generation jaded suburbanites, but brand spanking new consumers enamored with shiny objects and hungry to go through the same succession of consumption that the US and other jaded consumer countries have gone through.

Those BRIC nations are not any time soon going to curb their appetites for shiny objects, they are not going to curb their desire to join the mediocrity parade.

It really is just that simple.

Homogenized mediocrity across the globe...... this is where we are heading. Up until these tipping points make it otherwise so.

I have mentioned a number of times. Embrace climate change, it is one of the only solutions in town to slow down the juggernaut.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7586
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 14:30:47

Yes, if complex life is the problem, CC is certainly part of the 'solution.' Or should we say dissolution!? :cry:
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 15:27:38

Global Warming is the only thing holding off the next glaciation, and it's a good thing.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 16:35:45

Earth 140 Years Away From Reaching Carbon Levels Not Seen for 56 Million Years
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 112221.htm

Total human carbon dioxide emissions could match those of Earth's last major greenhouse warming event in fewer than five generations, new research finds.

A new study finds humans are pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a rate nine to 10 times higher than the greenhouse gas was emitted during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a global warming event that occurred roughly 56 million years ago.

The results suggest if carbon emissions continue to rise, the total amount of carbon dioxide injected into the atmosphere since humans started burning fossil fuels could equal the amount released during the PETM as soon as 2159.

"The fact that we could reach warming equivalent to the PETM very quickly, within the next few hundred years, is terrifying," DeSantis said.

The findings suggest scientists may not be able to predict the environmental or biological changes that will happen in the coming years based on what happened during the PETM because today's warming is occurring so much faster, according to DeSantis. What makes predictions harder is that today's climate starts from a cooler baseline than the PETM and the species that inhabit Earth are different than those of 56 million years ago.

Philip D. Gingerich. Temporal Scaling of Carbon Emission and Accumulation Rates: Modern Anthropogenic Emissions Compared to Estimates of PETM-Onset Accumulation. Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology, 2019
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Cid_Yama » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 18:00:50

What is predictable is that temperatures will exceed the ability of warm-blooded mammals to lose metabolic heat, thus resulting in their extinction. (Including us.) Long before it reaches the level of the PETM.

Yes, early horses existed during the PETM, but they were the size of house cats, and lacked fur which allowed them to lose sufficient metabolic heat. But they had enough time to evolve to that state, to allow them to survive. Also we aren't looking at it stopping at PETM levels. The Permian-Triassic extinction is the closest analog to what we are facing.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry

The level of injustice and wrong you endure is directly determined by how much you quietly submit to. Even to the point of extinction.
User avatar
Cid_Yama
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7169
Joined: Sun 27 May 2007, 02:00:00
Location: The Post Peak Oil Historian

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 21:22:19

I just noticed that wiki has something on runaway gw...here's a passage relevant here:

The human body generates about 100 W of metabolic heat that must be carried away to maintain a core body temperature near 37 °C, which implies that sustained wet bulb temperatures above 35 °C can result in lethal hyperthermia.[16] Today, the summer temperature varies widely over the Earth's surface, but wet bulb temperature is more narrowly confined by the effect of humidity, with the most common value of approximately 26–27 °C and the highest approximately of 31 °C.

A warming of 10–12 °C would put most of today's world population in regions with a wetbulb temperature above 35
°C.

[16] Given the 20 °C warming that occurs with 4.8 times current CO2 levels, such a climate forcing would produce intolerable climatic conditions even if the true climate sensitivity is significantly less...
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Subjectivist » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 21:34:10

I don't see as it matters much, once we hit about 820 ppmv the negative feedbacks start getting stronger and stronger. That is why hothouse earth tops out around 23 C global average instead of going all Venus like.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4408
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 20 Feb 2019, 22:10:23

dohboi wrote:I just noticed that wiki has something on runaway gw...here's a passage relevant here:

The human body generates about 100 W of metabolic heat that must be carried away to maintain a core body temperature near 37 °C, which implies that sustained wet bulb temperatures above 35 °C can result in lethal hyperthermia.[16] Today, the summer temperature varies widely over the Earth's surface, but wet bulb temperature is more narrowly confined by the effect of humidity, with the most common value of approximately 26–27 °C and the highest approximately of 31 °C.

A warming of 10–12 °C would put most of today's world population in regions with a wetbulb temperature above 35
°C.

[16] Given the 20 °C warming that occurs with 4.8 times current CO2 levels, such a climate forcing would produce intolerable climatic conditions even if the true climate sensitivity is significantly less...


Oh no it would not, for Pete's sake! Can't anyone use rational thought processes any more?

There is no scenario that results in a 20C increase in global average temperatures. Simple facts here folks, the earth during the most extreme hothouse earth climates has never exceeded 25 C global average. That average includes whichever pole happens to be in polar winter at that time, meaning massive quantities of heat are shifted to the cold pole by wind and water currents, which cools the equator.

What is more, the earth at the end of the last major glaciation was around 12 C and is currently somewhere between 14 and 15 C global average depending on whom you believe. That puts the cap on global temperature increase in the worst case scenario at 11 C above today, and that is not liable to happen as climate disruption is highly likely to destroy industrial rates of fossil fuel consumption. By far the more likely scenario is by the time we hit 520-540 ppmv CO2 things are going to be rapidly changing which is likely to disrupt food production for years, even decades until things stabilize at the higher temperature. During that period most likely we face a steep dieoff period where human population is cut by 1/3rd or more.

That scale of die off is not a happy BAU event where everyone just shrugs and keeps burning fossil fuels like they did before. By choice or necessity industrial scale consumption will be greatly slowed or ended entirely. That doesn't mean all fossil fuel use ends, but no more 8 billion private ICE powered vehicles on the road is a different scenario. Also end of fossil fuel utility scale power generation. Nuclear, hydro, solar, wind wave might keep going a long time, but if folks are dying from climate change there will be massive pressure to end fossil fuel use in industrial scale facilities.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15538
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Whitefang » Thu 21 Feb 2019, 05:00:16

Oh no it would not, for Pete's sake! Can't anyone use rational thought processes any more?


That is why we have you :-D I think Pete does not give a damm, but we do.

20 degrees C is over the top, 6 degrees at the least, 10 degrees likely.

We are working towards the opposite trigger when the Arctic Ocean will hit an effective zero sea ice level and solar radiance will be absorbed at a massive rate compared to interglacial conditions. In point of fact the tipping point isn't actually the blue ocean event per se. The tipping point is when enough ice cover has melted early enough in the season for the remaining sunny season energy capture to cause the BOE. IOW the BOE is proof that the tipping point has already passed, not the actual tipping point itself.

Once this happens the first time the energy stored by the sea that summer will make a recurrance of the event more likely in subsequent years. Once the second and third episode have happened no matter if it is three in a row or three over a decade the energy building up in the just below surface layer will make every year after less likely to have ice survive until freeze up.

The first BOE will also mean that the vast majority of the sea ice the next year will be first year ice, easily melted compared to conditions in say 1988 before we passed 350 ppmv CO2. The thinner ice not only melts easier, it is also more translucent so it allows more solar energy to pass through into the water below even before the ice melts.

It all adds up to the same thing, while CO2 directly may only trigger 3C of change its knock on effects will double that. Do we have evidence of this? Absolutely! The common statement is that CO2 warming is about 3C per doubling, which would mean 3C at around 540 ppmv CO2 and 6C at around 1080 ppmv CO2. HOWEVER we know from paleoclimate studies that around 450 ppmv CO2 in the current general arrangement of continents the Northern Hemisphere was ice free from 34 MM-BC to 3.3 MM-BC. IOW Greenland is highly likely to melt completely (though it may take a thousand years in the long scenario) as we get into the range 450 ppmv +/- 45 ppmv. IOW we are already in the zone where melting of Greenland is likely to be significant, and the closer we get to 450 ppmv the more likely it is. Even moreso the 3C model predicts that there will be a relatively mild 6C of warming at 1080 ppmv while the climate record clearly shows that above 780 ppmv the entire planet was ice free. I don't know where the reporters in the MSM learned math, but in my world 780 ppmv is a heck of a lot lower than 1080 ppmv and the effect signifies a 10 C change from 270 ppmv to 780 ppmv and much lower than two doublings.

All this nattering on about 1.5 C vs 2.0 C is pure political rhetoric.

Yes indeed Tanada, and Dohboi, another day, another feedback...…

A cascade of acceleration, an avelanche of global proportions poised to make this magical place a very lethal affair for mammals.
What is a new aspect these days is the methane monster, might be the fastest and largest boost bust blast to an ice age remnant, the sea ice and Greenland/Baffin/Nova Zembla, the bulk down under, bit of mtn glaciers in between.
For about 3 millions of years Taiga carbon store has been accumulating until recently, after the biblical flood that broke down the subsea permafrost cap. That dam is leaking and will collapse, 50 Gton slug to start with, then the rest, GIS will get the short version, a rapid melt. If the 2 to 10 k Gton carbon slush would have been released during earlier interglacials we would have had a hothouse from then on so it stayed put until now, hopefully some decades more, with a BOE that would be tricky.
The energy being released suddenly is immense.

https://thechive.com/2017/10/01/spectac ... sia-video/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech ... years.html

Traditional stories passed down through generations by Australian Aborigines may be among the oldest accurate oral histories in the world, scientists have claimed.
The findings have allowed them to map how the continent may have looked around 10,000 years ago.
Oral folklore tells how the Great Barrier Reef once formed part of the coastline of north east Queensland, while Port Phillip Bay in Victoria was once a rich place for hunting kangaroo and opossum.
Researchers have found other stories from all over the continent that mirror how the landscape dramatically changed towards the end of the last ice age.

See, we are in for the second and maybe final flood, like the people living on the great barrier rif experienced.


Life is a fragile thing as that report, paper on annihilation stated, an abrupt 6 degrees change will end most of organic life.
We tend to focus on CO2 and average temperature, rightfully important but Earth is a giant system, acts as a being that needs all its components, organs to sustain life as we know it.

What a wonder and suspense, the times we are alive today, terrible and yet……

Okay, the arctic cold will not be split in two this winter, but the heat is on, sea ice is on a drift, moving south into the Barentz where the pack will melt out, giving way to open water at the former Gyre in the spring/early summer.

https://seaice.uni-bremen.de/data/amsr2 ... R2_nic.png

I put my bet on less than 2 million, a new record extent and new volume low. Just a guestimate, a feeling :roll:
User avatar
Whitefang
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Fri 12 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Fredrik » Thu 21 Feb 2019, 07:04:18

Even a 10 C increase in global temperatures would leave the highest latitudes more or less inhabitable. Shortage of fertile soil would be a problem, of course, but there are patches of mainly deciduous forests (with more cultivable soil) in the north too, and potatoes do grow in acidic soils (typical in the boreal regions). Some sort of small-scale cattle-breeding would also be feasible.
"Only scarcity and effort make life worth living."
"A fundamental, devastating error is to set up a political system based on [individual] desires." -Pentti Linkola
User avatar
Fredrik
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun 05 Nov 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Finland

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dissident » Thu 21 Feb 2019, 19:45:15

Subjectivist wrote:I don't see as it matters much, once we hit about 820 ppmv the negative feedbacks start getting stronger and stronger. That is why hothouse earth tops out around 23 C global average instead of going all Venus like.


23 C global or 60-90 C local.

Even 3 C is going to do in humanity (we have on seen 1 C of this 3C). Talking about 23 C as if it ain't all that is a bit silly.

The main problem for humans are that all agricultural zones reflect the stable clime we were lucky to get over the last 8,000 years. This includes good soil accumulation. The "tiny" global mean warming of 3C will shift all these zones over water and parts of land that currently are nothing more than rock and sand. (Take a look at most of Canada).

But we are likely to see 6 C by 2100 given accumulating evidence that climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases has been underestimated. I wouldn't worry about the 23 C limit so much.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5612
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 14:35:38

Tanada,

Seeking clarification on this statement.

. During that period most likely we face a steep dieoff period where human population is cut by 1/3rd or more.


Do you mean we will go down from 7.5 billion to 5 billion? Or to 2.5 billion?

We’re you speaking of world wide population or USA population?

360 million to 240 million or 120 million.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13248
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 19:20:46

Newfie wrote:Tanada,

Seeking clarification on this statement.

. During that period most likely we face a steep dieoff period where human population is cut by 1/3rd or more.


Do you mean we will go down from 7.5 billion to 5 billion? Or to 2.5 billion?

We’re you speaking of world wide population or USA population?

360 million to 240 million or 120 million.


If/when we tip over into the hothouse climate I expect a world population drop to 5 Billion or less, mostly from loss of crops while the climate is unstable. It is easily conceivable that things could go very badly with some desperate nation or nations starting a global thermonuclear war which would double that drop and bring world population down to around 2.5 Billion. As for where the USA falls on the scale of loss, I think initially we will do better than average because we have well developed government corporate interaction in terms of agribusiness that will keep farms here producing as well as possible through the bad times. In places like Venezuela with very poor government leadership the losses cold be very much higher on the order of 75% perhaps even 85% of the pre tipping point population.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15538
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 22 Feb 2019, 19:58:11

Thanks for the clarification.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13248
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 23 Feb 2019, 07:42:28

Just to point out, over 10% of Venezuelans have already left the country in the last couple years, and about 60% of those left say they plan to emigrate. So when these events happen, it might be starting with a much diminished population already (from about 30 million in 2016 to ten million or less).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivarian_diaspora
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 21

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Sat 23 Feb 2019, 10:03:15

Not arguing with those numbers, just saying that those people are fleeing something far more deadly than Climate Change. They are fleeing from an economy devastated by Maxism. The places they are going are functioning Capitalist economies.

Fools here in the USA would attempt to turn the World's most powerful Capitalist economy in the direction of Socialism. They are aided and abetted by a system of education which ignores the repeated failures of various flavors of Marxism while preaching the "evils" of Capitalism. It is a bewitching fantasy: "tax the rich for the benefit of the poor". I call these utter fools "Robin Hood Democrats".

I must also point out that of the major economies of the World, the USA does more than any other to preserve the natural world. As for carbon emissions, although we are reducing our own burning of coal and oil and gas, we are also exporting these fuels to places like China and India where they do even more damage than they would here, by being burned in places without emissions standards.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Plantagenet, rockdoc123 and 10 guests