|
What about mirrors couldn't we just put mirrors all over the artic
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:55 |
|
|
Automation kills mining jobs, when it can be profitable. Otherwise, the ore stays there. Trump will change nothing. The jobs ARE gone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:What about mirrors couldn't we just put mirrors all over the artic Melt ice caps, launch solar shade, increase solar shade until the sea levels stop rising. Sounds legit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Creating artificial albedo (reflection) is something that we could (and should) be doing, but it's a moot point if we're not actively reducing emissions on a timeline that gets us to zero by, oh say, 2050 or so. There's no reason to not have solar panels on every building in the country, even accounting for the middling efficiency of solar cells and energy storage at the current moment, except that people just don't give a poo poo. Hell, even putting solar panels, or those new Tesla roofing tiles, on every government building in the country would make a huge difference. When a major American city falls into the sea or suffers a catastrophic disaster directly tied to climate change, we might see some serious movement in that direction. Until then, well, good luck. Do what you can to support green policy and action on a local level.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Speaking of things falling into the sea: https://twitter.com/lenaertsjan/status/798128755248164864 Yes, it's what it looks like: Greenland melt is exceeding RCP8.5 maximum projections. e: For those new to this sort of thing... RCP8.5 is the worst-case scenario. Temperature wise, it's bad. +4 degrees Celsius by 2100. +8 degrees Celsius by 2300 and still climbing. e2: Although, to be fair, it estimates +1 degrees Celsius by 2040, so... don't look too hard at the temperature this year and last. Evil_Greven fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Nov 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:Speaking of things falling into the sea: so literally our worst case scenarios are already obsolete. Nice
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
For some estimates, yes. In others, like Arctic sea ice melt, we're actually a little past when it was projected to happen (ice-free during summer 2015 or 2016, depending on source). Temperatures, though... not looking so great (YTD 2016 is at +0.97 degrees Celsius; 2005 is the light speck below 5 in 2015) : Evil_Greven fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Nov 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:For some estimates, yes. interesting. But it looks like we're looking at an ice free summer for next year judging on those graphs, so it may end up catching up? The Temprature will probably spike even harder then, too?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Potentially. The Global sea ice area looks somewhat worse due to Antarctic sea ice melt, but the Arctic is the lowest on record at this point in the year as well. Both areas of sea ice depend a lot on the weather and ocean. 2012 was almost as low at this point in the year, but sea ice recovered somewhat. Still, volume is another matter altogether - and so far, it doesn't look good for summer sea ice in the Arctic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Something to remember going forward is that while the lines in various projections and even climographs will be smoothed, reality operates more like a jump rope, always rotating around the average with more or less intensity. The range of variability of the global climate system may become more extreme, meaning that we may very well see very cold years where ice returns even as global temperature rises due to things like the polar vortex parking somewhere (as it is doing in Siberia right now). We're also likely to get lots of extremely hot years that overshoot. At the same time, it is also important to remember that the RCP models and projections are based on a globally acceptable consensus arrived at by the IPCC. While they are very robust, they are not perfect and reflect a considerable amount of positioning by various countries who have an interest in "avoiding alarmism." This is, of course, completely reasonable, as alarmism is generally not very productive unless you are running for office somewhere and it's a simpler kind of alarmism. One huge area of uncertainty is the variability with which global ecosystems will respond, as all of them can be either a huge sink or a huge source of GHGs and most of them provide a ton of direct ecosystem services for human communities. In most research, it seems that the global terrestrial sink in forests and other ecosystems is nearing its plateau point already. Free air enrichment studies found that around 500-600 ppm, CO2 fertilization gives way to nitrogen limitations, and you don't get more biologically fixed carbon per plant anymore. If there's enough nitrogen, phosphorus limitation kicks in. Another issue is runaways or compounding stressors in critical areas. A few really bad fire seasons across the southern Rockies (where drought, insect invasion, rapid development, and overall higher temps leading to more evapotranspiration and drier vegetation, among other things) could add up to a lot less water in the late summer as snow melts more quickly without tree cover and runoff infiltrates more poorly into the burned soils. These and other amplifier effects could hasten various impacts from warming, as the global average temperature may be derived from a much broader and more substantially variable spread of regional/local temperatures than previously considered. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the rotation around the mean will be more compact. All that said, one of the most interesting areas of work that I've been reading about surrounds getting cities to start thinking of the watersheds they rely upon as a sort of infrastructure - i.e., the trees, roots, soils, and other living things that provide water filtration and passive storage mechanisms are now on equal footing with roads, pipes, etc. As it turns out, trees and vegetation in watersheds effectively filter water so well that reducing trees to below 60% of total land cover causes downstream filtration and treatment costs to rise by about 230% as you get down to just 10% tree cover. So if you want to have a healthy, efficient city, you get into the business of forest management. I bring this up not because we should not be worried, but to point out that human impacts on the biosphere are not going to go away simply because we stop emitting CO2, and cutting GHGs is not the entirety of the problem we face when it comes to environmental issues. We have bathed in the blissful ignorance of a species relatively un-restrained by the limits of the terrestrial biosphere, and because of that our effects on ecosystems accumulated beyond our ability to react to or control. Thank god it happened in a way we can do something about it while also improving the rest of our society. We are the biggest game in town, and the more we are forced to be aware of this fact and act with it in mind, the more likely it is that we will continue to survive as a responsible species among many on this planet. If we can't develop a better, smarter culture, that operates synergistically with natural systems, then we probably weren't going to do anything worth caring about anyway. Hang on to your grief if it helps you, and fill your stomach if it helps you sleep, but don't pretend that doing something about this problem is a matter of it being too big. It is literally the only problem we have ever had, and it will not stop being a problem once we're all tucked away in underground habitrails. Clashing against the dumb weight of society is the duty of the informed, come what may, and we either do it or bottle our tears and hope someone wants to buy them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
The biggest issue for RCP or any other projection is they all somewhat rely on bottom up gathering of data. I.e., we rely on industry and other countries to provide data on how much emissions they have produced - clearly if it benefits them to underreport they will. It doesn't matter how good models are, if you can't get an accurate picture of now, the prediction will be off. Just trying to confirm this reporting is it's own branch of climate science. This is why when people think we can't possibly go worse than RCP8.5 I think they are mad and don't understand the situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Arctic is still melting during freeze season. The global anomaly is deviating from the mean at a rate of 0.3 sigma a day.
dex_sda fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Nov 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
welp. it's been nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
So, uh, how hosed is our generation? Because god drat
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:So, uh, how hosed is our generation? Because god drat Do you remember when there used to be bees and they called it summer instead of The Fire Season?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:So, uh, how hosed is our generation? Because god drat As hosed as you were before plus a stress magnifying environment. Depending on your age (30+/-10?), you will see more or less of the instability in play. But it really isn't as if this problem is unsolvable or that total phase transitions can't occur. People have transformed more in the last 100 years than ever before, and it is not beyond us to do so again. But like I said, if we aren't good enough to beat out the rubes and the hateful, then you should have been crying about it a while ago. If we're too stupid to deal with it, climate change will seem like a mercy compared to what we do to one another when the weather's nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
I was just watching a This Old House about rebuilding homes after Superstorm Sandy on NJ's barrier islands and all these people kept talking about how their are building their homes 10ft off the ground "So that it can last for 100 years and we can pass it from generation to generation." They are going to have a lot of fun commuting to their house by boat when the land washes away underneath it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Arctic is still melting during freeze season. The global anomaly is deviating from the mean at a rate of 0.3 sigma a day. source?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:source? That poster from the arctic forum + some others e; https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=19 https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/800003255946264576
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:So, uh, how hosed is our generation? Because god drat I don't think it'll be the end of civilization or anything but it will suck massively for a lot of people
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
You know, this loss of arctic sea ice is odd enough that I'm not so much scared as just really, really interested in what's going on. Am I right in assuming that enough data is lining up at this point that some kind of technical issue is unlikely?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:You know, this really odd loss of arctic sea ice is odd enough that I'm not so much scared as just really, really interested in what's going on. Am I right in assuming that enough data is lining up at this point that some kind of technical issue is unlikely? Data from two different satellites was used in the tweet I posted. It's real. What's going on is that for some reason, despite the eternal night, temps are above freezing in the Arctic. In addition, in previous years antarctic ice somewhat made up for the anomaly (a fact deniers loved to bring up). It's also plummeting like crazy. Something is super wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Data from two different satellites was used in the tweet I posted. It's real. The JAXA data is well presented, the current ice extent measurements are plausible given the overall decrease seen since the 1980s. We're probably not going to see an ice free artic next summer, but it looks pretty plausible over the next two (one?) decades. I don't know how much you can read into the recent downturn, it could be a statistical fluke or a systematic effect. Who knows? Who really expected the artic ice to last as we barrel into a +2C world?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
I'm not a climate expert by any stretch of the imagination but apparently this insane arctic warmth isn't totally unprecedented, something similar happened in 1998: http://ak-wx.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/sea-ice-update.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
AHungryRobot posted:I'm not a climate expert by any stretch of the imagination but apparently this insane arctic warmth isn't totally unprecedented, something similar happened in 1998: http://ak-wx.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/sea-ice-update.html seems like the major issue would be that the increase in emissions since 1998 would mean it's much harder- or impossible?- to recover from in any reasonable style. Interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
IronClaymore posted:As for coal mining, gently caress THAT! I wouldn't force Mao himself to work in a coal mine! Much less wage-slave people. Anyone forced out of that job should recognise their new lease on life. And besides, copper is making a comeback, thanks to expensive electric cars, learn to diversify mining dudes! (Also welcome to the dole queue get in line.) Do you think people mine for coal with pickaxes or something? A coal mine job is an extremely good job for someone without a degree. Probably one of the best blue collar jobs available in those areas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:Do you think people mine for coal with pickaxes or something? A coal mine job is an extremely good job for someone without a degree. Probably one of the best blue collar jobs available in those areas. It's also incredibly dangerous. So dangerous the DoL made its own safety agency completely separate from OSHA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:That poster from the arctic forum + some others Thanks, I've been pretty out of the loop on climate change and my blind googling didn't bear fruit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:It's also incredibly dangerous. So dangerous the DoL made its own safety agency completely separate from OSHA. Yes. So is railroading for example, which is what I do now, and which also has its own agency. I was just slackjawed at the idea that someone in this thread thinks American coal mining is a wage slave job. You have to know a few things about something before you argue against it or nobody will pay attention to you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/800179367594688514 ...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:Yes. So is railroading for example, which is what I do now, and which also has its own agency. I was just slackjawed at the idea that someone in this thread thinks American coal mining is a wage slave job. You have to know a few things about something before you argue against it or nobody will pay attention to you. Not like the Coal Industry has a legacy for poor workers rights and loving workers left and right...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
Oh dear
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Yeah, Arctic sea ice is over a million kilometers below 2012's (former) record low for this date. However, 2006 had a powerful stall in ice growth - for a couple of weeks, 2006 still has the record low sea ice extent. Consequently, today's record will transition from 2012 record sea ice lows to 2006 record sea ice lows. There it will remain until December 7th, when 2012 record sea ice lows return. I expect both will fall to 2016. Yesterday was a smaller decline, but the sea ice extent still went down. Even if it started to increase today, I don't think it's possible to catch up by the end of December. Evil_Greven fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Man we're ruining this earth
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Hey, man, this is, like, super important and stuff, but Mike Pence was booed at Hamilton!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Looks like the climate threw a rod on the dyno stand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Temperature spiral, is apparently an effective way of communicating how our climate changes. In the sense that it actually changes peoples perspectives, apparently.  More effective gif. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/10/see-earths-temperature-spiral-toward-2c-rise-graphic#img-2 Same gif, on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXrYvd-LBu0 Was lucky enough to recently attend a presentation by Ed Hawkins. BattleMoose fucked around with this message at 02:24 on Nov 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
BattleMoose posted:Temperature spiral, is apparently an effective way of communicating how our climate changes. In the sense that it actually changes peoples perspectives, apparently. I love this gif. You show this to people in a presentation and the change in attitude is almost palpable. In other good news. [quote="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-dead-trees-20161118-story.html" post=""""] The number of dead trees in California’s drought-stricken forests has risen dramatically to more than 102 million in what officials described as an unparalleled ecological disaster that heightens the danger of massive wildfires and damaging erosion. Officials said they were alarmed by the increase in dead trees, which they estimated to have risen by 36 million since the government’s last survey in May. The U.S. Forest Service, which performs such surveys of forest land, said Friday that 62 million trees have died this year alone. “The scale of die-off in California is unprecedented in our modern history,” said Randy Moore, the forester for the region of the U.S. Forest Service that includes California. Trees are dying “at a rate much quicker than we thought.” Scientists say five years of drought are to blame for much of the destruction. The lack of rain has put California’s trees under considerable stress, making them more susceptible to the organisms, such as beetles, that can kill them. Unusually high temperatures have added to the trees’ demand for water, exacerbating an already grim situation. [/quote] Add forests to the list of things that used to exist we'll be telling our grandkids about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
How credible is the doomsaying about [Phytoplankton Collapse] → [Literal Human Extinction] by 2100? Reportedly, 5.5C to 8C should be sufficient to produce sufficient ocean acidification and warming to ruin the marine ecosystem component responsible for 2/3 of our oxygen, and new research suggests that GHGs may grow more impactful as the atmosphere warms meaning we could be on track for a mass extinction event around 2100. And we just elected a denialist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:55 |
|
|
Accretionist posted:How credible is the doomsaying about [Phytoplankton Collapse] → [Literal Human Extinction] by 2100? Reportedly, 5.5C to 8C should be sufficient to produce sufficient ocean acidification and warming to ruin the marine ecosystem component responsible for 2/3 of our oxygen, and new research suggests that GHGs may grow more impactful as the atmosphere warms meaning we could be on track for a mass extinction event around 2100. Not credible from anything I've read. The only people who trot this out are Guy Mcpherson cultists. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest a realistic path to total human extinction this century (from pure climate effects anyway).
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:43
|
|