Arctic Sea Ice Collapse Threatens

[pscot]

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/

The image below compares the Arctic sea ice thickness on July 14, 2012 (left panel) and on July 14, 2015 (right panel), using Naval Research Laboratory images.






The dramatic decline of the sea ice, especially north of North America, is the result of a combination of factors, including:

•very high levels of greenhouse gases over the Arctic Ocean
•very high levels of ocean heat
•heatwaves over North America and Siberia extending high air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean
•wildfires triggered by these heatwaves resulting in darkening compounds settling on snow and ice

•very warm river water running into the Arctic Ocean, as illustrated by the image below.




Great news. Shell won't even have to drill; just capture the millions of tons of methane bubbling up from the bed of the Arctic ocean.

[newfie11]

1. Wow!!!!

Thanks for posting, this will never show up on the TV😡

[peacebird]

2. Kick for NRL! Sad for the planet...

[pscot]

4. this Shell oil drilling rig and another just like it, is headed for that stretch of Alaska coastline

that's melting out in the images above. It looks like that entire zone between the 70th and 80th parallels will soon be ice free, if it isn't already. A 28 ship flotilla is up there now building the infrastructure to support these rigs.

[mindwalker_i]

3. A while ago there was an article posted about correlation between

... the Artic melting and ice ages. It detailed research that concluded that once the Arctic melted, it would cause an ice age. If I remember correctly, having the Arctic open would allow the water to evaporate from it and fall as snow on the surrounding land, which built up glaciers, which then traveled south to freeze deep into he continents (N. America and Eurasia). Water would flow through the Arctic, keeping it melted until the glaciers closed it off, which could take a very long time. Only once the Arctic was closed off could it freeze again and end the ice age.

The following are my own speculations:

The addition of a lot of carbon into the atmosphere could keep the glaciers from closing off the area, thus prolonging the ice age, although it might also keep the glaciers from getting quite as big or reaching as far south. Glaciers would normally reflect sunlight, cooling the planet, but again I would guess that the extra carbon would slow the process - like everything has to get frozen in order to allow the Arctic to get cut off, freeze, and end the ice age. So it may be slightly less painful but significantly longer.

It's also worth noting that there will be a delay between rising temperatures, melting Arctic, and the onset of an ce age. Sea levels will rise and flood a lot of land, then the glaciers will form, lower the sea level, etc. There's a whole sequence of states that the planet will have to go through.

It should be pretty obvious that the Earth will probably be unable to support the population of people we have during this process. It's unlikely that it could continue to support this many for long even without an ice age. Available land for farming will be limited, as well as habitable land. Burning more fossil fuels could actually limit the severity of the ice age but it would also prolong it, and getting to the fossil fuels would, in some regions, require getting under glaciers - probably not too hard, but eventually fossil fuels will run out.

[pscot]

5. I wouldn't worry too much about an ice age

We have more immediate problems.

[mindwalker_i]

7. Definitely, but it would be cool

Maybe not for the billions who starve.

[pscot]

9. It's always something.

[ruffburr]

6. Oh honey-

You better put a fork in it ,See if it's done yet. All kidding aside, this is a unfolding disaster right under our collective noses, All because of greed, The report of the fossil fuels industry itself has come out and shows they knew what was happening to the climate since the 70s. Seems like a major crime to me mass murder of humans and all other species, Where is the outrage?

[pscot]

8. we don't want to trouble our beautiful minds

with ambiguously defined worries about the future. We like problems we can solve by killing someone. It's our strong suite.

[Ghost Dog]

12. !

[pscot]

11. You're absolutely right about the need for outrage

What we're doing is by far a bigger crime against the unborn than abortion. Maybe if people had a religious conviction that killing the planet was Mortal sin. More than mortal; we could find ways to start talking about this. It's made us shy. We creep around it like mice around a cat. If suicide is a sin, what is species self-extermination. These are issues of elemental morality, but no one wants to talk about them. It's too bad, really.

[PatrickforO]

14. Well, the corporate owned media isn't supposed to talk about that, nor are

the politicians who have been bought and paid for by the Koch brothers and other big oil concerns. They aren't even supposed to utter the words 'climate change.'

The bottom line is that these big money interests can still eke out more profits, and they NEED us to just shut up and consume.

So, ruffburr, we should just be good little consumers and not worry our happy little empty heads about that stuff...

[hatrack]

10. Have no fear! "A Person In A Garage Somewhere" is on the job!

Or at least, that's what Heb! said.

[pscot]

13. The development team better adjust to the new timetable

Because 'faster than expected' is already rolling up the beach.