Climate at risk - Canada retreates while Russia finds giant Methane bubbles

[Niri Te]

I will see if I can find the two books, IRAYO

[auroraglacialis]

More myteries on even more methane in the Arctic:

Climate scientists have been concerned about whether the Arctic Ocean's loss of summer ice cover might lead, through some feedback mechanisms, to boosting the release of methane. Concludes Wofsy: Thanks to HIPPO, “This hypothesized feedback has been observed for the first time.” And there are hints, he adds, that methane’s source may be something other than melting of gas hydrates.

HIPPO Reveals Climate Surprises - Science News

[Fkeu'itan]

The thing is, 'preserving' the ice sheets as things are is actually hindering the Earth's natural processes. We want to keep the ice cold and the climate warm, because it's what we as humans evolved for. Really, the ice on this planet *should* melt, the sea levels *should* rise... We jst chose a particularly bad time to develop into mass societies as a species.

I believe we should stop producing CO2, that much is sure, and that the ice caps' existence here on Earth being irregular in terms of geology is no justification for pumping poisons into the atmosphere, nor is it an excuse for deforestation, habitat destruction or collossal developments of cities into natural areas... But it is an excuse to stop all of this madness, endless and pointless 'quest' and just let our mother do her work.

[Loverofnature]

It's actually true what Fkeu is saying. Talk to a geologist. He'll tell you, that for the majority of the earths existence, there hasn't been any icecaps at all! Personally, i'm not supporting the whole "humans cause global warming" thing. i'm more of a follower to Henrik Svensmark. (see bottom). There has been times in the history of the earth, where there has been twice as much CO2 but it was much colder!

That being said, it doesn't justify the deforestation or just the general poor caer we put into our beautiful planet.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMTPF1blpQ i know it's long and that he has a horrible accent

[Moco Loco]

Right, the climate changing in general is certainly not actually the problem, it's more about how rapidly it is

[Tsyal Makto]

I'm of the mindset that we exacerbate the natural process of climate change with our pollutants. The safe limit of CO2 for Earth's current natural environment (yes, it was more in the past, but those conditions don't apply to our current biosphere) is 350ppm. That's the maximum amount that the Earth's climate can accept and naturally change in a generally stable fashion. We are currently at ~380ppm IIRC. We need to bring it back down to natural levels and let nature evolve on her own, without our leavings in the atmosphere disturbing her changes.

[Niri Te]

Well the good thing about the above information, though NOT an excuse to continue in ANY WAY, is the fact that we are only 30 PPM above the upper limit of the CO2 levels for the atmosphere. I would LIKE to see it 50 PPM BELOW the upper limit before I leave this planet, and given the numbers, I can take heart that this goal IS attainable.
Niri Te

[Loverofnature]

Originally Posted by Moco Loco

Right, the climate changing in general is certainly not actually the problem, it's more about how rapidly it is

I don't see it as a problem, because i genuinely believe, that this is a natural cycle and that what we humans are doing is a minimal factor. Try actually watching the video i posted .

@Tsayal: How can we know that that is the limit? how can they absolutely be sure? in the 70's the said the earth was cooling down and a new ice age was on the way, but just 10 years later, they change their minds. I think that we, in reality, don't know any about the planet at all. That goes for the universe too.


(Remember, this is only my opinion. You can believe in whatever you want )

[auroraglacialis]

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

We want to keep the ice cold and the climate warm, because it's what we as humans evolved for.

Present theory has it that humans evolved in Africa, an area that was never covered in ice despite many ice ages in the history of human evolution. Of course if humans want to live all over the globe and way up North it is convenient if there is not so much coldness there, but that is about it.
By the way - even during the last ide ages, the ice caps did not melt away. The record that indicates climate and ice ages comes in parts from ice cores from these ice caps. In these cores, ice is found from times of the last couple of ice ages and the warm periods in between.

Originally Posted by Loverofnature

It's actually true what Fkeu is saying. Talk to a geologist. He'll tell you, that for the majority of the earths existence, there hasn't been any icecaps at all! Personally, i'm not supporting the whole "humans cause global warming" thing.

Well then let a geologist tell you that it is far from that easy
First of all, the presence of ice caps, climate, vegatation, shape of the continents and oceas - all of that goes together to form a picture of palaeoclimatology. For example the reason why Northern Europe has a temperate climate and does not look like Siberia is the gulf stream that goes from the equator to Florida and then to Norway. In a time when there was no free passage for the ocean currents to do this, Northern Europe was an icehouse and there would have been larger icecaps in these regions. This is just one, oversimplified example. Another point is that the kind of vegatiation and animal life that is around is talking part in that whole picture. Overall, the planet has a certain state of homeostasis, which means that while the temperatures swing, they swing within a habitable zone for life as we know it. To stay in that zone, there are "feedback mechanisms" involved. For example in a colder climate, weathering slows down, less minerals go into the ocean, land is covered in ice, less plants grow, less CO2 is consumed overall, CO2 levels rise, helping along the warming again. Conversely warming causes more moisture to be in the air, more plants grow and absorb CO2, in the northern regions there is more snow because of the wetness in the air, reflecting the sunlight, all of this serves to cool down the Earth.
The problem with human activity is that not only does it increase CO2 emissions massively by literally burning through millions of years of stored carbon within a century, there are also impacts on the potential regulation feedbacks. For example a landscape that has been turned from forest to field will not help as much CO2 to be absorbed. Swamps that have been drained cannot prevent plant material from decomposing (and by that conservation store carbon). Ocean life plays a big role as well, but humans have fished so much, that over 90% of the large fish are gone. And all that change is so rapid, that we geologists would basically call it instantaneous in geological contexts. It is much more like a meteor hitting Earth in a few seconds than an outgassing of vulcanic gasses over millennia.

Moco said this alread in short:

Originally Posted by Moco Loco

Right, the climate changing in general is certainly not actually the problem, it's more about how rapidly it is

The 350ppm - this is a more or less random number. It was chosen as it supposedly is the concentration at which the increase in temperature is less than 2°C and this is considered to be tolerable. Theories say that if it goes up to 4°C, large areas will be unsuitable for agriculture and if it goes beyond that, it is thought that there could be tipping points reached, leading to increases of 8°C or more. That would be catastrophic.

Also one has to bear in mind that at present, CO2 levels still increase rapidly. No levelling off is in sight and a decline is at this time wishful thinking. Especially after the grand failure of the COP17 "Durban" talks that basically postponed any decisions once more - until 2020!
By then we likely are at 400ppm and rising.

Originally Posted by Loverofnature

I don't see it as a problem, because i genuinely believe, that this is a natural cycle and that what we humans are doing is a minimal factor.

Humans are a huge influence on the planetary ecosystems. There is quite a good grounds for us geologists to call the present time the "anthropocene".
Humans move as much of Earths mass (rocks, sand, boulders) as the Earth does by itself (in rivers and erosion processes). CO2 production is enough to almost double the normal CO2 concentrations (of <200 ppm). Humans use up to 40% of the total terrestrial net primary production, that is all the biomass created by the sunlight coming to Earth. Of all that sunlight, 40% will end up in food, wood, biofuels or fibres - or in our "waste". That is HUGE - humans are a "force of nature". And thus to say that Earth is too large for us to have a significant influence is not adequate I would say.

[Tsyal Makto]

Originally Posted by Loverofnature

@Tsayal: How can we know that that is the limit? how can they absolutely be sure? in the 70's the said the earth was cooling down and a new ice age was on the way, but just 10 years later, they change their minds. I think that we, in reality, don't know any about the planet at all. That goes for the universe too.

[0804.1126] Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim?

[auroraglacialis]

The scientists involved in that Methane study formed a workgroup and published a website, open letter to governments and a number of data. I disagree with the "solution" to use geoengineering to fix the problem - that can in the best case be a temporary patch, allowing governments to further postpone an emergency agreement - in the worst case it could have severe side effects. Here is the open letter on their website:
Home

Already today, all the potentially huge Arctic positive climate feedbacks are operating.
The Arctic summer sea ice is in a rapid, extremely dangerous meltdown process. The Arctic summer ice albedo loss feedback (i.e. open sea absorbs more heat than ice which reflects much of it) had clearly passed its tipping point in 2007 – many decades earlier than models projected, meaning that it is now inevitable that the Arctic will become ice free in summer within the next few years. Models of sea ice volume indicate a seasonally ice free Arctic likely by 2015, with the possibility of a collapse to a small amount of residual ice as soon as summer 2013.

Such a collapse will inexorably lead to positive feedbacks under which today's carbon sinks such as permafrost, peat bogs, and rainforests worldwide will become net sources of atmospheric carbon leading to planetary catastrophe.

The retreat of sea ice is leading to the most catastrophic feedback process of all, many decades ahead of projections. This is the venting of methane to the atmosphere from frozen methane gas hydrates that are destabilizing along the East Siberian continental shelf in the Arctic.