Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

An ice-free Arctic by 2013?

Scientist claims that climate models are too conservative in predicting ice loss

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 6:53 PM on 16 Dec 2007

Maybe I'm not alarmist after all. Maybe this future is nearer than everyone thinks:

ice-free.jpg

I was called "over-alarmist" by one of the people who took my bet that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2020. But one of the country's top ice experts, non-alarmist Professor Wieslaw Maslowski of the Naval Postgraduate School, told an American Geophysical Union audience this week:

My claim is that the global climate models underestimate the amount of heat delivered to the sea ice.

Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007. So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.

No, I haven't spent the $1000 yet, but I might take some more bets ...

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Add another one

And for those who still don't believe in global warming, how about ocean acidification?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071213152600 ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006 ...

-David Ahlport
Wow. Hopefully people will agree with this...

As stated above, many people underestimate the power of global warming. If they really want to make a change they have to help set the fire under Congress, take a look at http://members.greenpeace.org/hotseat/Michigan/District15 ... to see what an environmental action organization is doing to correct Congress' actions.

I had 2012

I staked out 2012 in the last thread on this topic.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Here it is

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/11/27/162059/21

But I propose a new pool, when will the arctic conveyor stop and the new ice age start?  How long until glaciers form in Maine and the UK?

I got 2023.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Lake Superior ice

http://climate.umn.edu/doc/journal/superior030603.htm

This history of Lake Superior ice might just foretell the future of the Arctic and Antarctic ice. Last complete ice coverage was in 1979 and 1962.  90% froze over in 2003.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Methane, Permafrost, Clathrates

These are things that the Arctic ice cap has shielded that can no longer be counted on to stay put. Higher temperatures caused by the loss of the ice cap will result in the thawing of permafrost and the release of methane from soils.  

Further heating of ocean temperatures will result in the dissolution of Clathrates and even more methane released. All of this dwarves all planned or possible coal burning emissions and if released will send the planet into a completely unknown climate regime.

A failure of thermohaline circulation and a little ice age would be a blessing in comparison to the methane release scenario.

Put the Carbon Back

doomsayers!

(...)

Mars J. Pictor Florifulgurator, Western Bavarian Forest.
Yet another one

And for those who still don't believe in ocean acidification, how about sea level rise?  

This 1.6 meters/century rate was paced by Milankovitch cycles, so potentially we could do even better.  

Methane hydrate

Sea floor methane hydrate ice and methane released as permafrost tundra melts.  That is a nearly unrecognized extra powerful GHG climate disaster.  How would it interact with the gulf stream conveyor stopping?

Would the additional greenhouse warming prevent a little ice age, or would it just delay it?  Would they cancel each other out in North America and Europe?

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

A major meltwater-induced cooling is unlikely

amazingdrx, the possibility of a major shutdown of the thermohaline circulation in the North Atlantic has been pretty well excluded by recent work.  Bear in mind that the present ice (Greenland plus sea ice) doesn't contain anywhere near as much fresh water as the ones that melted 10,000 years ago, plus present geography doesn't appear to allow for a large meltwater lake that could drain suddenly.  There could still be an effect, but likely no more than just a temporary slowing of the warming trend in northern Europe.

The possibility of a significant hydrate release from around the Arctic Ocean margins has yet to be ruled out, but there's no reason to expect it to be huge.  Methane release from permafrost melt may be more important.  The big open question with both of these is how fast they could happen.
   

Sea floor

Methane hydrate ice exists in the sea bed.  And as we all know by now, methane is a 23 times worse GHG than CO2.

Which conveyor research showed this result?  I did see some information claiming that the stppoage would only shift Europe's climate to that of Canada.

I'm wondering if denier propaganda is starting to affect this and other scenarios?  It seems a shift from denying human caused GHG climate change to merely denying the severity of the effect is underway.

First we saw an article here that claimed that the cure for GHG climate change was much more expensive that the effects were likely to be.  the latest one says that simply buying "insurance" in the form of "more study" of GHG free energy sources was a proportional investment to the risk posed by GHG, than actually going ahead with mass production of renewable energy devices.

It's an un-interesting new direction, but with similar rsults to the old denier talking points.  Continue the energy policy status quo, with huge subsidies to fossil and nuclear corporations, let them adapt at their own "free" market speed.  Trust monopoly corporations to care for the climate, government can't be part of any solution anyway, it is too inept and corrupt.

This new improved sophistry takes advantage of IPCC silence on many of the possible effects, like ice melting, and their speed.  methane hydrate and tundra entrapped methane hardly gets a notice.  The same with the typical melt rate of ice, it generally proceeds to accelerate at an exponential rate.

We can't just cede these points to the corpor-right.  They will take them and run for the goal, as we have seen them do in articles here recently.  Relying on the usual rhetorical shock and awe, and the traditional appeal to authority informal fallacy so dear to the hearts of corporate jetset wannabees everywhere.  

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Hedge

The actual word used was "hedge", this additional study of GHG free energy sources is purportedly  a sufficient hedge against GHG effects.

It seems a minor point, but is it really?  Bernanke met with hedge fund operators, according to the NYT, so they could try to explain the complex arrangement of lending (they have arranged) that has the world economy tottering on the brink of disaster.

As with the Cheney administration secret energy meeting early on after the first bush appointment (never call it an election), where Cheney met with the robber barons of fossil and nuclear energy to chart the demise of renewable energy policy.

So this meeting with the perpetual robber barons of the investment world, the completely unregulated insider trading thieves, that brought on this global credit emergency; was also designed to serve their own interests.

"Hedge" funds, the incremental financial "insurance" crowd, that justified their non-regulated status as part of some kind of "free" market response to risk.  Now the climate change deniers are using the very popular buzzword too.  Let's "hedge' the risk of climate change.

How?  Well just let hedge funds do it, through carbon trading and weather furtures options.  Of course the free market, left to operate efficiently (unregulated) knows the best of all possible ways to proceed.  It is the only accurate predictor of the future.  The market knows all.  The omniscient god of the corpor-right, it justifies anything they want it to.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks