Do you like the pain quick, or do you like it slow?
Edit: Ecologically speaking, I believe 1 CO2 is much better than 1 Methane molecule, as life can adapt much more easily to slower changes than to fast changes in the environment.
the specific issue at hand is that the albedo of liquid water is around .05 and snow has an one of .90. So about 18 times the amount of heat enters the system when it hits water instead of snow.
...ish. that number doesn't account for reflected light getting absorbed by greenhouse gasses or complicated angle of incident, or light that's hitting plain old ice without snow on it.
the specific issue at hand is that the albedo of liquid water is around .05 and snow has an one of .90. So about 18 times the amount of heat enters the system when it hits water instead of snow.
...ish. that number doesn't account for reflected light getting absorbed by greenhouse gasses or complicated angle of incident, or light that's hitting plain old ice without snow on it.
but, conduction of heat isn't really the issue.
I am more worried about the temperature spike that will occur when we have no more ice to melt.
Yesterday was a hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology entitled "Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method". It was stacked with climate change deniers, of course, and the Committee Chairman and Captain Planet villain Lamar Smith (R-TX) had some choice words (via ars technica):
Smith went after climate scientists right in the statement he used to open the hearing, saying, "Far too often, alarmist theories on climate science originate with scientists who operate outside the principles of the scientific method." He went on to say that "all too often, scientists ignore the basic tenets of science."
Smith objected to Mann calling [the Heartland Institute] "climate deniers," and after Mann read a description of Smith's talk at Heartland from Science magazine, Smith said, "That is not known as an accurate writer or magazine."
Sic transit gloria mundi.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Yesterday was a hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology entitled "Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method". It was stacked with climate change deniers, of course, and the Committee Chairman and Captain Planet villain Lamar Smith (R-TX) had some choice words (via ars technica):
Smith went after climate scientists right in the statement he used to open the hearing, saying, "Far too often, alarmist theories on climate science originate with scientists who operate outside the principles of the scientific method." He went on to say that "all too often, scientists ignore the basic tenets of science."
Smith objected to Mann calling [the Heartland Institute] "climate deniers," and after Mann read a description of Smith's talk at Heartland from Science magazine, Smith said, "That is not known as an accurate writer or magazine."
Well, your screen name is certainly appropriate.
+29
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
So, somewhat related, somewhat not:
In the old Cosmos series with Carl Sagan, there was a sequence where he took his ship of the imagination to other worlds, following radio transmissions, but they always stopped before he got there. IIRC (it's been years) he described it as a sort of nightmare he sometimes had, which he interpreted as him fearing that civilizations would reach a certain point and then die out. It was the 80s, so he was more worried about nuclear weapons.
And it was all set to Beethoven's 7th. It was, in fact, that sequence that reacquainted me with the 7th, which I hadn't heard since I was a child, and I found I really liked hearing it again.
The past few months, I've been thinking of that sequence again, but for different reasons than nuclear war. (Well, mostly.)
I don't enjoy listening to Beethoven's 7th anymore.
Why do people in this thread think this is awesome?
I assumed it was sarcasm. "Oh awesome. Great. Just swell."
Maybe, maybe it's me, it's just so frustrating!
I was saying in the Hiberno-Brittanic politics thread recently that I wanted a hug reaction because I didn't want to awesome or agree posts but really wanted to hug the people posting them.
I'm starting to think a "HOLD ME!" :bigfrown: reaction button is more appropriate.
Although yes, :hydra: seems to be very much a theme.
A supervisor at the Energy Department's international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases "climate change," "emissions reduction" or "Paris Agreement" in written memos, briefings or other written communication, sources have told POLITICO.
Another DOE source in a different office said that although there had been no formal instructions about climate-related language in their office there was a general sense that it's better to avoid certain hot-button terms in favor of words like "jobs" and "infrastructure."
+7
Options
IlpalaJust this guy, y'knowTexasRegistered Userregular
We will never be able to overcome this problem until we look it in the face and call it what it is, and that is Radical Climate Change.
So it seems like the overall strategy of this administration, covering up their ears and going "Can't hear you, problem doesn't exist if I don't hear about it", is still in effect.
FF XIV - Qih'to Furishu (on Siren), Battle.Net - Ilpala#1975
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
A supervisor at the Energy Department's international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases "climate change," "emissions reduction" or "Paris Agreement" in written memos, briefings or other written communication, sources have told POLITICO.
Another DOE source in a different office said that although there had been no formal instructions about climate-related language in their office there was a general sense that it's better to avoid certain hot-button terms in favor of words like "jobs" and "infrastructure."
Your failure to uphold the jobs will tip us over the edge of disastrous infrastructure.
Clearly we should aggressively support the growing job market of renewable energy and research into environmental conditions. Have to make sure we have Strong Trump infrastructure that can take a beating from the weather. Gotta understand the current and future conditions we will have to design around.
I'm looking to find a charity to support, and since climate change is the most important issue facing us today, I was wondering: are there any reputable charities working on climate change (either prevention or mitigation) that I can donate to?
Preferably international ones; I'm not American so I don't want to donate to a purely US-based one.
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
Whelp, we're fucked. If the US won't lead the fight against climate change, no one will. If you live anywhere near the coast, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE ASAP.
Whelp, we're fucked. If the US won't lead the fight against climate change, no one will. If you live anywhere near the coast, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE ASAP.
Sea-level rise is probably the least-bad part of climate change. Unless you live directly on a low beach, you probably have 50-75 years before that's something that will require individual action (governments in like New York or Venice need to act sooner, obviously).
And if you do have oceanfront property, you're rich enough to not care.
Whelp, we're fucked. If the US won't lead the fight against climate change, no one will. If you live anywhere near the coast, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE ASAP.
Here in the EU people want to partner up with China to mitigate climate change. China is actually making big investment s in green energy, Tesla, etc
+15
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
Whelp, we're fucked. If the US won't lead the fight against climate change, no one will. If you live anywhere near the coast, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE ASAP.
Sea-level rise is probably the least-bad part of climate change. Unless you live directly on a low beach, you probably have 50-75 years before that's something that will require individual action (governments in like New York or Venice need to act sooner, obviously).
And if you do have oceanfront property, you're rich enough to not care.
I was referring more to the erosion that is going to get a LOT worse around coastal areas, not a rise in sea levels. In the next few decades storms will get a lot worse and land will erode at an ever increasing rate. This will lead to most river areas turning into floodplains and most coastal cities just washing into the ocean.
Back in 2016, Siberia’s amusingly named Bely Island made headlines around the world after sections of its grassy landscape became somewhat bouncy.
As it turned out, the island was leaking greenhouse gases at a remarkable rate. In fact, the air escaping from the ground there contained 100 times more methane and 25 times more carbon dioxide – the two most potent greenhouse gases by far – than the surrounding atmosphere.
This time last year, just 15 of these near-surface, water-coated methane bubbles had been identified. Now, as reported by the Siberian Times, there are 7,000 of them. Considering that methane is incredibly flammable, it’s also likely that some of these bubbles will dramatically explode without much of a warning.
In sum, this, ladies and gentlemen, is not good.
I watched that video again, because it is interesting. I just noticed the guy had a rifle. Is he hunting on a a methane bounce house?
I'm not sure I'd feel totally comfortable shooting a rifle where a flammable gas is leaking out and mixing with the air.
Whelp, we're fucked. If the US won't lead the fight against climate change, no one will. If you live anywhere near the coast, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THERE ASAP.
Sea-level rise is probably the least-bad part of climate change. Unless you live directly on a low beach, you probably have 50-75 years before that's something that will require individual action (governments in like New York or Venice need to act sooner, obviously).
And if you do have oceanfront property, you're rich enough to not care.
What? No. I was living on the beach when I was broke as fuck. (Yes, in a building)
To say nothing of the people who don't live on the shores but do earn their living there, or drive over causeways, or live in places where storm surge is a threat.
Sea level status quo is not a "rich people" problem.
Back in 2016, Siberia’s amusingly named Bely Island made headlines around the world after sections of its grassy landscape became somewhat bouncy.
As it turned out, the island was leaking greenhouse gases at a remarkable rate. In fact, the air escaping from the ground there contained 100 times more methane and 25 times more carbon dioxide – the two most potent greenhouse gases by far – than the surrounding atmosphere.
This time last year, just 15 of these near-surface, water-coated methane bubbles had been identified. Now, as reported by the Siberian Times, there are 7,000 of them. Considering that methane is incredibly flammable, it’s also likely that some of these bubbles will dramatically explode without much of a warning.
In sum, this, ladies and gentlemen, is not good.
I watched that video again, because it is interesting. I just noticed the guy had a rifle. Is he hunting on a a methane bounce house?
I'm not sure I'd feel totally comfortable shooting a rifle where a flammable gas is leaking out and mixing with the air.
Siberia has lots of brown bears better to have your eyebrows singed off than chewed off.
Back in 2016, Siberia’s amusingly named Bely Island made headlines around the world after sections of its grassy landscape became somewhat bouncy.
As it turned out, the island was leaking greenhouse gases at a remarkable rate. In fact, the air escaping from the ground there contained 100 times more methane and 25 times more carbon dioxide – the two most potent greenhouse gases by far – than the surrounding atmosphere.
This time last year, just 15 of these near-surface, water-coated methane bubbles had been identified. Now, as reported by the Siberian Times, there are 7,000 of them. Considering that methane is incredibly flammable, it’s also likely that some of these bubbles will dramatically explode without much of a warning.
In sum, this, ladies and gentlemen, is not good.
I watched that video again, because it is interesting. I just noticed the guy had a rifle. Is he hunting on a a methane bounce house?
I'm not sure I'd feel totally comfortable shooting a rifle where a flammable gas is leaking out and mixing with the air.
Siberia has lots of brown bears better to have your eyebrows singed off than chewed off.
Is like that one of those spa services where you put your hands in a bowl of water and fish nibble your dead skin off?
Back in 2016, Siberia’s amusingly named Bely Island made headlines around the world after sections of its grassy landscape became somewhat bouncy.
As it turned out, the island was leaking greenhouse gases at a remarkable rate. In fact, the air escaping from the ground there contained 100 times more methane and 25 times more carbon dioxide – the two most potent greenhouse gases by far – than the surrounding atmosphere.
This time last year, just 15 of these near-surface, water-coated methane bubbles had been identified. Now, as reported by the Siberian Times, there are 7,000 of them. Considering that methane is incredibly flammable, it’s also likely that some of these bubbles will dramatically explode without much of a warning.
In sum, this, ladies and gentlemen, is not good.
I watched that video again, because it is interesting. I just noticed the guy had a rifle. Is he hunting on a a methane bounce house?
I'm not sure I'd feel totally comfortable shooting a rifle where a flammable gas is leaking out and mixing with the air.
Siberia has lots of brown bears better to have your eyebrows singed off than chewed off.
Is like that one of those spa services where you put your hands in a bowl of water and fish nibble your dead skin off?
Exactly like that, except you get a honey facial first.
Posts
Do you like the pain quick, or do you like it slow?
Edit: Ecologically speaking, I believe 1 CO2 is much better than 1 Methane molecule, as life can adapt much more easily to slower changes than to fast changes in the environment.
Nuke it! I see no way that that could go wrong.
Arctic ice extent:
Antarctic ice extent
Global ice extent:
The smaller the extent, the more heat energy gets absorbed by the earth's water.
the specific issue at hand is that the albedo of liquid water is around .05 and snow has an one of .90. So about 18 times the amount of heat enters the system when it hits water instead of snow.
...ish. that number doesn't account for reflected light getting absorbed by greenhouse gasses or complicated angle of incident, or light that's hitting plain old ice without snow on it.
but, conduction of heat isn't really the issue.
Why do people in this thread think this is awesome?
I assumed it was sarcasm. "Oh awesome. Great. Just swell."
Maybe, maybe it's me, it's just so frustrating!
I assumed it was part of a protest demanding mods return the "Hail Hydra!" Button
That's sure a relief.
*opens up Mars Street Journal
I am more worried about the temperature spike that will occur when we have no more ice to melt.
Well, your screen name is certainly appropriate.
In the old Cosmos series with Carl Sagan, there was a sequence where he took his ship of the imagination to other worlds, following radio transmissions, but they always stopped before he got there. IIRC (it's been years) he described it as a sort of nightmare he sometimes had, which he interpreted as him fearing that civilizations would reach a certain point and then die out. It was the 80s, so he was more worried about nuclear weapons.
And it was all set to Beethoven's 7th. It was, in fact, that sequence that reacquainted me with the 7th, which I hadn't heard since I was a child, and I found I really liked hearing it again.
The past few months, I've been thinking of that sequence again, but for different reasons than nuclear war. (Well, mostly.)
I don't enjoy listening to Beethoven's 7th anymore.
I was saying in the Hiberno-Brittanic politics thread recently that I wanted a hug reaction because I didn't want to awesome or agree posts but really wanted to hug the people posting them.
I'm starting to think a "HOLD ME!" :bigfrown: reaction button is more appropriate.
Although yes, :hydra: seems to be very much a theme.
Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’
So it seems like the overall strategy of this administration, covering up their ears and going "Can't hear you, problem doesn't exist if I don't hear about it", is still in effect.
Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
Fuck Joe Manchin
Your failure to uphold the jobs will tip us over the edge of disastrous infrastructure.
Preferably international ones; I'm not American so I don't want to donate to a purely US-based one.
Sea-level rise is probably the least-bad part of climate change. Unless you live directly on a low beach, you probably have 50-75 years before that's something that will require individual action (governments in like New York or Venice need to act sooner, obviously).
And if you do have oceanfront property, you're rich enough to not care.
Here in the EU people want to partner up with China to mitigate climate change. China is actually making big investment s in green energy, Tesla, etc
I was referring more to the erosion that is going to get a LOT worse around coastal areas, not a rise in sea levels. In the next few decades storms will get a lot worse and land will erode at an ever increasing rate. This will lead to most river areas turning into floodplains and most coastal cities just washing into the ocean.
The Biggest Loser.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-29/making-sense-of-trump-s-order-on-climate-change
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Honestly getting India on board is becoming more important, because China's been making some progress while India's still in full DGAF mode.
I'm not sure I'd feel totally comfortable shooting a rifle where a flammable gas is leaking out and mixing with the air.
Good thing it's in Russia, they would never dream of
oh god damnit.
What? No. I was living on the beach when I was broke as fuck. (Yes, in a building)
To say nothing of the people who don't live on the shores but do earn their living there, or drive over causeways, or live in places where storm surge is a threat.
Sea level status quo is not a "rich people" problem.
Siberia has lots of brown bears better to have your eyebrows singed off than chewed off.
Is like that one of those spa services where you put your hands in a bowl of water and fish nibble your dead skin off?
Exactly like that, except you get a honey facial first.