ForumGarden

I did once wade across Euston Road knee-deep in torrential rain, most of which drained down escalators and flooded the District, Circle and Metropolitan line. Kings Cross had an ingenious scheme which kept it out of the deeper areas, which probably involved doors designed to fend off nuclear events with over-engineered seals. The rest of London was sunny. That stretch from Capital FM to Battle Bridge Road suddenly decided it wanted a monsoon.

spot;1367566 wrote: I did once wade across Euston Road knee-deep in torrential rain, most of which drained down escalators and flooded the District, Circle and Metropolitan line. Kings Cross had an ingenious scheme which kept it out of the deeper areas, which probably involved doors designed to fend off nuclear events with over-engineered seals. The rest of London was sunny. That stretch from Capital FM to Battle Bridge Road suddenly decided it wanted a monsoon.


Tell me about it!

Coming through rural Northamptonshire this weekend I was caught in a sudden hailstorm - in a quarter of an hour the back deck was covered in a sheet of ice and a bowl that had been empty had three inches of water in it. Then it stopped and the sun came out.

This in the middle of summer?

Disturb a steady state system and chaos ensues until a new equlibrium is reached.

An update on this year.The last five years (2007 to 2011) have been the five lowest extents in the continuous satellite record, which extends back to 1979. While the record low year of 2007 was marked by a combination of weather conditions that favored ice loss (including clearer skies, favorable wind patterns, and warm temperatures), this year has shown more typical weather patterns but continued warmth over the Arctic. This supports the idea that the Arctic sea ice cover is continuing to thin.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

Who knows, maybe the final collapse in a couple of years is still a possibility. It would be desirable in that it would jolt a lot of people into a sense of urgency that's been lacking so far in the discussion of atmospheric pollution. There's oxides of nitrogen and sulphur up there out of all proportion to their pre-industrial concentrations, there's raised levels of greenhouse carbon compounds, all of it needs reducing. And I don't mean the rate of increase needs reducing, I do mean the concentrations, and nobody in any government is suggesting we even aim for that as far as I'm aware.

I note that a team took a rowing boat to the magnetic north pole this year. They weren't, as far as I know, wearing Hawaiian shorts but it's beyond a joke.The magnetic North Pole constantly changes position but the 1996 location was the first time it had been accurately plotted and the position has become an established objective for Arctic expeditions. On the final 80-kilometer (50-mile) leg, the crew rowed most of the way but then had to haul their 1.3-ton boat over three kilometers of ice rubble in a nine-hour slog.

It has been a long and hard slog to the end of this thread. There have been many good points made, and many times that I was tempted to jump in and comment in spite of my realization that most of these points were made over two years ago. One of those points I almost jumped in was your statement concerning your prediction that the ice pack in the Arctic would be depleted by 2013. In my opinion, that statement was prophetic. Whether or not it is actually depleted is beside the point; the facts provided at your link (and that I've read and posted on elsewhere) are close enough to that prediction that it makes no never mind.

I've long been interested in this phenomenon, no matter what causes it. Though contested by some, this phenomenon does exist and the consequences are disturbing at the very least. Evidence of the increase of carbon in the atmosphere, generated by human activity or otherwise, is undeniable by anyone able or willing to review the data. Our impact on the environment is also undeniable, and much of that impact affects the atmosphere, directly and indirectly.

Our factories and vehicles emit massive amounts of CO₂. Then we have had massive deforestation on an almost global scale. Those forests' plants are crucial in removing said CO₂ from the atmosphere, and deforestation is crippling the ability to remove it from naturally occurring sources, let alone the ever-increasing man-made ones.

I have read about many of the issues presented in the thread (I was going to do a little quoting, but seem to be having a "Database Error" at this time). In all actuality, this isn't confined to the Arctic, but to the Antarctic as well. The Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an alarming rate, and that is of much greater concern. That is where the rise in ocean levels is going to come from.

I find it slightly comforting that there hasn't been a massive influx of fresh water into the North Atlantic Conveyor. That, I'm sure you know, is what is theorized to have started the last great Ice Age. I'm not sure that might not happen, though, and if the Greenhouse Effect tips into runaway, we might be wishing that would.

The clathrate issue is starting to be observed.

Scientists shocked by Arctic permafrost thawing 70 years sooner than predicted

spot;837151 wrote: The recorded values for carbon dioxide for the last 400,000 years vary between 200 and 280 parts per million until 200 years ago, they're now at 380 and rising fast. Are we agreed with at least those facts?


For the record we've now reached 410ppm. That's an 8% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in eleven years, all of which increase happened during and despite the fully active Kyoto Protocol and subsequently the Paris Agreement.



spot;1369775 wrote: An update on this year.The last five years (2007 to 2011) have been the five lowest extents in the continuous satellite record, which extends back to 1979. While the record low year of 2007 was marked by a combination of weather conditions that favored ice loss (including clearer skies, favorable wind patterns, and warm temperatures), this year has shown more typical weather patterns but continued warmth over the Arctic. This supports the idea that the Arctic sea ice cover is continuing to thin.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis




This year's Arctic Sea Ice Minimum is the second worst figure since measurements started. The link still works, the actual graph is at https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/char ... ice-graph/

At 10:05 you will hear Kerry Obrien (if you don't want to hear what the opposition, government, and the prime minister of New Zealand have to say)

QnA is an ABC show that allows the people to ask questions of those in power.

spot;1525533 wrote: For the record we've now reached 410ppm. That's an 8% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide in eleven years.





This year's Arctic Sea Ice Minimum is the second worst figure since measurements started. The link still works, the actual graph is at https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/char ... ice-graph/


If you watch that link I put above to youutbe you'll realise that according to some members of our government there's no water rise and more polar bears than ever .

to be honest I find it hilarious that they put security on a 15 year old girl to protect the President of the United States ......that speaks volumes to me and the rest of the world. To me that says how weak the President actually is . Big cry baby!!!!

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-09- ... U3u_qlngx0

magentaflame;1525570 wrote:



At 10:05 you will hear Kerry Obrien (if you don't want to hear what the opposition, government, and the prime minister of New Zealand have to say)

QnA is an ABC show that allows the people to ask questions of those in power.


Thank you, I quite liked the format and the behavior.

It can get rowdy at times, but it's usually in response to really dumb answers from politicians.

It is about time somebody realised theseverity of our present situation on this planet. I feel that whilst the Chinese belch pollutants into the sky, and the Philipines and South America burn down all our essential trees, there is absolutely no hope for the human race to survive.

It is the greed of businesses. It is the desperate greed for money and damn the rest. I believe that this corrupt human race deserves to perish, to suffocate and rot in its filthy greedy arrogant cess pit it has created over the centuries. True, it will take us all - the innocent along with the guilty perpetrators.

But, as those who have common sense realise (and have been warning the heads of governments for decades ) we have left it too late. We should have rebelled decades ago, but so many people were in denial. Governments will be too lilly livered to bother. I really don't think there is anybody in any Government in any country on this planet who has the balls to stand up and risk being assasinated by some hitman hired by some huge Global Company, to demand that industry must not use finite fuels for their power. They could use wave power, solar power, wind turbines. But they will all turn round and say that to change the type of fuel would be too costly, take too long to organise, and so it will go on.

I, personally, will be long gone from this mortal coil. But in years to come, maybe your grand children, or perhaps if we're lucky, their children will sit on a park bench in the setting sunlight and cry, as they scan slowly the miles of desert that once was verdant grass and beautiful tall trees with fields beyond presenting swaying acres of golden corn. Think on, remember the drought periods of our UK summers - how quickly the grass turned light brown through lack of water. That happened in a period of a few sun scorched weeks. It is no exaggeration that our once healthy agricultural land would in comparatively short time, become barren and lifeless.

I really don't know what the answer is to try to stop this terrible prospect. I think it could mean mass rioting against the various governments as it's obvious that they don't take notice of peaceful rallies ! The public needs to be a lot more forceful.

I'm getting quite annoyed at the cobblers emitted by the BBC in response to The State of Nature 2019 report.

The State of Nature report shows, in grim detail, that almost one in five plants are classified as being at risk of extinction, along with 15% of fungi and lichens, 40% of vertebrates and 12% of invertebrates.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209




This is beyond mere clumsiness. On Radio 4 it's been explicitly interpreted as worldwide extinction as opposed to the loss of the UK as a habitat for each species, and one commentator used the word "mammals" where the report has "vertebrates". The State of Nature report itself uses "extinction" for this level of UK habitat loss and it's an abuse of language, they do themselves no favors by promoting such hysteria.

Summarising these results

by the main higher taxonomic

groups, 440 plants (18%), 232 fungi

and lichens (15%), 111 vertebrates

(40%) and 405 invertebrates (12%)

are classified as being at risk of

extinction from Great Britain.

In addition, there are species

in each group that are known

to have gone extinct from

Great Britain already: 32 plants

(1.2%), 33 fungi and lichens

(1.8%), seven vertebrates (2.4%)

and 61 invertebrates (1.6%).

A breakdown of all-Ireland




I like unbiased reporting. I like unbiased fact summaries and unbiased statistics. I am left feeling I've had none of that, either from the report or from the BBC.

The link text on the BBC News website says "More than a quarter of UK mammals face extinction" which is quite simply an outright naked clickbait lie.

I'd also be interested to know how many of the "known to have gone extinct from Great Britain already: seven vertebrates" in the report are still alive elsewhere in the world. I would put money on all. Perhaps they could then modify their house style to only use "extinction" in its universally recognized sense of no remaining instances on the planet. Is this species, for example, they could ask themselves, in the same category of aliveness as the Dodo.

This is quite effective, as bar-charts go. I approve.

spot;1528782 wrote: This is quite effective, as bar-charts go. I approve.







It’s the temperature dipole in the Indian Ocean shifting, non-intuitively, towards the west. It also means that East Africa is getting wetter.

Bryn Mawr;1528790 wrote: It’s the temperature dipole in the Indian Ocean shifting, non-intuitively, towards the west. It also means that East Africa is getting wetter.


Consistently more so over 120 years? I wonder what's driving that.

spot;1528798 wrote: Consistently more so over 120 years? I wonder what's driving that.


No, it’s a more recent phenomenon, from memory just the past fifteen years or so but as the hot end of the dipole is shifting west Australia is becoming dryer and hotter

ETA, I really will have to go back and check the timescale, I saw the article in passing rather than detailed research.

EETA, It’s the research that only goes back twenty years, the effect has, apparently, been building since the beginning of the last century.

tude dog;1529190 wrote: I should have explained those pictures. I had an explanation but deleted it. In short, I was giving an example of the technological and societal advances/changes unimagined those 110 years ago.

I have no idea of the actual date of that old picture of what the weather was like.



Today few people own horses and they are not used on a daily basis. The streets are now paved and everybody has electrical power, the internet, etc.

1920 census population 390 and now barely 100.

My problem with the panic of weather change is all those who want to preach what we all should do/can about it.

It is a global situation, there is no global concesus what if anything we can/do about it.Thank you for that. I don't quite get what you're trying to convey, but thanks for trying. It's much appreciated.

All I can say is ..... we were warned after Black Saturday we were going to be up **** creek in ten years if something drastic wasn't done. (Fires aside) they were bang on the money. We were warned and it's happening. Dead rivers. Species disappearing etc etc.

I am wondering,

Do they have similar data from the other locations?

Cape Town, for example, or Jakarta, Port Moresby, Santiago, Montevideo, Buenas Aires,...

I wonder if they are seeing similar changes in temp and rainfall.

I read earlier that New Zealand is reporting much less rainfall and warmer temps, as well.

Obviously, Australia, because of its larger land mass relative to the rest of the Southern Hemisphere will be impacted the most, but it would be educational to see the data from other areas.

It's always been interesting how regions virtually surrounded by water can experience such hot, dry weather.

I dread seeing the results of the surveys being carried out this summer in Antarctica, given the news we have seen from Alaska, Canada and Greenland this year.

There's an interesting graphic in thday's Guardian labelled "Global oceans are getting hotter due to global heating - Change in heat content relative to 1981-2010 average in zettajoules" which is a figure I've wondered how to get hold of in the past. Not temperature, which is difficult to interpret, but change in heat content. It shows the past 80 years.

spot;1529565 wrote: There's an interesting graphic in thday's Guardian labelled "Global oceans are getting hotter due to global heating - Change in heat content relative to 1981-2010 average in zettajoules" which is a figure I've wondered how to get hold of in the past. Not temperature, which is difficult to interpret, but change in heat content. It shows the past 80 years.


Converting that back to increasing sea temperature one wonders how quickly that will destabilize the methane hydrate deposits and dump gigatonnes of methane into the atmosphere?

Bryn Mawr;1529566 wrote: Converting that back to increasing sea temperature one wonders how quickly that will destabilize the methane hydrate deposits and dump gigatonnes of methane into the atmosphere?


The trouble with temperatures is that different bits of the ocean get different proportions of the heat, and the levels have different mixing rates. Some bits will get ten degree increases and others none, until equilibrium after an age or two.

Bryn Mawr;1529566 wrote: Converting that back to increasing sea temperature one wonders how quickly that will destabilize the methane hydrate deposits and dump gigatonnes of methane into the atmosphere?


Fortunately, at the depths much of it is stored, little current-caused heat exchange takes place. I hope.

Though the Japanese and Chinese are working very hard at figuring out how to exploit all those hydrocabons.

That could get very interesting in a couple of decades.

LarsMac;1529568 wrote: Fortunately, at the depths much of it is stored, little current-caused heat exchange takes place. I hope.

Though the Japanese and Chinese are working very hard at figuring out how to exploit all those hydrocabons.

That could get very interesting in a couple of decades.


Apart, I think, from the southern Arctic Ocean where the Atlantic Conveyer dumps the warmer water brought up from sunnier climes and we know that there’s a lot of methane hydrate stored up there with a reasonable amount of evidence that it is already destabilizing, cause as yet uncertain.

I had it in mind that all these seabed clathrates were in coastal rather than abyssal waters, but I could be wrong.

spot;1529573 wrote: I had it in mind that all these seabed clathrates were in coastal rather than abyssal waters, but I could be wrong.


I was thinking they were in deeper and colder areas, but it seems depth is not necessarily a factor.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ea ... ne-hydrate

There are, it seems, large deposits in arctic and Antarctic sea ice, as well as in the permafrost.

It is the Permafrost where the primary concern is, though, not so much in the sea regions.

spot;1529573 wrote: I had it in mind that all these seabed clathrates were in coastal rather than abyssal waters, but I could be wrong.


Deep continental shelf but that includes quite a bit on the edges of the conveyor.

LarsMac;1529575 wrote: I was thinking they were in deeper and colder areas, but it seems depth is not necessarily a factor.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ea ... ne-hydrate

There are, it seems, large deposits in arctic and Antarctic sea ice, as well as in the permafrost.

It is the Permafrost where the primary concern is, though, not so much in the sea regions.


Totally agree that the permafrost is a huge problem that is already coming into effect.

Bryn Mawr;1529600 wrote: Totally agree that the permafrost is a huge problem that is already coming into effect.


We could have a bet on whether there will be a smallpox outbreak as the top layer thaws and bodies get uncovered. I do hope there's still a lot of vaccine in fridges.

spot;1529601 wrote: We could have a bet on whether there will be a smallpox outbreak as the top layer thaws and bodies get uncovered. I do hope there's still a lot of vaccine in fridges.


I can't speak for the rest of the world, but the US reportedly has stockpiled plenty of the vaccine in case some random terrorists manage to get hold of the bugs and decides to "share"

what global warming

Pretty sure it is skipping Canada.

We have had snow on Vancouver Island, this month, this is super unusual.

We just thawed out from a week of -30C-51C weather here in Western Canada.

Last summer we had below normal temperatures all summer long

Then on the East Coast they just had so much snowfall it piled higher than many homes out that way.

minks;1529899 wrote: what global warming

Pretty sure it is skipping Canada.

We have had snow on Vancouver Island, this month, this is super unusual.

We just thawed out from a week of -30C-51C weather here in Western Canada.

Last summer we had below normal temperatures all summer long

Then on the East Coast they just had so much snowfall it piled higher than many homes out that way.


Hi Minks, great to see you :-6

That’s just weather, not climate

minks;1529899 wrote: what global warming

Pretty sure it is skipping Canada.


Minksy!

There was a photo of your town in the newspaper last week and it looked like a white bedsheet from close up. They said there were houses underneath. Speaking for myself, if I have to change out of slippers to walk round the garden it annoys me. You must have the reflexes of a goat to get around at the moment.

Well looking at weather, Where we live it has been the dryest, and among the warmest Januaries on record. 30 days without any measurable precipitation.

At the same time, the mountains just 50 miles to the west have been having near record snowfall.

An interesting piece in BBC today about Antarctica might be worth reading:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51097309

If that was the piece about the journalist going to the Thwaites glacier, I did earlier. It reminded me why a career as a journalist never appealed, the chap's clearly a masochist.

spot;1529916 wrote: If that was the piece about the journalist going to the Thwaites glacier, I did earlier. It reminded me why a career as a journalist never appealed, the chap's clearly a masochist.


I would actually sign up for such an escapade, though I don't know what possible use I could be. Perhaps my culinary skills might be appreciated?

LarsMac;1529922 wrote: I would actually sign up for such an escapade, though I don't know what possible use I could be. Perhaps my culinary skills might be appreciated?


Not if you specialize in sorbets.

spot wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:00 pm The clathrate issue is starting to be observed.

Scientists shocked by Arctic permafrost thawing 70 years sooner than predicted

And now the East Siberian sea shelf.

Igor Semiletov, of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who is the chief scientist onboard, said the discharges were “significantly larger” than anything found before. “The discovery of actively releasing shelf slope hydrates is very important and unknown until now,” he said. “This is a new page. Potentially they can have serious climate consequences, but we need more study before we can confirm that.”

The most likely cause of the instability is an intrusion of warm Atlantic currents into the east Arctic. This “Atlantification” is driven by human-induced climate disruption.

The latest discovery potentially marks the third source of methane emissions from the region. Semiletov, who has been studying this area for two decades, has previously reported the gas is being released from the shelf of the Arctic – the biggest of any sea.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... tists-find

https://naturaldisaster.royalcommission ... rvations-1


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-30/ ... s/12815204


Just a bit of light reading.

One thing to come out of the enquiry was a call for Australia to have it's own firefighting aircraft fleet. At he moment we share equipment with other countries in their off seasons. Unfortunetly the "off seasons" are no longer "off seasons" . Each countries fire seasons are overlapping with other countries no matter wether they are in the northern or southern hemispheres. if that doesn't tell you something I don't know what does.

I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

LarsMac wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:19 pm I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

Given that methane in the atmosphere breaks down over about twelve years it makes you wonder what the ongoing source of the methane being added since the start of the industrial revolution is.

As we appear to be at the start of a tipping point with the release of the stored methane hydrates we can expect that graph to really kick upwards soon.

Bryn Mawr wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:25 pm

LarsMac wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:19 pm I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

Given that methane in the atmosphere breaks down over about twelve years it makes you wonder what the ongoing source of the methane being added since the start of the industrial revolution is.

As we appear to be at the start of a tipping point with the release of the stored methane hydrates we can expect that graph to really kick upwards soon.

There are numerous, varying opinions, but it It would seem that petroleum production accounts for around a 25-34% of the methane produced, and "Enteric Fermentation" is responsible for around another third. That appears to be the combined animal digestion of nutrients. (This is where the popular notion that Cows are responsible for Global Warming came from, it seems. However Termites are a significant production source in that category, as well. Also Agriculture produces as much as 12-15% Swamp/Marshlands and Rice fields contribute a significant amount of Methane, as well.
In the Everglades, and Okefenokee Swamps, and others, you can smell it, especially at night.
We can say with some confidence that Human activity is responsible for at least half of the Methane currently in the atmosphere, I believe.
Now that we have evidence that the warming atmosphere is causing ancient pockets of the stuff to be released, Is that also caused by Human activity?

We should probably send humans to Venus to start trying to figure out how to live in the atmosphere of the future. But, I reckon we must depend upon Evolution for that. Hmmmm?

https://www.upsbatterycenter.com/blog/w ... -Human.jpg
https://eidclimate.org/wp-content/uploa ... 4x1024.png
http://earthonlinemedia.com/ebooks/tpe_ ... t2_EPA.gif

LarsMac wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:00 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:25 pm

LarsMac wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:19 pm I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

Given that methane in the atmosphere breaks down over about twelve years it makes you wonder what the ongoing source of the methane being added since the start of the industrial revolution is.

As we appear to be at the start of a tipping point with the release of the stored methane hydrates we can expect that graph to really kick upwards soon.

There are numerous, varying opinions, but it It would seem that petroleum production accounts for around a 25-34% of the methane produced, and "Enteric Fermentation" is responsible for around another third. That appears to be the combined animal digestion of nutrients. (This is where the popular notion that Cows are responsible for Global Warming came from, it seems. However Termites are a significant production source in that category, as well. Also Agriculture produces as much as 12-15% Swamp/Marshlands and Rice fields contribute a significant amount of Methane, as well.
In the Everglades, and Okefenokee Swamps, and others, you can smell it, especially at night.
We can say with some confidence that Human activity is responsible for at least half of the Methane currently in the atmosphere, I believe.
Now that we have evidence that the warming atmosphere is causing ancient pockets of the stuff to be released, Is that also caused by Human activity?

We should probably send humans to Venus to start trying to figure out how to live in the atmosphere of the future. But, I reckon we must depend upon Evolution for that. Hmmmm?

https://www.upsbatterycenter.com/blog/w ... -Human.jpg
https://eidclimate.org/wp-content/uploa ... 4x1024.png
http://earthonlinemedia.com/ebooks/tpe_ ... t2_EPA.gif

So basically....no matter where it's come from, the planet cannot handle it anymore. We are seeing the effects of it and now we are at a point of no return. So? what do we do about it? It doesn't matter anymore what,who has caused it ......what are we going to do so the next few generations can live through it?

LarsMac wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:00 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:25 pm

LarsMac wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:19 pm I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

Given that methane in the atmosphere breaks down over about twelve years it makes you wonder what the ongoing source of the methane being added since the start of the industrial revolution is.

As we appear to be at the start of a tipping point with the release of the stored methane hydrates we can expect that graph to really kick upwards soon.

There are numerous, varying opinions, but it It would seem that petroleum production accounts for around a 25-34% of the methane produced, and "Enteric Fermentation" is responsible for around another third. That appears to be the combined animal digestion of nutrients. (This is where the popular notion that Cows are responsible for Global Warming came from, it seems. However Termites are a significant production source in that category, as well. Also Agriculture produces as much as 12-15% Swamp/Marshlands and Rice fields contribute a significant amount of Methane, as well.
In the Everglades, and Okefenokee Swamps, and others, you can smell it, especially at night.
We can say with some confidence that Human activity is responsible for at least half of the Methane currently in the atmosphere, I believe.
Now that we have evidence that the warming atmosphere is causing ancient pockets of the stuff to be released, Is that also caused by Human activity?

We should probably send humans to Venus to start trying to figure out how to live in the atmosphere of the future. But, I reckon we must depend upon Evolution for that. Hmmmm?

https://www.upsbatterycenter.com/blog/w ... -Human.jpg
https://eidclimate.org/wp-content/uploa ... 4x1024.png
http://earthonlinemedia.com/ebooks/tpe_ ... t2_EPA.gif

The trouble with that is that most of it existed pre-industrial revolution. Why the huge spike since? A 25% to 34% uplift through petrol production is not sufficient and the release of Palaeolithic sources is too recent to explain the curve.

Bryn Mawr wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:31 pm

LarsMac wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:00 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:25 pm

LarsMac wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:19 pm I like Graphs

https://www.methanelevels.org/

I think we are basically screwed, unless we can soon find a way to safely combust a shitload of Methane, and maybe use up a lot of the CO, as well, very soon.

Given that methane in the atmosphere breaks down over about twelve years it makes you wonder what the ongoing source of the methane being added since the start of the industrial revolution is.

As we appear to be at the start of a tipping point with the release of the stored methane hydrates we can expect that graph to really kick upwards soon.

There are numerous, varying opinions, but it It would seem that petroleum production accounts for around a 25-34% of the methane produced, and "Enteric Fermentation" is responsible for around another third. That appears to be the combined animal digestion of nutrients. (This is where the popular notion that Cows are responsible for Global Warming came from, it seems. However Termites are a significant production source in that category, as well. Also Agriculture produces as much as 12-15% Swamp/Marshlands and Rice fields contribute a significant amount of Methane, as well.
In the Everglades, and Okefenokee Swamps, and others, you can smell it, especially at night.
We can say with some confidence that Human activity is responsible for at least half of the Methane currently in the atmosphere, I believe.
Now that we have evidence that the warming atmosphere is causing ancient pockets of the stuff to be released, Is that also caused by Human activity?

We should probably send humans to Venus to start trying to figure out how to live in the atmosphere of the future. But, I reckon we must depend upon Evolution for that. Hmmmm?

https://www.upsbatterycenter.com/blog/w ... -Human.jpg
https://eidclimate.org/wp-content/uploa ... 4x1024.png
http://earthonlinemedia.com/ebooks/tpe_ ... t2_EPA.gif

The trouble with that is that most of it existed pre-industrial revolution. Why the huge spike since? A 25% to 34% uplift through petrol production is not sufficient and the release of Palaeolithic sources is too recent to explain the curve.

The Paleolithic sources are being exposed due to the significant warming that has taken place since the beginnings of the industrial revolution.
We have a nearly 1.4 C rise in mean temp since 1900. The arctic and Antarctic Ice is beginning to degrade, and throughout the Alaskan and Siberian regions the Permafrost is not quite as permanent as it used to be.
Wait until the Antarctic Ice begins to degrade in Ernest. That, combine with the rapid rise on CO concentration, accelerating the warming even more, well, in a few thousand years or so, Earthlings will be discussing the fossilized signs of ancient civilizations that mysteriously faded into extinction.