DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Sober Thinking
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Catastrophic Climate Change
*****************************************************
#Post#: 364--------------------------------------------------
Polar Bears are Smarter Than Scientists Thought
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: June 20, 2022, 1:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200317134631.png
June 17, 2022 by Fermin Koop in Animals, Environment, News,
Science
[center]A population of polar bears in Greenland is adapting to
a life without sea ice
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422122257-65551.png[/center]
They survive by hunting from freshwater ice that pours into the
ocean from Greenland’s glaciers -- an unusual strategy for polar
bears.
SNIPPETS:
[center]
HTML https://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Laidre-bear-1-2048x1365-1-1536x1024.webp[/center]
A polar bear stands on a snow-covered iceberg that is surrounded
by fast ice, or sea ice connected to the shore, in Southeast
Greenland. Image credit: The researchers.
Polar bears have long been seen as the poster child of global
warming’s impact on the natural world, and for good reason: the
bears rely on sea ice to hunt seals, so climate change could
destroy the habitats the bears desperately need, which puts the
species at risk of extinction.
However, in a rare piece of good news, scientists have
discovered a group of bears in southeast Greenland has adapted
to hunting using freshwater platforms — something which was
thought to be impossible. ... ...
The study shows the Southeast Greenland bears have access to sea
ice just for four months of the year, between February and late
May. This gives them the platform that most Arctic bears use to
hunt seals. For the rest of the year, the bears take a different
approach. They hunt seals from blocks of freshwater ice breaking
off the Greenland Ice Sheet.
Full article:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164615-5351419.gif
HTML https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/polar-bears-in-greenland-are-adapting-to-a-life-without-sea-ice-17062022/
AGelbert COMMENT: The key word here is, "ADAPTATION". Please
remember that when some Evolutionist true believer scientist
disingenuously tries to spin this as "Evolution". Yes, they are
already trying hard to do that. In the article, you can detect
the frustration the study scientists experienced
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-230721144125.png<br
/>when they couldn't identify these Greenland polar bears as a
"new species". Their genetics are exactly the same as that of
polar bears everywhere. Adaptating to changing environmental
conditions with an unchanged genetic package is what these polar
bears are doing. Evolutionists hate to admit that said genetic
package enables polar bears to ADAPT to environmental conditions
they have never before experienced because, that ability, not
only totally excludes "Natural Selection" as the cause of this
Adaptation, but irrefutably evidences 👉 Intelligent
Design.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-090422150144.png<br
/>
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185040-1659929.gif<br
/>
#Post#: 373--------------------------------------------------
Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted Ocean
Wave Activity
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: June 20, 2022, 9:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Updated June 20, 2022
Agelbert NOTE: I am reposting this article due to the fact that
the graphics in the original have been so thoroughly hacked by
the 🦖 Hydrocarbon Hellspawn, that anyone trying to read
it would be discouraged from the missing graphics. I laboriously
recovered the graphics, so the first part is, once again ;D,
legible and instructive for those who care about the future of
our biosphere and want to know where, EXACTLY, to assign the
blame for the continued profit over people and planet multiple
extinctions causing rampant degradation. Remember, somebody
(i.e. 🦕😈🦖) out there hacked the crude
oil tanker picture, the RCP scenario graphics, the scientists 2
degree C rise danger warning pictures and ALL the ECM graphics
because they did not want YOU to know the Global Warming facts.
All the graphics unrelated to climate change and hydrocarbon
fuels were not hacked. The hacking is VERY targeted. For that
reason alone, I encourage you to read it and pass it on.
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210614221847.gif<br
/>
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png<br
/>
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211532-14611282.png[/center]
[center]Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted
Ocean Wave Activity[/center]
[center]PART ONE OF THREE PARTS[/center]
In this three part article I explain what the scientific
community defines as the "Business as Usual" scenario in regard
to atmospheric pollutants fueling Global Warming. A brief review
of the existential threat to marine life that this scenario
represents will follow.
Subsequently, I discuss global shipping. I provide a summary of
the tremendous importance of blue water (deep ocean) cargo
shipping to global civilization. You will be surprised at how
vital to global civilization blue water cargo shipping is. All
the military vessels, all the pleasure yachts and even all the
fishing fleets are insignificant in tonnage compared to that of
ocean going cargo and tanker vessels.
I then leave the subject of shipping and the types of cargo
vessels, which I return to at the end, to provide the reader
with a graphic climate history of the Northern Hemisphere, from
the last Glacial Maximum to the present, followed by the,
scientifically based, predicted sea level and land vegetation
changes in the "Business as Usual" scenario within the next 85
years.
The discussion then returns to cargo ships and their behavior in
rough seas. I provide graphics to explain what has been learned
about ocean waves in the last 40 years that shocked the
scientific community and caused them to go back to the drawing
board on the science and math formulas of hydrodynamics in
regard to maximum wave heights. Some tragic cargo vessel losses
from "rogue" waves (that turned out not to be as "rogue" as
science had thought) are presented as evidence that the oceans
are becoming increasingly dangerous to shipping.
Finally, the Hansen et al paper, published in June of 2015, is
referenced as evidence of a coming abrupt sea state change that
will make modern blue water surface cargo shipping either too
costly or impossible. The reason for this will be explained in
detail with graphics showing ocean wave action and modern
shipping design limitations.
Included in the last section that ties all the others together
is a reference to another scientific paper published in July of
this year (2015) that provides evidence that the worst case
scenario ("Business as Usual") modeled by the scientific
community severely understates the amount of sea level rise in
the next 85 years.
I conclude with recommendations on what the governments of the
industrialized countries of the world need to do within the next
decade in order to prevent a collapse of civilization (or worse)
within the next 25 years.
Let us begin with these nuggets of climate science from NASA:
[center]Carbon Dioxide Controls Earth's Temperature[/center]
Water vapor and clouds are the major contributors to Earth's
greenhouse effect, but a new atmosphere-ocean climate modeling
study shows that the planet's temperature ultimately depends on
the atmospheric level of carbon dioxide.
Without non-condensing greenhouse gases, water vapor and clouds
would be unable to provide the feedback mechanisms that amplify
the greenhouse effect.
The study ties in to the geologic record in which carbon dioxide
levels have oscillated between approximately 180 parts per
million during ice ages, and about 280 parts per million during
warmer interglacial periods. To provide perspective to the
nearly 1 C (1.8 F) increase in global temperature over the past
century, it is estimated that the global mean temperature
difference between the extremes of the ice age and interglacial
periods is only about 5 C (9 F).
"When carbon dioxide increases, more water vapor returns to the
atmosphere. This is what helped to melt the glaciers that once
covered New York City," said co-author David Rind, of NASA's
Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "Today we are in uncharted
territory as carbon dioxide approaches 390 parts per million in
what has been referred to as the 'superinterglacial'."
"The bottom line is that atmospheric carbon dioxide acts as a
thermostat in regulating the temperature of Earth," Lacis said.
--- Quote ---
> "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has
fully documented the fact that industrial activity is
responsible for the rapidly increasing levels of atmospheric
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
>
> It is not surprising then that global warming can be linked
directly to the observed increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide
and to human industrial activity in general."
>
--- End Quote ---
HTML http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/co2-temperature.html
So, if you read some happy talk from the fossil fuel industry
that it's the "water vapor" that is causing global warming, be
sure and reference the above study (and the companion study also
mentioned at the link) just before you call them on their
ignorance, or worse, their duplicity.
You just read about the huge difference a mere 5 degrees C
(Centigrade) can make. Here's a graphic to give you an idea
about how effective our greenhouse gas (GHG) shell is at keeping
us from turning into a ball of ice.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211202-145233.png[/center]
Greenhouse gases are vital to regulating Earth's temperature.
But there is a goldilocks band of these gases that must be
adhered to in order to provide a viable biosphere.
In addition, GHG changes in concentration within that band must
proceed, down or up, at or slower than a certain rate in order
to allow the organisms that live in that biosphere to adapt to
the changes or they will go extinct.
Industrial civilization has BOTH exceeded the upper margin of
the GHG band by a huge margin AND has done it at a rate far
above the ability of most complex non-microscopic organisms to
adapt to these violent changes. Mammalian vertebrates, among the
complex organisms on Earth, are the least able to adapt to rapid
GHG concentration changes.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210838-14351582.png[/center]
There is no precedent in the geological record for the increase
in CO2 caused by the burning of fossil fuels over the last
century. And the rate those fossil fuels are being burned is
increasing, not slowing down or ceasing.
Non-self aware mammalian vertebrates, unlike us, cannot use
technology to adapt. This is the part the CEO of ExxonMobil (Rex
Tillerson) forgot accidentally on purpose when he said, "We will
adapt to that". Mr. Tillerson is an idiot or a liar (possibly
both). Those "qualities" seem to be a job requirement for those
that work in the fossil fuel industry.
Mr. Tillerson's optimistic happy talk is not based on climate
science or the geological record.
--- Quote ---
> "Mass extinctions due to rapidly escalating levels of CO2 are
recorded since as long as 580 million years ago."
--- End Quote ---
HTML http://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
Whether we humans want to admit it or not, we need the 75% of
all of Earth's species in danger of extinction from climate
change. I know it is really hard for the fossil fuel industry
predators 'R' US crowd to wrap their greedy heads around this,
but it's hard to live on a diet of hydrocarbons. And if we don't
stop burning them, both our plant and animal food supply, along
with thousands of other species of other earthlings that make
this planet viable, will go extinct.
This is not hyperbole. Mass extinctions are part of the
geological record. In all but one of those mass extinctions, the
rapid rise in GHG was the cause of the extinctions. Furthermore,
in all the former mass extinctions, the RATE of rise in GHG was
much slower than today.
--- Quote ---
>
> "As our anthropogenic global emissions of CO2 are rising at a
rate for which no precedence is known from the geological record
with the exception of asteroid impacts, another wave of
extinctions is unfolding."
--- End Quote ---
HTML http://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
According to the latest scientific studies on Global Warming,
"Business as Usual", touted as the basis for the continued
health of global civilization, is actually the greatest threat
to global civilization and our species that we have ever faced.
Before we get to what exactly is meant by, "Business as Usual",
let us first review the human caused pollution effects on ocean
physical chemistry and temperature and marine species
biochemistry.
The following review references an analysis of oceans that
totally omits a growing problem for worldwide shipping. Although
the review is mostly very bad news, it may turn out to be, in
terms of what deals the collapse triggering blow to human
civilization as we know it, the "good" news.
[center]The World Ocean Review[/center]
The ocean may be buffering the most severe consequences of
climate change for now. But in the long run we can only hope to
avoid these if we strictly curb GHG emissions today.
Experts are concerned that hundreds of thousands of tonnes of
methane hydrate could break down due to the warming of seawater
– gas masses that are lying inertly in solid, frozen form in the
sea floor sediments today. A portion of the methane, which is a
powerful greenhouse gas, could then rise into the atmosphere and
further accelerate the process of climate change – a vicious
circle.
The oceans absorb many millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide
annually. They are the largest “sink” for anthropogenic CO2
emissions. The excess carbon dioxide, however, upsets the
chemical equilibrium of the ocean. It leads to acidification of
the oceans, the consequences of which are unpredictable. Acidic
water disrupts the sense of smell in fish larvae, carbonate
formation by snails, and the growth rates of starfish. The
phytoplankton, tiny algae in the ocean and vital nutrient basis
for higher organisms, are also affected by acidification.
The coastal environment is still being damaged by effluent and
toxic discharges, and especially by nutrients conveyed to the
ocean by rivers. Thousands of tonnes of nitrogen and phosphorus
compounds flow into the ocean around the world, causing an
explosion in algal reproduction. In many coastal regions the
catastrophe begins with the death of the algae. Bacteria feed on
the algal remains and consume oxygen in the water. In these
oxygen-depleted zones all higher life forms die off. Efforts to
reduce nutrient levels have been successful in Western Europe.
Worldwide, however, the input of nutrients is becoming
increasingly problematical. People are, without a doubt, abusing
the oceans in many respects, and this is increasing the stress
on marine organisms. Through over-fertilization and
acidification of the water, rapid changes in water temperature
or salinity, biological diversity in the ocean could drop
worldwide at increasing rates. With the combination of all these
factors, the disruption of habitats is so severe that species
will continue to disappear.
Clearly the oceans continue to be the “last stop” for the dregs
of our civilization, not only for the persistent chemicals, but
also our everyday garbage. Six million tonnes of rubbish end up
in the ocean worldwide every year. The trash is a fatal trap for
dolphins, turtles and birds. Plastic is especially long-lived
and, driven by ocean currents, it collects in the central oceans
in gyres of garbage covering hundreds of square kilometres. A
new problem has been identified in the microscopically small
breakdown products of plastics, which are concentrated in the
bodies of marine organisms.
HTML http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/wor-1-in-short/
That World Ocean Review I just quoted from, after laying out the
hard facts, incredibly goes on to happily discuss ocean mining
opportunities and methane hydrate harvesting plans for "energy
products" for "energy independence". The only caveat they supply
is more of an epitaph for human willful denial of facts than a
precautionary warning. Please file the following in the WTF!?
category.
--- Quote ---
> [center]Energy from burning ice [/center]
>
> In addition to abundant minerals, there are large amounts of
methane hydrate beneath the sea floor. Some countries hope to
become independent of energy imports by exploiting marine gas
hydrate deposits near their own coasts. The technology for
production, however, is not yet available. Furthermore,
[size=14pt]the risks to climate stability and hazards to marine
habitats associated with extraction of the methane
hydrates[/size] must first be clarified.
>
HTML http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-3-overview/methane-hydrate/
--- End Quote ---
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164545-5312068.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211041-144324.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211034-14412118.png[/center]
Yes, it seems the DANGER of extracting methane hydrates has not
been "CLARIFIED" enough. Neither the Permian Extinction
geological record nor the PETM (Paleocene–Eocene Thermal
Maximum) geological record has "clarified" the methane issue
enough.
Hello? Is this, a more recent pre-human epoch, CLARIFICATION
enough for you fellows providing your business friendly "World
Ocean Review ", claiming, among other wonders of optimistic
prose, that the sea level is only going to rise about 180 cm by
century's end?
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211001-14401777.png[/center]
The following alarming, but still too conservative, MIT study
EXCLUDES the ABRUPT climate change positive feedback loop
effects we are now beginning to experience.
[center]Do they think this MIT study needs
"clarification"?[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211040-14422072.png[/center]
And the DANGER of an acidified ocean to most marine species,
which will clearly be exacerbated by the methane bomb, has not
been clarified? Didn't Professor Gerardo Ceballos, lead author
of a study published in June of 2015 on the Sixth Mass
Extinction we are now entering, with particular emphasis on
marine mammal extinction threats, get the word?
I think he and his fellow scientists CLARIFIED the methane issue
AND the CO2 pollution issue rather well. For those that do not
get it, the CO2 pollution, now baked in, is already threatening
marine mammals with extinction. When methane hydrates are added
to the mix from a warmed ocean, acidification will accelerate
and trigger anoxic conditions throughout the ocean water column,
thereby destroying the food chain. That is a death sentence for
most non-microscopic marine life and a large portion of the
microscopic oxygen producing microscopic phytoplankton as well.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210805-14341698.png[/center]
These scientifically challenged, insultingly naive, business
friendly, bland statements sold as "sober advice" are precisely
the kind of double talk that has placed humanity in the polluted
situation it finds itself.
Some have blamed the scientific community.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622205540-14311520.png[/center]
They forget that scientists are mostly employees. They forget
that businesses gag their reports or keep their published, peer
reviewed papers from the public on a regular basis. So the
criminally negligent here are business leaders, not scientists.
My experience with reading these big picture reviews of our
terribly polluted situation is that they seem to feel obligated
to give some peppy, optimistic, happy talk at the end.
Do these people understand what "business as usual" means? It
appears that either they don't or willfully avoid doing so.
The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has a
scientific name for Business as Usual. They have modeled it.
They have a number for it. It's called the RCP-8.5. RCP stands
for Representative Concentration Pathway.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210925-1438376.png[/center]
Business as usual is a death sentence for over 75% (or more) of
life on Earth.
The people that defend business as usual are deluded. There is
evidence, which I will present, that even the RCP-8.5 scenario
is too conservative. And yet the methane issue needs
"clarification"?
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210903-1436277.png[/center]
[center]Dr. Scott Goetz (Deputy Director and Senior Scientist of
the Woods Hole Research Center) has that thousand yard stare for
a reason.[/center]
[center]CHANGES IN THE ARCTIC AND THEIR CLIMATE FEEDBACK
IMPLICATIONS: Interview with Scott Goetz[/center]
[center]
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDxw0PcRgE0[/center]
Friends, there is a crime being committed. But the guiltiest
parties do not want to pay for their share of the damage. And
that is why these reviews lack the urgency that they need to
have in order to successfully convince government policy makers
to alter our destructive trajectory.
But I have discussed that in my recent article, Dianoia is sine
qua non to a viable biosphere
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg27/#msg27.<br
/>So, I will move on to other matters of concern to humanity.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-200622221504.png[/center]
[center]Global shipping [/center]
Human civilization has come to rely on the relatively
inexpensive movement of millions of tons of cargo over the
oceans.
It is difficult or impossible to avoid a collapse without the
use of the oceans.
To underline the importance of cargo shipping as the lifeblood
of civilization, you need to look at the massive amount of
tonnage these ships move globally on a daily basis.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211142-14472326.jpeg][/center]
Tankers, bulk carriers and container ships are the most
important means of transportation of our time. Each year they
carry billions of tonnes of goods along a few principal trade
routes. Containerization has revolutionized global cargo
shipping, bringing vast improvements in efficiency.
Throughout history the oceans have been important to people
around the world as a means of transportation. Unlike a few
decades ago, however, ships are now carrying goods rather than
people.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211147-14481903.jpeg[/center]
Deadweight tonnage (abbreviated to dwt) or tons deadweight (TDW)
is a measure of how much mass a ship is carrying or can safely
carry; it does not include the weight of the ship.
Agelbert NOTE: Please take note of the caveat, "safely carry".
More on what that means later.
In terms of carrying capacity in dwt,
HTML [img width=640]http://[/img]
tankers account for 35 per cent,
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622131352.jpeg
bulk carriers account for 35 per cent,
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211508-146094.png
container ships 14 per cent,
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211151-1451792.jpeg
general cargo ships 9 per cent
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211504-14591766.jpeg
and passenger liners less than 1 per cent.
In all, the global merchant fleet has a capacity of just under
1192 million dwt.
[center]
The growth of the global merchant fleet according to type of
vessel (as at 1 January [[i]sic]) 2009.[/i][/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211149-14491096.jpeg[/center]
HTML http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/transport/global-shipping/
There is a LOT of shipping out there and a LOT of ships. If the
above graphics have not brought home to you how much shipping is
going on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, take a look at this:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211603-14621088.png[/center]
In summary, this is what is out there going hither and yon
across the oceans on a regular basis:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211150-14501965.png[/center]
Most of those affordable products in our homes are a direct
result of a the uninterrupted global lifeblood of efficient blue
ocean shipping. If that shipping was no longer possible, global
civilization would be impossible because it would be
unaffordable. It is, therefore, extremely important to ensure
that human civilization can use those oceans for routine cargo
transportation.
The oceans, as was pointed out earlier in this article, are a
giant heat sink. The more CO2 we pump into the air, the hotter
the oceans get. When the oceans get hotter, they become more
active. This means trouble for shipping.
Insurance companies do not like that. They analyze the risks of
blue water shipping and track any trends that might increase
those risks. They have actuaries that pay a lot of attention to
losses of insured ships.
All commercial shipping is insured. You and I are billed for
insuring, not just the merchant fleets, but the military ships
too! That's what the "defense budgets" lobbied for by all those
welfare queen corporations, constantly whining about that
"dangerous world out there", are all about.
Well, it looks like all shipping is going to find out how
DANGEROUS the oceans, not some invented threat about bellicose
humans, can be. The insurance actuaries already know that the
"terrorist" or piracy threat on the high seas is insignificant
compared to the threat of sinking from rough seas.
Of course you haven't read that in the papers. But you will read
it here. And I will provide evidence for it.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. To understand what is happening
in the oceans today, we need to go back in time about 20,000
years. We need to go back to the Last Glacial Maximum.
WHY? Because the sea state, as well as the sea level, is a
function of the average global temperature. In addition, the
vegetation changes that accompany changes in the average global
temperature can have deleterious effects on the sea state,
totally separate from the dire extinction threat these
temperature changes represent to marine organisms.
[center]The Environmental Change Model (ECM)[/center]
The following series of graphics deals with accurately modeled
representations of the climate in a large part of the Northern
Hemisphere centered on the Arctic. A link to the science and the
source is provided. The average global temperature and pertinent
data on the ice cover and types of vegetation is provided. Of
particular importance to the reader are the different types of
Tundra coverage. The legend has color codes for the graphical
representations.
NOTE: The Greek letter "DELTA" ="Δ". It is used in science
to mean, "Change in". The referenced average global temperature
is what we have today (about 15 degrees Centigrade = T).
So, ΔT = - 6C is a change in average temperature of minus 6
degrees centigrade from today. THAT was when there was a two
mile high glacier sheet edge near what is now New York City.
That was also when the oceans were 120 meters = 394 feet lower
than they are today.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211438-1458364.png[/center]
HTML http://cci-reanalyzer.org/ECM/
Notice how much dry and moist Tundra there was. Notice the range
and size of the types of forests and the polar desert coverage
too. At a glance you can see that this was a very dry world in
comparison to our world.
Fast forward to ΔT = - 0.5C. This was the Little Ice Age of
1850. That was just before the industrial pollution revolution
had gotten up to full biosphere trashing speed.
Sea level is close to the present level. Notice how the forest
cover has changed. Notice how the Tundra moved north as the ice
retreated. Notice how the forests and the forest Tundra
transition changed.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211351-14561967.png[/center]
Tundra responds in one of two ways when it goes above freezing.
It has to do with the available oxygen. If there isn't enough in
the soil, the microbes resort to anaerobic metabolism and make
lots of methane. This is NOT methane locked in the Tundra. This
is NEW methane. This is unrelated to the methane hydrates frozen
on the ocean bottom, but it is still an additional feedback
mechanism that increases the RATE of atmospheric heating. So
these mechanisms are, by definition, not linear. They can become
self reinforcing. That means they can go exponential.
Below, please find, the world we all grew up in (ΔT = 0C.).
I have labeled some areas for clarity. The Tundra continues to
shrink, as does the ice coverage. The forest transition area
creeps north and the forests grow along with the prairie grass
covered areas. There is less ice.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211434-14571869.png[/center]
Which brings us the IPCC RCP-8.5 scenario labeled "Business as
Usual".
This scenario is considered "worst case". It does not expect us
to hit ΔT = plus 2C until 2050. The boundless optimism of
the IPCC sounds a lot like those fellows doing the "World Ocean
Review" that mentioned the methane "issue" needed
"clarification" right after they admitted that the PRESENT
conditions were causing the extinction of most marine animals.
Please look at this graph:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210759-14331395.png[/center]
The line with the number "1" is the IPCC RCP-8.5 scenario. The
temperature increases in lines 2 and 3 ARE NOT in the IPCC
RCP-8.5 scenario.
ΔT = plus 2C is considered extremely dangerous.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622130853.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622130329.png[/center]
The IPCC projects a mere 0.5 meters sea level increase by 2050.
But the July 2015 study
HTML http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6244/aaa4019.abstract
that
I reference in the graphic claims a sea level rise greater or
equal to 6 meters (over 19 feet!) is evidenced in the geologic
record for this type of temperature rise.
The IPCC projected sea ice decline to 2010 will give you more
context to understand why it is unrealistic to believe that we
will not hit the ΔT = plus 2C until 2050.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211132-14441481.png[/center]
But nevertheless, the IPCC RCP-8.5 scenario for ΔT = plus
2C is instructive because the Tundra is disappearing. You know
what that means for increased methane release, don't you?
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211338-14551900.png[/center]
A note about the word, "Equilibrium" on the graphic: The word
"Equilibrium" means that the full effects of the temperature
change are being felt throughout the planet. Glaciologists had
previously thought that "equilibrium" effects on ice sheets took
centuries or millennia.
Now, because of empirical observations on the Greenland ice
sheet, Antarctica and various glaciers in the world, they have
come to accept that equilibrium is reached in decades or in
years, depending on the temperature anomaly increase. As you
know, or should know, the polar regions have warmed over 3C MORE
than the rest of the planet in the last 50 years.
The huge differential was not plugged in to the IPCC models so
they are too conservative on ice retreat and sea level rise. So,
if somebody tells you that all this is a long way off, they are
uninformed or working for the fossil fuel industry.
I will return to the dangers of the ΔT = plus 2C (and
beyond) world in a moment.
For now, I wish to show you the rest of the IPCC RCP-8.5
scenario projections. Please remember that they are conservative
projections and the effects portrayed will most likely arrive 25
years or more earlier than predicted. Also please remember that
the actual sea level increase (see graphic below that I added
CO2 PPM as of March of 2022), according to the
July 2015 paper
HTML http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6244/aaa4019.abstractreferenced<br
/>previously, will be several METERS, not feet, above the
predictions.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-250422172918.jpeg[/center]
[center]Science 10 July 2015: Vol. 349 no. 6244 DOI:
10.1126/science.aaa4019
Sea-level rise due to polar ice-sheet mass loss during past warm
periods[/center]
[center]ΔT = plus 3C[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211257-14541988.png[/center]
Sometime after the loss of the ice cap, all the Tundra will have
thawed. ALL the trapped gases, be they CO2 or CH4, will be
released. Added grasses absorbing CO2 will not be enough to
counteract the warming acceleration.
There are those who expect a negative feedback from the stopping
of the thermohaline oceanic current circulation (stopped by all
the cold fresh water melted off the Greenland ice cap into the
oceans). Perhaps that will help slow the heating (north of about
45 degrees latitude - below that they will roast even more!) for
a decade or so. But it will do nothing to calm the ocean
surface.
[center]ΔT = plus 4C[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211244-14531490.png[/center]
The worst effect is that Arctic ocean bottom frozen clathrates
will thaw and the methane will be released. The planet will
continue warming increasingly faster past ΔT = plus 4C.
That will [b]exacerbate ocean conditions 🌊even more.
With more and more heat energy present, the ocean surface will
get increasingly more turbulent.[/b] And we will already be well
past the ΔT = plus 2C mark.
As evidenced by the two referenced scientific studies, both
published in 2015, and the woefully conservative IPCC
predictions on the rate of the North Polar Ice Cap retreat,
Antarctic and Greenland ice cap melt rates, and temperature rise
rate, sea level will most likely rise a minimum of 6 meters
within 10 years, not 35 years. We are talking about 2025, not
2050, for a ΔT = plus 2C world. We are not preparing
adequately for that.
For those who will point to the increase in size of the floating
ice around Antarctica as evidence that the Earth is not really
warming, I beg to differ.
The fact that the Antarctic land mass IS losing ice has been
measured with satellites. It is losing ice because of global
warming. It is true that the floating ice around Antarctica has
increased and will continue to increase as long as the Antarctic
land mass is shedding melt water.
This is because of two factors. The first one is that there are
very high winds around Antarctica, unimpeded by any land mass.
The second factor is that fresh water freezes more rapidly on
the ocean surface than salty water.
That's why salt is spread on roads in winter. On the ocean, the
water molecules must rid themselves of the sodium and chloride
ions dissolved in them before they can freeze. All the ice
floating on the oceans is water ice. It has no salt in it.
And as long as that floating ice is the product of melt water
from the Antarctic land mass, it will ADD to sea level.
And when the sea level goes up just 6 feet, never mind the 19
feet or more increase expected with CURRENT CO2 levels, all
shipping port facilities (and most coastal airport facilities
too!) in the world are no longer usable without gargantuan and
heroic efforts requiring trillions of dollars in costs for every
foot the land and port infrastructure must be raised.
It seems that the countries (see every industrialized country on
the planet) dragging their feet on CO2 reduction actions do not
understand this. There are, as of this writing, over 140
countries investing trillions of dollars in port facilities.
No, they aren't raising the level of the port facilities to
prepare for rapidly rising sea levels. They are trying to cash
in on container shipping by building more container shipping
infrastructure.
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-190419232147.png<br
/>
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622210956-1439185.jpeg[/center]
Don't these governments listen to their climate scientists?
End of PART ONE.
Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted Ocean
Wave Activity: PART TWO
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg374/#msg374
#Post#: 374--------------------------------------------------
Part 2 👉 Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and
Predicted Ocean 🌊 Wave Activity
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: June 20, 2022, 9:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160112-14651249.png[/center]
[center]Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted
Ocean Wave Activity[/center]
[center]PART TWO OF THREE PARTS[/center]
Updated June 22, 2022
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164718-5381960.png
On top of the disaster for civilization that a rise in seal
level of 6 meters (over 19 FEET!) represents from the loss of
coastal arable land, coastal cities, shipping ports and
airports, there is the problem of wave activity.
Which brings us back to shipping and the ocean surface. Of
particular concern to ocean shipping in a ΔT = plus 2C (and
greater) atmosphere are the following facts about waves.
WHY?
Because that world will have more energy both in the oceans and
in the atmosphere. That world will have, not just greater
average wind speeds, particularly over unobstructed surfaces
like the oceans, but a greater duration of higher wind
velocities (speed in a relatively constant direction) over
thousands of miles. High wind velocity and duration over
hundreds or thousands of miles is a recipe for giant waves.
Here's a very brief primer on waves so you can grasp the impact
of giant wave characteristics on shipping.
First, the high points of the waves are called "crests" and the
low points of the waves are called "troughs". The crest is the
part that starts to curl over and turn foamy when waves hit the
beach. The difference in height between the crest and the trough
is called the wave height.
The "amplitude" is one half the wave height. So if you have
"50-foot seas", you have wave crests 25 feet above calm sea
level and troughs 25 feet below it. The amplitude of 50-foot
seas is 25 feet.
In the ocean, the trough of a wave is just as far below sea
level as the crest is above sea level.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160155-1477445.png
[/center]
--- Quote ---
> Energy, not water, moves across the ocean's surface. Water
particles only travel in a small circle as a wave passes.
--- End Quote ---
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160215-14782209.gif[/center]
How are waves energy?
The best way to understand waves as energy is to think of a long
rope laid on the ground. If you pick up one end and give it a
good snap --there's a ripple effect all the way to the other end
-- just like the waves on the ocean! That means that energy is
applied at one end and it moves to the other end.
What provides the energy?
In the case of ocean waves, wind provides the energy. Wind
causes waves that travel in the ocean. The energy is released on
shorelines. Some of the energy of waves is also released against
the hulls of ships at sea. The larger the vessel surface being
impacted by the wave, the more force is exerted against that
surface. Being hit by a single giant wave from the front of the
bow or the rear of the stern is normally within the structural
design limits of a large vessel. But being broadsided can either
sink a ship or severely damage it.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622163947.png[/center]
1973: A rogue wave off the coast of Durban, South Africa,
strikes the 12,000-ton cargo ship Bencrauchan. The ship is towed
into port, barely floating.
HTML http://freaquewaves.blogspot.com/2006/07/list-of-freaque-wave-encounters.html
HTML http://freaquewaves.blogspot.com/2006/07/list-of-freaque-wave-encounters.html
What determines the size of the wave?
The size of a wave depends on:
1. the distance the wind blows (over open water) which is known
as the "fetch",
2. the length of time the wind blows, and
3. the speed of the wind.
The greater these three, the larger the wave.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160153-14751264.png[/center]
The distance waves are apart is called the "wavelength".
Wavelength is typically measured between the crests of two
adjacent waves, but it could be measured from trough to trough
or from any point on one wave to the same point on the next
wave. You will get the same distance no matter where you
measure.
Finally, the "frequency" of the wave specifies how many wave
wavelengths go by in a set amount of time. So this is dependent
not only on the speed of the waves, but on their wavelength.
HTML http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/applets/xray/wavefront.html
HTML http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/applets/xray/wavefront.html
The "period" of a wave must also be considered. The period of a
wave is the amount of time it takes for one wavelength to occur.
Frequency and period are distinctly different, yet related,
quantities. The frequency of a wave is how many wavelengths
occur in a given amount of time.
HTML http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-2/Frequency-and-Period-of-a-Wave
Ship hulls are designed to withstand about 15 to 20 tons per
square meter. They can handle up to 30 tons per square meter
only if they bend to take the blow.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622162813.png[/center]
[center] Rogue Wave Is Suspected in Mideast Tanker Blast
HTML http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703940904575394601540430826[/center]
When a wave with a height of 30 meters (100 ft.) is spoken of,
only half that much of it is what is above the sea level. That
doesn't do a ship much good because the ship will ride down the
15 meter trough before it gets hit by the 30 meter monster. And
"riding" down the trough is somewhat of a misnomer.
Large ships, because of the combined weight of the ship and the
cargo, have a lot of inertia. If the ship is moving forward at
about 13 kts (15 mph) and a giant wave is approaching it a 45
mph (this has been documented and is routine), you have a
relative speed of the wave to the ship of 60 mph. The wavelength
of a 30 meter wave is about 230 meters (this has also been
documented).
Even if the combined speed against such a wave is just 45 mph
because the captain has slowed his ship to reduce hull stress,
the ship experiences a drop of ocean beneath it of 50 feet in 6
seconds, followed by the a rise of 100 feet in another six
seconds.
Initially the ship just dives bow first and everybody on it
feels like they are in free fall. When the ship hits the trough
bottom, its inertia is still driving the bow down as the seas
rise 100 feet. The bridge superstructure is impacted and often
the windows are blown in and the bridge, with all its
electronics, is flooded.
If that causes the engines to fail, the ship will probably sink.
That is because the waves and wind will then turn the ship
broadside to the waves. When a ship is broadside to the waves,
it will either get rolled and sink or get holed by the force of
a giant wave. Whether it sinks or not depends on how long the
severe sea state continues. This ship was hit broadside by a
"rogue" wave, but survived.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622173604-14791477.png[/center]
Thirty meter waves have a force of about 100 tons per square
meter, depending on the frequency and period of the wave. Waves
of the same height with a higher frequency and shorter period
are traveling faster, so they have much more force.
1976: The oil tanker Cretan Star in Indian Ocean off Bombay
radios for help: “Vessel was struck by a huge wave that went
over the deck.” The ship is never heard from again. The only
sign of the vessel's fate was 6 km oil slick.
HTML http://ycaol.com/demons_of_the_deep2.htm
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622162846.png[/center]
1980: A huge wave was reported to have slammed into the oil
tanker Esso Languedoc off the east coast of South Africa. First
mate Philippe Lijour, aboard the supertanker Esso Languedoc,
took this rare photo.
HTML http://www.theartofdredging.com/roguewaves.htm
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622162939.jpeg
1981: A giant wave seemed to want to teach a crude oil tanker
named "Energy Endurance" (Gross tonnage, 97,005 tons. DWT,
205,808 tons) what REAL energy endurance is all about.
HTML http://migciao.blogspot.com/2007/10/vagues-scelerates.html
There is no amount of cargo that a large vessel can safely carry
under these conditions, regardless of the design claims about
"safe" DWT tonnage for cargo and tanker ships you read about
earlier in this article.
[center]Where are the largest waves found?[/center]
The largest waves are found in the open ocean. Waves continue to
get larger as they move and absorb energy from the wind.
HTML http://www.angelfire.com/crazy2/nur_filzah/new_page_2.htm
HTML http://www.angelfire.com/crazy2/nur_filzah/new_page_2.htm
Waves at Sea
Waves at sea are created by winds blowing across the water
surface and transferring energy to the water by the impact of
the air. Small ripples develop first, and frictional drag on
their windward side causes then to grow larger, or to collapse
and contribute part of their expended energy to larger waves.
Consequently, large waves capture increasing amounts of energy
and continue to develop as long as the wind maintains sufficient
strength and constant direction.
As more and more energy is transferred to the water surface.
waves become higher and longer, and travel with increasing
velocities; 50-foot waves are not uncommon in the open ocean,
and waves more than 100 feet high have been reported.
HTML http://www2.fiu.edu/~kpanneer/lab_assignment/Lab8_Waves.pdf
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622163142.png[/center]
2002: December 15, 2002, MS Hanseatic of the Radisson Seven Seas
was struck by a large rogue wave while on a coastal cruise of
New Zealand.
HTML http://freaquewaves.blogspot.com/2006/07/list-of-freaque-wave-encounters.html
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160152-14741350.png[/center]
Above you see a scale simulation of two small vessels in 50 ft.
seas. The wavelength is fairly large, so these vessels are
handling a very dangerous sea state okay. The wave is 50 feet
from crest to trough. The danger increases when the wind gets
stronger. That is because the wind increases the wave height and
the wave frequency while the wavelength gets shorter.
When large waves are present, the shorter the wavelength, the
steeper and more dangerous the wave. And, as mentioned earlier,
a higher frequency of large waves makes them even more dangerous
because they have much more energy to be delivered as a force
against the hull of a ship. It is simple physics that getting
hit with a wall of water at 44 mph is potentially far, far more
than twice as damaging as the same wall of water hitting you at
22 mph.
Larger vessels, while generally more sea worthy, have weaknesses
that small vessels do not have. A small vessel with properly
battened hatches can bob like a cork in a storm. In the above
situation, the sail boat would probably have the sails reefed
(taken in). It will survive as long as it isn't smashed against
a reef or a rock.
But a large vessel, because it is much longer than it is wide,
is weakest in the middle and along the sides from bow to stern.
The bow and stern act as giant levers moved by the wave crests
and troughs with the fulcrum located somewhere in the middle.
The middle either sags or it "hogs" (bends up instead of down).
There is no ship that can be made strong enough to handle the
massive metal fatigue inducing stresses of repeated sagging and
hogging that would occur in seas populated with 30 meter waves.
Here is an example of a container ship that hit a reef. It did
not sink right away. But you can see that it buckled and cra
cked on the side from the up, down and sideways wave movement of
the ends of the ship.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622171543.png[/center]
Individual "rogue waves" (also called "freak waves", "monster
waves", "killer waves", and "king waves") much higher than the
other waves in the sea state can occur.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622163102.jpeg[/center]
[center]NOAA ship Delaware II in bad weather on Georges
Bank.[/center]
--- Quote ---
>
> ... the largest ever recorded wind waves are common — not
rogue — waves in extreme sea states.
--- End Quote ---
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622173642-14831373.png[/center]
For example: 29.1 m (95 ft) high waves have been recorded on the
RRS Discovery in a sea with 18.5 m (61 ft) significant wave
height, so the highest wave is only 1.6 times the significant
wave height.
--- Quote ---
> The biggest recorded by a buoy (as of 2011) was 32.3 m (106
ft) high during the 2007 typhoon Krosa near Taiwan.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_wave
[center]Giants of the Oceans[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622163219.png[/center]
Naval architects have always worked on the assumption that their
vessels are extremely unlikely to encounter a rogue. Almost
everything on the sea is sailing under the false assumption that
rogue waves are, at worst, vanishingly rare events. The new
research suggest that’s wrong, and has cost lives. Between 1969
and 1994 twenty-two super carriers were lost or severely damaged
due to the occurrence of sudden rogue waves; a total of 542
lives were lost as a result.
G. Lawton. Monsters of the deep. New Scientist, 170(2297):28–32,
2001.
Freak, rogue or giant waves correspond to large-amplitude waves
surprisingly appearing on the sea surface. Such waves can be
accompanied by deep troughs (holes), which occur before and/or
after the largest crest.
There are several definitions for such surprisingly huge waves,
but the one that is more popular now is the amplitude criterion
of freak waves, which define them as waves with heights that
exceed at least twice the significant wave height. The
significant height is the height of at least one third of the
largest waves in a given area being traversed by a ship.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622162728.png[/center]
According to orthodox oceanography, rogue waves are so rare that
no ship or oil platform should ever expect to encounter one. But
as the shipping lanes fill with supercarriers and the oil and
gas industry explores ever-deeper parts of the ocean, rogue
waves are being reported far more often than they should.
The most spectacular sighting of recent years is probably the
so-called New Year Wave, which hit Statoil’s Draupner gas
platforms in the North Sea on New Year’s Day 1995. The
significant wave height at the time was around 12 metres. But in
the middle of the afternoon the platform was struck by something
much bigger. According to measurements made with a laser, it was
26 metres from trough to crest.
Hundreds of waves been recorded by now that are at least twice
the significant wave height, and several waves at larger than
three times the significant wave height. Waves with an
"Abnormality index" (Ai) larger than three (Ai > 3) are known.
Alexey Slunyaev Christin Kharif, Efim Pelinovsky. Rogue Waves in
the Ocean. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[center]The New Year Wave is an example of a wave with an Ai =
3.19.[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160112-14661450.png[/center]
Christian Kharif and Efim Pelinovsky. Physical mechanisms of the
rogue wave phenomenon. European Journal of Mechanics - B/Fluids,
22(6):603 – 634, 2003.
I obtained the above information from a paper submitted to the
mathematics department of the University of Arizona. Here is a
summary:
"In this project, the rogue wave phenomenon is introduced along
with its importance. The main equations governing both linear
and nonlinear theory are presented. The three main linear
theories proposed to explain the rogue rave phenomenon are
presented and a linear model reproducing rogue waves due to
dispersion is shown. A nonlinear model for rogue waves in
shallow water is also exhibited."
I have skipped the math. The information is state of the art and
the references are impeccable.
References
[1] Alexey Slunyaev Christin Kharif, Efim Pelinovsky. Rogue
Waves in the Ocean. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[2] K.B. Dysthe, HE Krogstad, H. Socquet-Juglard, and K.
Trulsen. Freak waves, rogue waves, extreme waves and ocean wave
climate. Mathematics Departments in Bergen and Oslo, Norway.
Available at: www. math. uio. no/-karstent/waves/index_ en.
html, July, 2007.
[3] R.S. Johnson. A modern introduction to the mathematical
theory of water waves. Cambridge Univ Pr, 997.
[4] Christian Kharif and Efim Pelinovsky. Physical mechanisms of
the rogue wave phenomenon. European Journal of Mechanics -
B/Fluids, 22(6):603 – 634, 2003.
[5] G. Lawton. Monsters of the deep. New Scientist,
170(2297):28–32, 2001.
[6] Pengzhi Lin. Numerical Modeling of Water Waves. Taylor and
Francis, 2008. 13
And that is why the conclusions are so unsettling.
Conclusions
1. Precise physical mechanisms causing the rogue waves
phenomenon remain unknown.
2. Rogue waves should be considered when designing ships and
marine platforms to reduce the number of vessels sunk worldwide.
HTML http://math.arizona.edu/~gabitov/teaching/101/math_485_585/Midterm_Reports/RogueWaves_Midterm.pdf
HTML http://math.arizona.edu/~gabitov/teaching/101/math_485_585/Midterm_Reports/RogueWaves_Midterm.pdf
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622163015.jpeg[/center]
[center]Ocean Ranger severely listing in a storm after being hit
by a "rogue" wave.[/center]
Ironically, the first industry that started to feel the effects
of an angrier ocean was the fossil fuel industry. You've already
read about some oil tanker damage and losses. They continue to
this day despite alleged vessel "design improvements".
But the 120 million dollar "unsinkable" Ocean Ranger, a giant
ocean going oil platform damaged from a "rogue" wave, really got
their attention. All hands perished. This was a wake up call to
the scientists that studied waves and was of much concern to the
fossil fuel industry.
The wave hit too high and damaged some electronics. The platform
began to list. The operator made the right moves but the valves
that should have closed, opened more. The last that was heard
from them was that they were listing at about 15 degrees and
going to the lifeboat stations.
Ocean Ranger reported experiencing storm seas of 55 feet (17 m),
with the odd wave up to 65 feet (20 m), thus leaving the
unprotected portlight at 28 feet (8.5 m) above mean sea level
vulnerable to wave damage. Some time after 21:00, radio
conversations originating on Ocean Ranger were heard on the
Sedco 706 and Zapata Ugland, noting that valves on Ocean
Ranger's ballast control panel appeared to be opening and
closing of their own accord. The radio conversations also
discussed the 100-knot (190 km/h) winds and waves up to 65 feet
(20 m) high. Through the remainder of the evening, routine radio
traffic passed between Ocean Ranger, its neighbouring rigs and
their individual support boats. Nothing out of the ordinary was
noted.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622173612-1482456.png[/center]
At 00:52 local time, on 15 February, 1982, a Mayday call was
sent out from Ocean Ranger, noting a severe list to the port
side of the rig and requesting immediate assistance. This was
the first communication from Ocean Ranger identifying a major
problem. The standby vessel, the M/V Seaforth Highlander, was
requested to come in close as countermeasures against the
10–15-degree list were proving ineffective.
The onshore MOCAN supervisor was notified of the situation, and
the Canadian Forces and Mobil-operated helicopters were alerted
just after 1:00 local time. The M/V Boltentor and the M/V
Nordertor, the standby boats of the Sedco 706 and the Zapata
Ugland respectively, were also dispatched to Ocean Ranger to
provide assistance.
At 1:30 local time, Ocean Ranger transmitted its last message:
"There will be no further radio communications from Ocean
Ranger. We are going to lifeboat stations." Shortly thereafter,
in the middle of the night and in the midst of severe winter
weather, the crew abandoned the rig. The rig remained afloat for
another ninety minutes, sinking between 3:07 and 3:13 local
time.
All of Ocean Ranger sank beneath the Atlantic: by the next
morning all that remained was a few buoys. Her entire complement
of 84 workers – 46 Mobil employees and 38 contractors from
various service companies – were killed.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Ranger
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Ranger
It turns out that the math formulas for wave action were
incorrect. But it took over a decade to get some proof that they
were incorrect. The fossil fuel industry apparently filed the
tragedy away as a freak incident. They certainly did not seem
that concerned, considering they did everything possible to keep
from having to build more sturdy (i.e. double hulled) tankers
with the help of the Reagan and the first Bush Administration.
Scientists, up until the 1980's, had believed that it was
impossible for an ocean wave on this planet to be higher than 80
feet. This, despite eye witness accounts from mariners to the
contrary. As usual, the non-credentialed folks could not
convince the scientists that there were waves out there that
exceeded 100 feet.
AND that those waves appeared in seas that were only half as
high (or less) as the giant wave(s) (sometimes they came in a
group of three - they call them the three sisters - the women
always get the blame - lol!). Impossible, proclaimed the
scientist worthies. Fish tales!
But in 1995, a laser wave height measuring device on an oil
platform provided the first concrete evidence that the happy
math was wishful thinking. :P You saw the graph of the 1995 New
Year Wave earlier in this article. In this video it is modelled
in 3D.
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/sCxr_XzyGO8
HTML https://youtu.be/sCxr_XzyGO8[/center]
As you all know, when the fossil fuel industry wants action, it
gets action. And it gets government funded action that you and I
pay for and they don't pay a penny for. But I digress. ;D Faster
that you can say fossil fuel profits are threatened, a three
week satellite survey of the oceans was undertaken. Four giant
waves were observed and measured in just three weeks!
Not only was the math wrong, but, as referenced earlier in this
article, "rogue" waves were not really "rogue" at all!
Of course, at that time, no connection to wave activity and
global warming had been established.
Snark alert. ;D Yes, it's true that scientists are taught, like
all the rest of us that cook every now and then, that warmer
waters can be a bit more turbulent, but it's a big ocean out
there, right?
Well, the attitude of the scientific community is changing, at
least in regard to these giant waves.
The cause of rogue waves is still an area of active research.
One theory under investigation cites “constructive
interference,” which is a result of several smaller waves
overlapping in phase, combining to produce one massive wave.
Another working hypothesis is based on the “non-linear
Schrödinger effect,” in which energy is “soaked up” from
neighboring waves to create a monster wave. Still other
researchers are looking into the possibility that wave energy is
being focused by the surrounding environments, or that wind
action on the surface is amplifying existing effects.
HTML http://www.damninteresting.com/monster-rogue-waves/
Suggested mechanisms for the formation of freak waves include
the following:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622173643-1484634.gif[/center]
HTML http://www.theartofdredging.com/roguewaves.htm
HTML http://www.theartofdredging.com/roguewaves.htm
End of PART TWO.
If you missed PART ONE, you may read it HERE.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg373/#msg373
I updated Part three on June 20, 2022.
Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted Ocean
Wave Activity: Part 3 of 3 parts
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg375/#msg375
#Post#: 375--------------------------------------------------
Part 3 👉 Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and
Predicted Ocean 🌊 Wave Activity
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: June 20, 2022, 9:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133659-14971987.jpeg[/center]
[center]Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted
Ocean Wave Activity[/center]
[center]PART THREE OF THREE PARTS Updated June 24, 2022[/center]
Whatever is finally determined by scientists as the exact
combination of factors that forms these monster waves, it is
well known that wave height and ferocity is a function of the
ferocity and duration of the winds.
ΔT = plus 2C or greater guarantees ferocious winds of long
during over wide areas in a consistent direction.
We are already experiencing the beginning of the abrupt climate
change that is bringing these destructive winds due to the
increase in frequency and severity of cyclonic movements over
the oceans.
Hurricanes and typhoons are the DIRECT result of overheated
ocean surface water. As heat increases, so will they continue to
increase in frequency and severity, setting new records. As soon
as the surface temperature of the ocean is at or above 27.8C
(82F), they can form.
And the sea surface temperature (SST) continues to steadily
rise.
From a June 20, 2017 NOAA article:
Don't let that average global temperature lull you into thinking
the risk of hurricanes is the same as always. The sea surface
temperature in the hurricane forming areas is much higher. Which
means that, on top of everything else, we will get more
hurricanes.
[center]Recipe for a Hurricane[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133833-15042417.jpeg[/center]
[center]
HTML http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/HURRICANE_RECIPE.html[/center]
The higher the ocean surface temperature, the more often they
will form to wreak havoc with ships and coasts.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133657-14872123.jpeg[/center]
We now must apologize for interrupting this article to bore you
readers with some fine print:
Agelbert NOTE: The following includes snippets of an excerpt
from the excellent scientifically accurate book, "The Wave.
Copyright ©2010 Susan Casey. Published by Doubleday Canada, an
imprint of the Doubleday Canada Publishing Group, which is a
division of Random House of Canada Limited".
I am posting said snippets of said book review under Fair Use
for the purpose of Commentary. I am not posting for commercial
purposes. Even though Susan Casey and her publisher may benefit
from my praise of her book, which provides ample evidence for
increased giant wave activity, I do not benefit monetarily.
Consequently, I am sure these snippets of the book review
excerpts posted below are done under Fair Use - for a limited
and "transformative" purpose (i.e. Commentary) through which the
public will reap benefits (it may even save thousands of lives).
That ends the fine print.
Now to get back to benefiting the biosphere loving public!
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-1624479.gif
[center]Susan Casey gives us an eye opening look at giant
waves.[/center]
The book titled, "The Wave" is the overall scope; Casey links
how the Earth's weather is changing to how waves are growing,
and there's no denying the stats: there is a clear correlation.
She visits various scientists and marine salvage folks and
shares their stories; they all agree that we're seeing the
oceans get nuttier, and it's only just beginning.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133657-14961402.jpeg[/center]
[center]The Wave: In Pursuit of the Rogues, Freaks, and Giants
of the Ocean by Susan Casey[/center]
Susan Casey, National Post · Monday, Sept. 20, 2010
57.5° N, 12.7° W, 175 MILES OFF THE COAST OF SCOTLAND FEBRUARY
8, 2000
The clock read midnight when the 100-foot wave hit the ship,
rising from the North Atlantic out of the darkness. Among the
ocean's terrors a wave this size was the most feared and the
least understood, more myth than reality -- or so people had
thought. This giant was certainly real. As the RRS Discovery
plunged down into the wave's deep trough, it heeled 28 degrees
to port,
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622135334-1515599.png[/center]
[center]The above graphic is a scale simulation of 295 ft. ship
heeling 28 degrees to port in the trough of a 100 ft. wave by
Agelbert.[/center]
rolled 30 degrees back to starboard, then recovered to face the
incoming seas. What chance did they have, the 47 scientists and
crew aboard this research cruise gone horribly wrong? A series
of storms had trapped them in the black void east of Rockall, a
volcanic island nicknamed Waveland for the nastiness of its
surrounding waters. More than 1,000 wrecked ships lay on the
seafloor below.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622135343-1516569.png[/center]
[center]Scale simulation by Agelbert[/center]
Captain Keith Avery steered his vessel directly into the
onslaught, just as he'd been doing for the past five days. While
weather like this was common in the cranky North Atlantic, these
giant waves were unlike anything he'd encountered in his 30
years of experience.
And worse, they kept rearing up from different directions.
Flanking all sides of the 295-foot ship, the crew kept a
constant watch to make sure they weren't about to be sucker
punched by a wave that was sneaking up from behind, or from the
sides.
No one wanted to be out here right now, but Avery knew their
only hope was to remain where they were, with their bow pointed
into the waves. Turning around was too risky; if one of these
waves caught Discovery broadside, there would be long odds on
survival. It takes 30 tons per square metre of force to dent a
ship.
A breaking 100-foot wave packs 100 tons of force per square
metre and can tear a ship in half. Above all, Avery had to
position Discovery so that it rode over these crests and wasn't
crushed beneath them.
He stood barefoot at the helm, the only way he could maintain
traction after a refrigerator toppled over, splashing out a
slick of milk, juice and broken glass (no time to clean it
up--the waves just kept coming).
Up on the bridge everything was amplified, all the night noises
and motions, the slamming and the crashing, the elevator-shaft
plunges into the troughs, the frantic wind, the swaying and
groaning of the ship; and now, as the waves suddenly grew even
bigger and meaner and steeper, Avery heard a loud bang coming
from Discovery's foredeck. He squinted in the dark to see that
the 50-man lifeboat had partially ripped from its 2-inch-thick
steel cleats and was pounding against the hull.
Below deck, computers and furniture had been smashed into
pieces. The scientists huddled in their cabins nursing bruises,
black eyes and broken ribs. Attempts at rest were pointless.
They heard the noises too; they rode the free falls and the
sickening barrel rolls; and they worried about the fact that a
6-foot-long window next to their lab had already shattered from
the twisting. Discovery was almost 40 years old, and recently
she'd undergone major surgery. The ship had been cut in half,
lengthened by 33 feet, and then welded back together. Would the
joints hold? No one really knew. No one had ever been in
conditions like these.
One of the two chief scientists, Penny Holliday, watched as a
chair skidded out from under her desk, swung into the air and
crashed onto her bunk. Holliday, fine boned, porcelain-doll
pretty and as tough as any man on board the ship, had sent an
e-mail to her boyfriend, Craig Harris, earlier in the day. "This
isn't funny anymore," she wrote. "The ocean just looks
completely out of control." So much white spray was whipping off
the waves that she had the strange impression of being in a
blizzard. This was Waveland all right, an otherworldly place of
constant motion that took you nowhere but up and down; where
there was no sleep, no comfort, no connection to land, and where
human eyes and stomachs struggled to adapt, and failed.
Ten days ago Discovery had left port in Southampton, England, on
what Holliday had hoped would be a typical 3-week trip to
Iceland and back (punctuated by a little seasickness perhaps,
but nothing major).
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134244-15132278.jpeg[/center]
[center]RRS Discovery in calm seas[/center]
Along the way they'd stop and sample the water for salinity,
temperature, oxygen and other nutrients. From these tests the
scientists would draw a picture of what was happening out there,
how the ocean's basic characteristics were shifting, and why.
These are not small questions on a planet that is 71% covered in
salt water. As the Earth's climate changes -- as the inner
atmosphere becomes warmer, as the winds increase, as the oceans
heat up -- what does all this mean for us? Trouble, most likely,
and Holliday and her colleagues were in the business of finding
out how much and what kind. It was deeply frustrating for them
to be lashed to their bunks rather than out on the deck lowering
their instruments. No one was thinking about Iceland anymore.
The trip was far from a loss, however. During the endless trains
of massive waves, Discovery itself was collecting data that
would lead to a chilling revelation. The ship was ringed with
instruments; everything that happened out there was being
precisely measured, the sea's fury captured in tight graphs and
unassailable numbers.
Months later, long after Avery had returned everyone safely to
the Southampton docks, when Holliday began to analyze these
figures, she would discover that the waves they had experienced
were the largest ever scientifically recorded in the open ocean.
The significant wave height, an average of the largest 33% of
the waves, was 61 feet, with frequent spikes far beyond that.
At the same time, none of the state-of-the-art weather forecasts
and wave models-- the information upon which all ships, oil
rigs, fisheries and passenger boats rely -- had predicted these
behemoths. In other words, under this particular set of weather
conditions, waves this size should not have existed. And yet
they did.
HTML http://www.samsmarine.com/forums/showthread.php?15984-Giants-of-the-Ocean-(Part-1)&s=3ce56fe6a5efb7cdccd8412c349f4bf2
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622154845.jpeg[/center]
You could call them whatever you wanted -- rogues, freaks,
giants -- but the bottom line was that no one had accounted for
them. The engineers who'd built the Draupner rig had calculated
that once every 10,000 years the North Sea might throw them a
64-foot curveball in 38-foot seas. That would be the maximum.
Eighty-five-foot waves were not part of the equation, not in
this universe anyway.
But the rules had changed. Now scientists had a set of numbers
that pointed to an unsettling truth: Some of these waves make
their own rules. Suddenly the emphasis shifted from explaining
why giant waves couldn't simply leap out of the ocean to
figuring out how it was that they did.
This was a matter of much brow sweat for the oil industry, which
would prefer that its multimillion-dollar rigs not be swept
away. It had happened before. In 1982 the Ocean Ranger, a
400-foot-long, 337-foot-high oil platform located 170 miles off
the coast of Newfoundland, was struck by an outsize wave in
heavy weather. We'll never know how big the wave was exactly,
for there were no survivors. Approved for "unrestricted ocean
operations," built to withstand 110-foot seas and
115-mile-per-hour winds, considered "indestructible" by its
engineers, the Ocean Ranger had capsized and sank close to
instantly, killing all 84 people on board.
In the nautical world things were even more troubling. Across
the global seas ships were meeting these waves, from megaton
vessels like the Munchen -- oceangoing freighters and tankers
and bulk carriers -- down to recreational sailboats.
At best, the encounters resulted in damage; at worst, the boat
vanished, taking all hands with it. "Two large ships sink every
week on average [worldwide], but the cause is never studied to
the same detail as an air crash. It simply gets put down to 'bad
weather,' " said Dr. Wolfgang Rosenthal, senior scientist for
the MaxWave Project, a consortium of European scientists that
convened in 2000 to investigate the disappearing ships.
HTML http://www.samsmarine.com/forums/showthread.php?15984-Giants-of-the-Ocean-(Part-1)&s=3ce56fe6a5efb7cdccd8412c349f4bf2
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622140112-15232152.jpeg[/center]
[center]MS München [/center]
December 12, 1978: Considered unsinkable, the Munchen was a
cutting-edge craft, the flagship of the German Merchant Navy. At
3:25 a.m. fragments of a Morse code Mayday, emanating from 450
miles north of the Azores, signaled that the vessel had suffered
grave damage from a wave.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622140113-1524781.gif[/center]
[center]Artist's conception of MS München facing a giant
wave.[/center]
But even after 110 ships and 13 aircraft were deployed -- the
most comprehensive search in the history of shipping -- the ship
and its 27 crew were never seen again.
A haunting clue was left behind: Searchers found one of the
Munchen's lifeboats, usually stowed 65 feet above the water,
floating empty. Its twisted metal fittings indicated that it had
been torn away. "Something extraordinary" had destroyed the
ship, concluded the official report. *
The Munchen's disappearance points to the main problem with
proving the existence of a giant wave: If you run into that kind
of nightmare, it's likely to be the last one you'll have.
The force of waves is hard to overstate. An 18-inch wave can
topple a wall built to withstand 125-mile-per-hour winds, for
instance, and coastal advisories are issued for even
five-foot-tall surf, which regularly kills people caught in the
wrong places.
The number of people who have witnessed a 100-foot wave at close
range and made it back home to describe the experience is a very
small one.
HTML http://www.samsmarine.com/forums/showthread.php?15984-Giants-of-the-Ocean-(Part-1)&s=3ce56fe6a5efb7cdccd8412c349f4bf2
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220622160112-14651249.png[/center]
* Agelbert NOTE: The container ship El Faro sank during
Hurricane Juaquin on October 1, 2015. All 33 crewmembers
perished. The lifeboats on El Faro were also 65 feet above the
water line. From the condition of the lifeboat that was
recovered, the evidence indicates a giant wave sank the El Faro.
The authorities never did admit this (as of September 9, 2019),
but I am sure that I am not the only one that strongly suspects
that the condition of the lifeboat is evidence that a giant wave
sank El Faro (Spanish for "Lighthouse").
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622140704.jpeg[/center]
June 24, 2022 UPDATE: The final investigation did not admit a
rogue wave caused the El Faro to sink, but the camera of the
robot submersible that finally found the ship's recording device
clearly showed that the entire superstructure of the bridge had
been ripped off the ship :o and lay some distance away on the
ocean floor (see excellent video by Brick Immortar below). If
that wasn't caused by a giant wave, I am a blue nosed gopher.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-090422150144.png
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134021-15071698.png[/center]
[center]Coast Guard Investigates El Faro Life Boat [/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/BQv_NxVBge0[/center]
Warming oceans are with us now and increasing the violence of
the oceans. By chance, I recorded the SST (Sea Surface
Temperature) off the East Coast of the USA the day before
Hurricane Juaquin sank the El Faro container ship.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622135526-15222118.png[/center]
Here's two days later (one day after the El Faro Container ship
sank). I superimposed the hurricane location. It is a one day
average SST so the conditions when the El Faro sank are
displayed. I was not aware that the El Faro had been lost at
the time I made these screenshots. Notice the cooler spot on the
ocean precisely where Hurricane Juaquin is lashing El Faro. A
hurricane transfers several degrees of water temperature
directly to the atmosphere, which, in turn, increases the
ferocity of the winds. Ferocious winds produce ferocious waves.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622135513-15211352.png[/center]
El Faro departed Jacksonville en route to San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622143238.jpeg[/center]
[center]Disastrous Indifference: The Loss of SS El Faro[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/-BNDub3h2_I[/center]
Brick Immortar 103K subscribers
--- Quote ---
> On October 1st, 2015 the Ro-Con ship El Faro plunged directly
into Hurricane Joaquin, a Category 4 storm near the bahamas.
This tragedy was the result of long-term negligence, poor
decision making, complacency & indifference.
> ▶REFERENCES, SOURCES & FEATURED MEDIA:
HTML https://pastebin.com/tSU32Smz
> *Views presented are my own and the appearance of U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD), NTSB & any other entities' visual
information does not imply or constitute their endorsement.
--- End Quote ---
The El Faro was one of TWO cargo ships that went down because of
Hurricane Juaquin (the 215 ft. MV Minouche that went down didn't
make national headlines, because people, perhaps, might start to
get "unnecessarily alarmed" about the increasing shipping losses
from our increasingly violent oceans). All 12 crew of the MV
Minouche were rescued.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134306-15141010.png[/center]
[center]MV Minouche[/center]
The Coast Guard pilot's voice shakes as he describes conditions
they have never before experienced in rescue attempts when they
were searching for the El Faro and rescuing the crew of the MV
Minouche.
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/_xFT9JD2f1A[/center]
[center]US Coast Guard search for El Faro; 12 rescued from MV
Minouche[/center]
The El Faro, that went down with a crew of 33, all lost, 294
cars, trailers and trucks, along with hundreds of containers,
had a type of lifeboat that is a death boat in stormy seas.
Here's a comment by a fellow who's handle is deckofficer:
Hurricane Joaquin vs. M/V El Faro's final voyage, weather and
decision-making...
I guess the only point I would like to make is some owners don't
seem to value the lives of their crews. Schedules are tight and
safety equipment is in many cases the bare minimum for
certification. In the case of SS El Faro (it is my understanding
this is a steam ship, not diesel) the open life boats as high on
the super structure as they were meets requirements but
certainly doesn't offer the all sea state conditions of
deployment as free fall enclosed life boat capsules. If these
souls are lost at sea, it is maddening that the simple added
investment of better emergency egress would have saved their
lives. I have done more lifeboat drills than I can remember, and
for the older style gravity systems there was a good reason
these drills only occurred on calm days.
When sea state is overwhelming and you have lost propulsion and
need to abandon ship, do you want this....
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622140744.png[/center]
Or this....
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133842-15052126.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/a7giEX-vIyo[/center]
[color=navy]Bob
USCG Unlimited Tonnage Open Ocean (CMA)
HTML http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f122/hurricane-joaquin-vs-m-v-el-faros-final-voyage-weather-and-decsion-making-154191-3.html
Free fall enclosed life boat capsules are a great idea. They
should be mandatory. The fact that they aren't is mute evidence
of the neoliberal Empathy Deficit disordered "cost/benefit
analysis" that values goods more than lives. As long as people
continue to line up to crew the ships, management will cut
corners on life support.
And the Libertarians will cheer them on demanding all those
"government regulations" be eliminated so the shippers can make
more money without "government interference". >:(
But the greedball shippers are increasingly going to have a bit
more to worry about than whether they have a labor force or not.
Thanks to the fossil fuel industry socialized cost of CO2
pollution (even though Big Oil is getting a bit of payback from
the oceans with oil rig difficulties and tanker losses), this is
no longer going to be about whether the "demand" for products
"justifies" cargo shipping.
I am grateful to Paul Beckwith of the University of Ottawa for
alerting me to the threat from violent oceans that mankind
faces.
Paul Beckwith is a part time professor at the University of
Ottawa and a post graduate studying and researching abrupt
climate change, with a focus on the arctic.
[center]An Ocean Full of 30 meter Tall Waves[/center]
[center]by Paul Beckwith[/center]
Published on Jul 23, 2015
"Near the end of the previous warm period (Late-Eemian) when the
sea level was +5 to +9 meters higher than today, persistent long
period long wavelength waves 30 meters high battered the Bahamas
coastline. Will we see these massive storm generated waves soon?
No ship could survive this..."
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/rq24d3-bIU4[/center]
If the ships cannot handle the seas (NO ship is designed, or can
cost effectively be designed, to handle anywhere near 100 tons
per square meter of force on her hull), shipping itself will no
longer be cost effective unless cargo ships morph into cargo
submarines. The cost of doing that is staggering. Even if they
designed them to ride just beneath the wave turbulence, they
still would have to submerge to one half the wavelength of ocean
waves.
[center][color=navy]
HTML http://www2.fiu.edu/~kpanneer/lab_assignment/Lab8_Waves.pdf[/center]
The wave that hit the Draupner platform in 1995 was over 90 ft.
high and had a wavelength of 231 meters (which it covered in
only 12 seconds! - 45 mph). To avoid these waves, a submerged
cargo vessel or tanker would have to withstand pressures at a
minimum of 116 meters below sea level.
That may be a piece of cake for a normal submarine but it would
cost multiples of what cargo and tanker vessels cost now to make
cargo submarines and tankers capable of routinely submerging to
400 or 500 feet.
And in water that is too shallow to get under the wave action,
they will not avoid being damaged or sunk. Those waves Paul
Beckwith mentions will be visiting the coastlines regularly in a
ΔT = plus 2C (and beyond) world.
During WW2 the Germans actually made submarine tankers. They
nicknamed them "Milk Cows". The German type XIV U-Boat could
resupply other boats with 432 t (425 long tons) of fuel. I'm
sure ExxonMobil will look into it when the going gets REALLY
rough on the oceans, instead of doing the right thing and giving
up fossil fuels. They aren't known for their ability to consider
the wider consequences of their greed based, short term profit
motive stupidity. But I digress. ;D
Besides the large increase in sea level, the wave action
predicted makes every hull design of modern shipping inadequate.
It will be very hard to sustain our level of civilization
without the benefits of modern shipping.
Redesigning hulls will not work for the simple reason that the
waves, now called "rogue" waves, of those oceans will be
routine. 30 to 35 meter tall waves exert forces on a hull of
about 100 tons per square meter. No modern hull design exceeds
30 tons per square meter.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622131352.jpeg[/center]
[center][I]Hellespont Alhambra (now TI Asia), a ULCC TI class
supertanker, which are the largest ocean-going oil tankers in
the world[/i][/center]
To give you a better idea of the huge threat a giant wave or
three is to a large tanker or cargo vessel, I took some
screenshots from a video of a wave laboratory testing the
effects of 72 ft. waves on a modern supertanker. I'm sure Big
Oil is paying attention, regardless of what they say in public.
;)
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133813-1503216.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133812-15021023.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133749-15001604.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133750-15012054.png[/center]
[center]3D simulation of tanker model by Agelbert shown below
the wave tank screenshot[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133723-14991911.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133721-14981895.png[/center]
[center]5: The above is catastrophic for a tanker. 6:
Supertanker scale model in scale 72 ft. waves is rolled and
sinks.[/center]
The model tanker completely capsized. In a real world situation,
this is a death blow to the crew because it happens too fast to
get survival gear on or reach the lifeboats, even if they are
the emergency egress sealed type you saw earlier. That is why
both tanker and cargo ships do everything they can to avoid
being broadsided. In the real world, when the engines are lost
in these types of seas, the only way to survive is to
immediately abandon ship on a free fall enclosed life boat
capsule.
If the above series of screen shots are not convincing enough to
the reader of the threat shipping faces from giant waves, the
following video will leave no doubt in your mind that world
shipping is incapable of handling the routine 30 to 35 meter
waves that the Hansen et al June 2015 paper predicts for a
ΔT = plus 2C (and beyond) world.
This brief video shows 10 monster waves caught on camera. Though
it includes waves caused by a nuclear explosion and others by
the Japan 2011 large earthquaqe, it makes clear the
difficulties that shipping faces with giant waves. With
Catastrophic Climate Change caused large wave activity, waves
like those of the Japan earthquake will become all too common.
Absolutely nothing I have told you is exaggeration or hyperbole.
[center]10 Monster 🌊 Waves CAUGHT ON CAMERA[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/RMUxSwUB0p0[/center]
Within a decade or two at most, these giant destructive waves
will be too common to be labelled "freak" waves.
When Nature Strikes Back - Episode 105: Freak Waves
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/MU4xDd9GRJM[/center]
The threat is real and it is getting worse. This concerns our
future as a civilization. We are not prepared for a ΔT =
plus 2C world (and beyond).
[center]CONCLUSIONS[/center]
Global Civilization is threatened within 25 years or less by the
scientifically predicted ocean surface wave activity in the
Hansen [I]et al[/i] June 2015 study * and the Dutton et al[/I]
July 2015 study ** evidencing a 6 to 25 meter (19 to 82 feet!)
sea level increase in the geological record when the CO2 parts
per million (PPM) atmospheric concentration was between 300 and
400 PPM.
As of June 23 of 2022, the CO2 concentration is 🚨
[i]420.86 ppm. It is increasing at about 3PPM per year.
* Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 15, 20059–20179, 2015
doi:10.5194/acpd-15-20059-2015 © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution
3.0 License.
[center]Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from
paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations
that 2 C global warming is highly dangerous[/center]
J. Hansen1, M. Sato1, P. Hearty2, R. Ruedy3,4, M. Kelley3,4, V.
Masson-Delmotte5, G. Russell4, G. Tselioudis4, J. Cao6, E.
Rignot7,8, I. Velicogna8,7, E. Kandiano9, K. von Schuckmann10,
P. Kharecha1,4, A. N. Legrande4, M. Bauer11, and K.-W. Lo3,4
www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/20059/2015/
HTML http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/20059/2015/acpd-15-20059-2015.pdf
** Science 10 July 2015: Vol. 349 no. 6244 DOI:
.1126/science.aaa4019
[center]Sea-level rise due to polar ice-sheet mass loss during
past warm periods[/center]
A. Dutton1,*, A. E. Carlson2, A. J. Long3, G. A. Milne4, P.
U. Clark2, R. DeConto5, B. P. Horton6,7, S. Rahmstorf8, M.
E. Raymo9
HTML http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6244/aaa4019.abstract
Furthermore, the rate of increase is also rising, evidencing,
not only the lack of concerted action by the governments of the
industrialized nations of the world to stop using fossil fuels,
but an increase in their use, along with the incredibly
destructive policies of subsidizing the exploration for fossil
fuels.
If drastic action is not taken to avert this violent oceans
catastrophe for human civilization, our global civilization will
collapse into "sea-locked" regions unable to conduct trade
across the oceans except via air transportation, a method that
is not economically feasible to use for bulk cargo.
Port facilities and coastal airport facilities will become
unusable. In addition, the salt water fishing industry would
also collapse, both from the violent oceans and the increasing
rate of marine extinctions, creating joblessness, food shortages
and widespread hunger.
At least 25 percent of the world's arable land, all of which is
low lying and near sea coasts, will be lost due to salt water
invasion of the water table, even several miles from the coasts.
[center]RECOMMENDATIONS[/center]
To prevent a collapse of global civilization into a group of
"sea locked" areas, we must act now to prevent the oceans from
being too stormy for shipping.
This requires the following:
1. The manufacture of internal combustion engines, and spare
parts, used to power utility scale power plants, land, sea and
air vehicles and emergency generators for public or private use,
be they large or small, is to be outlawed, unless they are
designed to run exclusively (low temperature alloys ONLY - 2/3
lighter engine blocks - they break down due to high waste heat
if run on fossil fuels) on ethanol or some other biofuel. All
aircraft must be powered by biofuels until electrically powered
or hydrogen powered aircraft replace current jet engines. All
ocean going oil tankers are to be recycled for low cost EV
metals. All remaining ships of all sizes must be electrically
powered as well, unless they can be modified to run on biofuels.
Biofuels must be used to bridge the gap while phasing out the
internal combustion engine in industry, the military and
transportation by air, land or sea.
2. All ships must have enclosed egress lifeboats capable of
surviving 35 meter waves.
3. Small engines, like those used for lawn mowers, leaf blowers
or weed whackers are to be outlawed. All ordinances requiring
lawns are to be outlawed. All lawn, gardening or snow removal
power equipment not running on E100 is to be electrically
powered without any exceptions or grace period.
4. A program to phase out of all uses of fossil fuels within one
year must begin immediately. All gasoline stations are to have
at least two E100 pumps. A gasoline tax of one dollar per gallon
is to be levied to existing gasoline or other distillate fuels
tax. The tax is to be increased by one additional dollar per
gallon every month.
5. All governments must provide an EV for gas guzzlers consumer
trade program at no cost to the owner until all on road and off
road vehicles that are not fueled exclusively with E100 (100%
ethanol) have been recycled.
6. All public and private buildings (including the military) are
to be modified to have 100% renewable energy for heating and
cooling. Zero percent financing and a 30 year amortization
period is to be provided to all private households and landlords
for the purchase and installation of Renewable Energy
infrastructure. No household is entitled to heat and cool more
than 500 square feet per occupant (No exceptions). Monitoring
devices are to placed on all large houses in general and
mansions in particular with heavy fines for violations.
7. After all buildings are heated and cooled with renewable
energy, the remaining energy needs, plus a surplus, are to be
generated by renewable energy in order to begin the process of
returning to less than 350PPM (Parts Per Million) of CO2 (Carbon
Dioxide). Carbon will be sequestered with renewable energy
machines.
8.The manufacture, sale or use of fossil fuel based pesticides
or chemical fertilizers for agriculture is to be outlawed with a
six month phase out grace period.
9. The manufacture and sale of any product, including, but not
limited to, pharmaceuticals and plastics, using fossil fuels as
a feed stock is to be prohibited by law. A one year grace period
will be allowed for transition to the use of plant based
carbohydrates as feed stock.
10. Water use is to be heavily regulated.
11. Military budgets are to be limited to no more than 5% of tax
receipts.
12. All subsidies for fossil fuels are be declared null and void
in every country in the world. All rigs, refineries, tanker
trucks, pipelines and other fossil fuel industry plant and
equipment are to be recycled within a five year period. The
fossil fuel industry stock holders are to shoulder the cost of
this. Corporate bankruptcies of fossil fuel corporations will
not limit the liability of the corporation stock holders
according to a worldwide proclamation of Force Majeure.
Executives, board members and all other stock holders will be
liable for all recycling costs according to ownership records
over the last 50 years.
[center]And, as "radical" as the above seems to status quo
lovers, that is just the start of what MUST be done. [/center]
Massive conservation efforts must be undertaken to preserve and
protect all animals now threatened with extinction. All
governments must put these efforts on the level of war time
demands simply because our survival as a civilization and
possibly as a species is threatened.
A wartime mobilization scenario has been proposed that is
somewhat less radical than what I propose. I would certainly
support that action (Any Port in the Catastrophic Climate Change
Storm 😇).
We cannot function without the use of the oceans. We will not be
able to use those oceans if we don't lower the CO2 atmospheric
content to at least 350 PPM.
And even then, with the 6 meter or more (over 19 feet!) rise in
sea level locked into the ΔT = plus 2C world, we will
lose the use of all port facilities, coastal cities and arable
land near sea level within a decade or, optimistically speaking
in regard to the IPCC RCP-8.5 "Business as Usual" scenario, by
2050. Our civilization does not have the money to rebuild and
replant and relocate millions of people as the seas go up and
fly all cargo when the seas can't be used, PERIOD.
It is only possible to avoid a collapse of global civilization
by drastic measures, and only if those measures are undertaken
within a decade.
If not, then mankind will be split into several "sea locked"
groups watching the oceans acidify and the temperature increase
to the point when the methane bursts from the thawed clathrates
in the Arctic ocean bottom. Then the ΔT = plus 2C world
will be a distant mild memory in comparison to the ΔT =
plus 4C and beyond runaway GHG hell.
Sadly, I do not see any evidence that any government is
championing drastic action.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422141413-627726.png<br
/>🤦‍♂️
🦉 Yes, ALL governments will eventually realize that we
are in an Existential Catastrophic Climate Crisis. But every day
of delay multiplies the costs of ameliorating the damage from
climate change exponentially. 😵 😱
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622135441-15181792.jpeg[/center]
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-241119204318.png<br
/>Oil Tanker named "Prestige" sinks. Is this the Writing on the
Oil Tanker Hull Wall for Big Oil?
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-1624479.gif[/center]
It is small consolation to me that these oil tankers will not
survive the coming oceans. But there is a certain logic to it.
If you find this article of importance to our survival as a
species or the survival of civilization, please pass it on with
or without attribution. People need to properly understand the
nature of our climate problem in general, and the fossil fuel
industry's blame for profiting from it in particular, in order
to embrace the outlawing of the burning of fossil fuels.
They must be held accountable and they must NOT be allowed to
influence energy policy ever again. They successfully sabotaged
and/or watered down all the reforms proposed, from the December
2015 COP21 Climate Conference to the 2021 COP26 Debacle, as they
have done at all the other global climate conferences through
corruption or threats. Our survival and the welfare of the
children of the world depends on stopping these criminals NOW.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134100-15081061.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622151755.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134136-15092495.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-020422164021.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622133957-15062283.png[/center]
[center]Please Help the Children have an Opportunity to Live in
a Viable Biosphere.[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622134137-15101567.jpeg[/center]
Many will read this and scoff. They do not accept the FACT that
Business as usual is a death sentence for global civilization.
They do not accept the FACT that nature does not negotiate. They
do not accept the FACT that Incremental/half measures are like
being half pregnant with Rosemary's baby.
They will say that there is absolutely no way that the
governments of the world will undertake even a tiny portion of
the recommendations I list as sine qua non[/I] for our survival
as a global civilization.
Perhaps they are right about the governments. If they are, then
perhaps we will, because of the successful degrading of
democracy and the biosphere by the fossil fuel industry over the
course of about a century, experience the roaring oceans and the
[i]collapse of all human civilization, not just global
civilization.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622153454.png[/center]
If so, then the ocean violence, including its dramatic effects
on human civilization, now predicted by science, was accurately
described in New Testament Scripture Prophesy a long time ago.
“And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the
stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity,
the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them from
fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the
earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken." -- Luke
21:25-26
But whether you believe the above prophesy is valid or not, I
think it safe to assume that our future ocean surface will be
very unsafe. And below the surface, it will be even worse for
the marine species we all depend on.
Suggested viewing:
Agelbert NOTE: Learn about biological stability of systems,
negative feedbacks, positive feedbacks, population trends, ocean
acidification and the very important issue of increasing anoxic
(oxygen starved) conditions in the oceans directly caused by the
continued burning of fossil fuels in the video below. Dr.
Lubchenco is one of several credentialed leading climate
scientists at this conference:
[center]Biological Extinction | Discussion #11[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/ztX7iUyZIpg[/center]
Casina Pio IV
Published on Mar 2, 2017
[move]How to Save the Natural World on Which We Depend
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-221017161839.png[/move]
PAS-PASS Workshop
Casina Pio IV, 27 February-1 March 2017
On our 4.54 billion year old planet, life is perhaps as much as
3.7 billion years old, photosynthesis and multi-cellularity
dozens of times independently around 3.0 billion years old, and
the emergence of plants, animals, and fungi onto land, by at
least the Ordovician period, perhaps 480 million years ago,
forests appearing around 370 million years ago, and the origin
of modern groups such as mammals, birds, reptiles, and land
plants subsequently. The geological record shows that there have
been five major extinction-events in the past, the first of them
about 542 million years ago, and suggests that 99% of the
species that ever lived (5 billion of them?) have become
extinct. The last major extinction event occurred about 66
million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous Period, and, in
general, the number of species on earth and the complexity of
their communities has increased steadily until near the present.
Suggested Reading:
Greenland now a major driver of rising seas: study June 26,
2017 by Marlowe Hood
HTML https://phys.org/news/2017-06-greenland-major-driver-seas.html#jCp
More summer sunshine leading to increased Greenland ice melt
June 28, 2017
A team of scientists, led by the University of Bristol, has
discovered that a marked decrease in summer cloud cover during
the last 20 years has significantly accelerated melt from the
Greenland ice sheet.
HTML https://phys.org/news/2017-06-summer-sunshine-greenland-ice.html#jCp
Greenland ice sheet may melt completely with 1.6 degrees of
global warming March 12, 2012
HTML https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120312003232.htm
Storms caused massive Antarctic sea ice loss in 2016 June 26,
2017
HTML https://phys.org/news/2017-06-storms-massive-antarctic-sea-ice.html#jCp
The Real Sea Monsters: On the Hunt for Rogue Waves
By Lynne Peeples | September 2, 2009
HTML http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rogue-waves-ocean-energy-forecasting/
Rogue waves are no fish tale
Once regarded as extremely rare, satellite photos and radar
imagery have documented the existence of numerous rogue waves,
and it turns out that they are far more common than previously
thought.
HTML http://mentalfloss.com/article/15284/rogue-waves-are-no-fish-tale
Hydrosphere Based Renewable Energy for Large Cities
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/renewables/wave-and-ocean-currents-power/msg385/#msg385
If you missed the first two parts, you can read them at the
links below.
Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted Ocean
Wave Activity: PART 1 of 3
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg373/#msg373
Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and Predicted Ocean
Wave Activity: PART TWO
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg374/#msg374
You may print or post any part or the whole of the three parts
of this article, with or without attribution, as many times as
you wish. Spread these timely warnings far and wide. Remember,
the biosphere we need to preserve is the only one we have.
Without a [b]Viable Biosphere, we cannot survive. [/b]We cannot
have a viable biosphere unless we stop burning fossil fuels.
"We do not need a 'new' business model for energy because we
never had one. What we need, if we wish to avoid extinction, is
to plug the environmental and equity costs of energy production
and use into our planning and thinking. " -- A.G. Gelbert
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-070422154030.png[/center]
[move]The 🦕🦖 Hydrocarbon 👹 Hellspawn
Fossil Fuelers DID THE Clean Energy Inventions suppressing,
Climate Trashing, Government corrupting, human health depleting
CRIME. Since [Color=Brown]they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and
conscience free
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422145428-563469.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422162639.gifcrooks,<br
/>they are trying to AVOID [/color]DOING THE TIME or PAYING THE
FINE! Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422150727.png[/move]
#Post#: 411--------------------------------------------------
Author John Feffer discusses his novels set in a not-so-distant
future disrupted by climate chaos.
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: July 11, 2022, 1:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/7MSADSQp4IBIGDQbb24vCjTnZZHwKKiRCofkpI7ZW29HTKGRqYQfZt-jiafQ70oBE1LjoYp8y2zkr48ElFrskeetTY4lCmy-jHoy3w56Rg_t-stwQ5NNNMgDyX0jaEscIfC5QyZN=s0-d-e1-ft#https://therealnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/newsletter-header-2-1024x170.png[/center]
JULY 8, 2022
[center]THE CHRIS HEDGES REPORT: SPLINTERLANDS’ CLIMATE
DYSTOPIA[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/dxd-iFqCsUE[/center]
Chris Hedges speaks with author John Feffer about his novels set
in a not-so-distant future disrupted by climate chaos.
Full Transcript:
HTML https://therealnews.com/the-chris-hedges-report-splinterlands-climate-dystopia
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/A9pHuVX-ZxE[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240422195104-954852.png[/center]
#Post#: 432--------------------------------------------------
Antarctica: What happens if the 'Doomsday' Glacier collapses?
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: July 25, 2022, 11:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agelbert NOTE: The graphics in this video are spectacular.
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-1626482.gif<br
/>
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185039-1655102.gif
[center]Antarctica: What happens if the 'Doomsday' Glacier
collapses?[/center]
Mar 15, 2020
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/Hax7EPFysqY[/center]
Just Have a Think
51.6K subscribers
Antarctica is home to some of the world's largest ice sheets and
glaciers. They existed in a stable equilibrium of ebb and flow
for millions of years until global warming started to melt them
faster than the snow falls could replenish their ice. Now a new
US / UK research collaboration has discovered that the rate of
melt is even worse than scientists feared. What's driving this
latest acceleration, and can we slow it down?
Help support and influence the growth of the Just Have a Think
initiative here:
www.patreon.com/justhaveathink
#Post#: 446--------------------------------------------------
No, this is not "alarmist" graphics hyperbole.
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: August 14, 2022, 3:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-280322140406.jpeg[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-140822145418.jpeg[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-140822145501.jpeg[/center]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-140822145612.jpeg[/center]
AGelbert NOTE: Some lyrics from an old song come to mind...
[move]When Tomorrow is Today, the Bells Will Toll for Some, But
Nothing Can Stop the Shape of Things to Come.[/move]
And no, this is not "alarmist" graphics hyperbole. Learn about
about the GIANT 🌊 Wave activity that Climate Scientists
predict is inevitable in our 2 degree Celcius, or more,
Catastrophic Climate Changed world.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211338-14551900.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240622154845.jpeg[/center]
👉 Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and
Predicted Ocean Wave Activity: PART 1 of 3
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg373/#msg373
👉 Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and
Predicted Ocean Wave Activity: PART TWO
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg374/#msg374
👉 Climate Change, Blue Water Cargo Shipping and
Predicted Ocean Wave Activity: Part 3 of 3 parts
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg375/#msg375
Or, you can ignore all this "Chinese Hoax alarmist" stuff and
continue your excellent imitation of an Ostrich...
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-250422171053-1107280.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-250422164151-10611570.jpeg[/center]
#Post#: 585--------------------------------------------------
"If BigAg is allowed to steer Aim4C, what they may be
aiming for is 4C of warming."
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: October 11, 2022, 2:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211810-2001879.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
October 11, 2022
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211808-20001173.png
[center]Why Is The UN Letting
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622210450-1415528.gif<br
/>[b]Big Ag's 😇 Front 🐍 Groups Influence Effort
To
Reduce Ag Emissions?[/b]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080422121109.gif[/center]
At the COP26 UN climate summit in Glasgow last year, the US and
United Arab Emirates launched a new initiative to fund research
into solutions to agricultural emissions, called the Agriculture
Innovation Mission for Climate (Aim4C). Among its some 200
partners are plenty of nations and even more
agricultural-oriented non profits, and for-profit companies.
Unfortunately, as Rachel Sherrington revealed at DeSmog last
week as part of their new series on the issue, one of those
groups is the North American Meat Institute. And they have some
questionable views on climate change, with a "fact" sheet
claiming the "degree" to which people are causing climate change
(by burning fossil fuels and eating meat) is "unknown," despite
their supposed Paris agreement pledge.
And it's not just NAMI. Sherrington also points to the Animal
Agriculture Alliance and US Farmers and Ranchers in Action, both
Aim4C "knowledge partners" and both featuring members of the
American Farm Bureau Federation on their board, and both running
off of funding from the industrial agriculture sector.
For those blissfully unaware of what goes on in the weeds of
farm politics, AFBF is a long-time 👿 opponent of climate
action, essentially the agriculture industry's version of the
😈 American Petroleum Institute. Inside Climate News
called it "Big Oil's unnoticed ally" back in 2018, and more
recently, reported on how the AFBF has led "a Charge Against SEC
Rules Aimed at Corporate Climate Transparency."
The Farm lobby didn't let the fact that a rule applied to
publicly traded companies and not farms (because "not a single
farm in America is listed with the SEC") distract it from
lobbying against climate action.
What sort of "knowledge" are these groups bringing to the
"partnership" with Aim4C?
Likely not the kind that will be useful for farmers struggling
to cope with climate change, pointed out Anne Maina of the
Biodiversity and Biosafety Association of Kenya. She told
Sherrington for another DeSmog story that “A focus on ag-tech is
often hinged on profits for multinational corporations and not
sustainable. Africa has workable alternatives right here at
home, for resilient agriculture that works with nature.”
But “When the voice of African farmers and communities is not
brought to the negotiating table, we end up with flawed
initiatives like Aim4C."
Specifically, Sherrington writes, "Aim4C argues that technology
can increase productivity, help farmers adapt to the climate
crisis, and cut emissions" with "climate-smart" solutions which
sounds well and good- that's the point. The problem is that
"climate-smart" ;) can be used "to promote contested
☠️ practices including the use of ☠️
pesticides and big data in farming have led to concerns that the
concept could be used to 😈 “greenwash” polluting forms
of agriculture."
And even if things like the "Greener Cattle Initiative" were
successful, "it would only reduce methane emissions from the
cattle. It doesn’t address the climate impacts of land use
change, biodiversity loss, or deforestation associated with
cattle production. And it doesn’t take into account the nutrient
pollution from the pesticides you use to grow the rest of their
feed, corn and soy.”
That's why Jennifer Jacquet, author of a book on industrial
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202527-13931485.png<br
/>disinformation , likened "Green cattle" to "clean coal",
saying
that there's "no getting around" the fact that "beef is the coal
of animal ag."
What works? Again, back to Maina: “We need to focus on
agroecological solutions: Support resilient agriculture that
works with nature, builds crop and diet diversity, and empowers
marginalised farmers."
Instead, as Molly Anderson of IPES-Food said, "the kind of
technology pursued by Aim4C is proprietary. It’s going into
digitalization, it’s going into artificial intelligence. This
technology is not available to low-income people. The technology
being promoted are things that basically bolster the existing
industrialised food system.”
In other words, if
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202719-14071062.gif<br
/>😈 BigAg is allowed to steer Aim4C, what they may be
aiming for is
4C of warming.
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20221011-julia-iran-oil-workers-megadrought-navajo
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080422121435.png<br
/>Agelbert NOTE: The following is the scientifically predicted
ice
free North Pole of a, thoroughly coastlines flooded, +3C world.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211257-14541988.png[/center]
ALL the Tundra thaws and ALL that methane now trapped there
comes out to overheat our biosphere up EVEN FASTER.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211041-144324.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211034-14412118.png[/center]
Reaching [b]+3C means it is basically over for most mammaliam
vertebrate species. [/b]
A +4C world would be even MORE hellish, eventually devoid of
high order multi-cellular organisms.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-210622211244-14531490.png[/center]
If you are a farmer, think about the total insanity of trying to
hang on to the profit over people and planet BigAg
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240422194918-9232441.jpeg<br
/>"business model"
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-250422171405-11441696.bmp.<br
/>Industrial farmers, STOP BEING STUIPD AND CRAZY!
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422132945-7012374.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-170422173048-7741566.jpeg[/center]
#Post#: 602--------------------------------------------------
Re: Future Earth
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: October 16, 2022, 1:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
November 19, 2021
Agelbert NOTE: After the Glasgow COP26 COP-OUT, the news
immediately thereafter of BIG BUCKS spent by Big Oil for NEW Oil
Leases in the Gulf of Mexico AND MORE BIG BUCKS in CONTINUED
Federal Government SUBSIDIES for the Hydrocarbon "Industry",
there can be no doubt whatsoever as to WHO is In Charge
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/hydrocarbon-industry-skullduggery/the-hydrocarbon-hellspawn-knew-their-mo-causes-catastrophic-climate-change-long-/msg603/#msg603<br
/>of Policies by the governments of industrialized nations to
address Catastrophic Climate Change.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-250422171828-11961874.png[/center]
So, this is an appropriate, to put it mildly, time to repost
this article
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/future-earth/msg15313/?topicseen#msg15313.<br
/>
[center]How to Survive When, NOT IF, Catastrophic Climate Change
Makes Earth's Climate Unsuitable For Humans[/center]
By Anthony G. Gelbert
During many periods in human history, some were doing just fine
and others lived on the edge of starvation in a constant state
of collapse. Abrupt changes in climate, such as that caused in
France by a massive Laki volcanic eruption in Iceland in 1783,
have resulted in famine induced starvation. In that case,
starvation was followed by social upheaval and revolution,
instead of collapse. Civilization in Iceland was nearly wiped
out with that eruption (over one third of the population was
killed), but did not collapse.
For a collapse to occur, the society destroying pressure must
last longer than a decade or so. For example, natural climate
alterations that produced lengthy droughts caused some ancient
starving civilizations to eventually collapse.
SNIPPET From the March 21, 2016 article, "Ten Civilizations or
Nations That Collapsed From Drought", by Jeff Masters:
Drought is the great enemy of human civilization. Drought
deprives us of the two things necessary to sustain life--food
and water. When the rains stop and the soil dries up, cities die
and civilizations collapse, as people abandon lands no longer
able to supply them with the food and water they need to live.
While the fall of a great empire is usually due to a complex set
of causes, drought has often been identified as the primary
culprit or a significant contributing factor in a surprising
number of such collapses. Drought experts Justin Sheffield and
Eric Wood of Princeton, in their 2011 book, Drought, identify
more than ten civilizations, cultures and nations that probably
collapsed, in part, because of drought. As we mark World Water
Day on March 22, we should not grow overconfident that our
current global civilization is immune from our old
nemesis--particularly in light of the fact that a hotter climate
due to global warming will make droughts more intense and
impacts more severe. So, presented here is a "top ten" list of
drought's great power over some of the mightiest civilizations
in world history--presented chronologically.
֍ Collapse #1. The Akkadian Empire in Syria, 2334 BC -
2193 BC.
֍ Collapse #2. The Old Kingdom of ancient Egypt, 4200
years ago.
֍ Collapse #3. The Late Bronze Age (LBA) civilization in
the Eastern Mediterranean. About 3200 years ago, the Eastern
Mediterranean hosted some of the world’s most advanced
civilizations.
֍ Collapse #4. The Maya civilization of 250 - 900 AD in
Mexico. Severe drought killed millions of Maya people due to
famine and lack of water, and initiated a cascade of internal
collapses that destroyed their civilization at the peak of their
cultural development, between 750 - 900 AD.
֍ Collapse #5. The Tang Dynasty in China, 700 - 907 AD. At
the same time as the Mayan collapse, China was also experiencing
the collapse of its ruling empire, the Tang Dynasty. Dynastic
changes in China often occurred because of popular uprisings
during crop failure and famine associated with drought.
֍ Collapse #6. The Tiwanaku Empire of Bolivia's Lake
Titicaca region, 300 - 1000 AD. The Tiwanaku Empire was one of
the most important South American civilizations prior to the
Inca Empire. After dominating the region for 500 years, the
Tiwanaku Empire ended abruptly between 1000 - 1100 AD, following
a drying of the region, as measured by ice accumulation in the
Quelccaya Ice Cap, Peru.
֍ Collapse #7. The Ancestral Puebloan (Anasazi) culture in
the Southwest U.S. in the 11th - 12th centuries AD. Beginning in
1150 AD, North America experienced a 300-year drought called the
Great Drought.
֍ Collapse #8. The Khmer Empire based in Angkor, Cambodia,
802 - 1431 AD. The Khmer Empire ruled Southeast Asia for
intense decades-long droughts interspersed with intense monsoons
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that, in combination
with other factors, contributed to the empire's demise.
֍ Collapse #9. The Ming Dynasty in China, 1368 - 1644 AD.
China's Ming Dynasty--one of the greatest eras of orderly
government and social stability in human history--collapsed at a
time when the most severe drought in the region in over 4000
years was occurring, according to sediments from Lake Huguang
Maar analyzed in a 2007 article in Nature by Yancheva et al.
֍ Collapse #10. Modern Syria. Syria's devastating civil
war that began in March 2011 has killed over 300,000 people,
displaced at least 7.6 million, and created an additional 4.2
million refugees. While the causes of the war are complex, a key
contributing factor was the nation's devastating drought that
began in 1998. The drought brought Syria's most severe set of
crop failures in recorded history, which forced millions of
people to migrate from rural areas into cities, where conflict
erupted. This drought was almost certainly Syria's worst in the
past 500 years (98% chance), and likely the worst for at least
the past 900 years (89% chance), according to a 2016 tree ring
study by Cook et al., "Spatiotemporal drought variability in the
Mediterranean over the last 900 years." Human-caused emissions
of greenhouse gases were "a key attributable factor" in the
drying up of wintertime precipitation in the Mediterranean
region, including Syria, in recent decades, as discussed in a
NOAA press release that accompanied a 2011 paper by Hoerling et
al., On the Increased Frequency of Mediterranean Drought.
A 2016 paper by drought expert Colin Kelley showed that the
influence of human greenhouse gas emissions had made recent
drought in the region 2 - 3 times more likely.
Ten Civilizations or Nations That Collapsed From Drought - lots
of great pictures
HTML https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/ten-civilizations-or-nations-that-collapsed-from-drought.html<br
/>
As Dr. Jeff Masters evidenced above, extended drought, sometimes
alternating with other harsh climate conditions like intense
rains, can lead to starvation. Long wars exacerbate the
situation, leading directly to collapse.
In addition to the above, there is another climate change based
collapse level attack on human civilization, one that is 100%
unavoidable now, that has wreaked havoc in the past.
SNIPPET from the March 23, 2018 article, "Humanity has contended
with rising seas before — and it didn’t go well for us", by
Alxandru Micu:
The Neolithic revolution was the first major transformation
humanity had passed — the transition foraging to farming.
Spreading out from the Middle East, this wave of change took
peoples used to hunt and forage wherever they pleased and tied
them down, hoe in hand, to sedentary — but oh so lucrative —
farms and fields.
Around 7,600 years ago, however, the revolution paused — no new
agricultural settlements seemed to pop up in Southeastern Europe
around the time, existing communities declined, and the progress
of civilization as a whole came to a standstill. Up until now,
we didn’t have any inkling as to why this happened, but new
research from the Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research
Centre, the Goethe University in Frankfurt, and the University
of Toronto sheds some light on this mysterious period.
According to their findings, this lull in progress was due to an
abrupt rise in sea levels in the northern Aegean Sea. Evidence
of this event was calcified in the fossils of tiny marine algae
preserved in seafloor sediments.
The impact this event had on societal dynamics and overall
development during the time highlights the potential economic
and social threats posed by sea level rise in the future, the
team says. Given that climate-change-associated changes in sea
level are virtually unavoidable, the team hopes their findings
will help us better prepare for the flooding ahead.
“Approximately 7,600 years ago, the sea level must have risen
abruptly in the Mediterranean regions bordering Southeastern
Europe. The northern Aegean, the Marmara Sea and the Black Sea
recorded an increase of more than one meter. This led to the
flooding of low-lying coastal areas that would have been ideal
areas for settlement,” says lead author Professor Dr. Jens
Herrle.
The evidence supports a link between the two timeouts in the
Neolithic revolution and the flooding events. The event 8,400
years ago coincides with archaeological findings suggesting that
settlements in low-lying areas were under significant hardship
from encroaching seas and other associated climatic changes. The
renewed rise just 800 years later likely amplified these
communities’ woes, keeping them from making the transition to
agriculture.
“The source of this may have been Lake Agassiz in North America.
This glacial meltwater lake was enclosed in ice and experienced
a massive breach during this period, which emptied an enormous
volume of water into the ocean.”
Past fluctuations in sea levels have already had a significant
effect on human history during the early days of agriculture,
the authors note, warning that it would be unwise to dismiss the
challenges it will place in our path in the future.
"Humanity has contended with rising seas before — and it didn’t
go well for us"
HTML https://www.zmescience.com/ecology/aegean-sea-rise-8257346/
The article goes on to repeat the overly conservative estimate
from the IPCC of a rise by up to "one meter over the next 100
years". That is the same IPCC that predicted the amount of ice
depletion we have at present at the poles would not occur until
2070. That is the same IPCC that has NOT figured in the
contribution of ice loss from Greenland to global sea level rise
in any of the models.
So, if you are a logical person, I recommend you count on 3 to 6
meters, at least, of sea level rise several decades before the
end of the century. As Peter Ward says (The Flooded Earth: Our
Future In a World Without Ice Caps by Peter D. Ward), over 25%
of the world's arable land is near sea level and will be
flooded. Most major airports along coastlines will be flooded.
Every harbor facility in the world will require a staggering
amount of land fill to raise them as the sea level goes up. Most
coastal real estate, currently highly assessed in value, will be
flooded and become worthless.
By the way, the latest science indicates that rapid sea level
rise will be accompanied by a large increase in volcanic
eruptions (which might slow down the heating due to a temporary
increase in aerosols), and increase in earthquake activity. The
volcanic aerosols, at most, will be a minor speed bump on the
way to intolerable climate caos. So, please don't count on
volcanic eruptions to 'save us' from global warming hell. That
is wishful thinking.
I am not a voice "crying in the wilderness" on this issue. I
will provide you some screenshots from the video of a scientist
who recently wrote the book, "Waking the Climate Giant". He
predicts a continued increase in volcanic activity, now observed
in the data, due to terrain bounce from melting land ice and
increased pressure on the surrounding seabed, as the the global
average temperature increases. It's not the volcanoes that are
increasing the heat, it's the greenhouse gases that are causing
massive ice melt that, in turn, triggers earthquakes and
volcanic eruptions. Read his book if you disagree. I just
watched the video but I think he is spot on.
On Earth, destructive climate change was not catastrophic
before. The difference now it that the entire globe will be
impacted. Humans have never lived on a planet with an average
temperature of 3° C above pre-industrial. We will pass that mark
up a half century before 2100 and continue towards PLUS 4° C and
beyond, with no available technological or natural negative
feedback mechanism to stop the continued acceleration, not
slowing, of the rate of increase in temperature.
Already our atmosphere is being distorted by global warming to
the point of pushing the dry subtropical bands on either side of
the tropics towards their respective pole, thereby increasing
drought conditions in highly populated areas and a large
percentage of hitherto arable terrain.
SNIPPET from the February 2, 2016 article, "The mystery of the
expanding tropics", by Olive Heffernan
As Earth's dry zones shift rapidly polewards, researchers are
scrambling to figure out the cause — and consequences.
One spring day in 2004, Qiang Fu was poring over atmospheric
data collected from satellites when he noticed an unusual and
seemingly inexplicable pattern. In two belts on either side of
the equator, the lower atmosphere was warming more than anywhere
else on Earth. Fu, an atmospheric scientist at the University of
Washington in Seattle, was puzzled.
It wasn't until a year later that he realized what he had
discovered: evidence of a rapid expansion of the tropics, the
region that encircles Earth's waist like a green belt. The heart
of the tropics is lush, but the northern and southern edges are
dry. And these parched borders are growing — expanding into the
subtropics and pushing them towards the poles.
Tropical forest losses outpace UN estimates
Cities that currently sit just outside the tropics could soon be
smack in the middle of the dry tropical edge. That's bad news
for places like San Diego, California. “A shift of just one
degree of latitude in southern California — that's enough to
have a huge impact on those communities in terms of how much
rain they will get,” explains climate modeller Thomas Reichler
of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-161022154503.jpeg[/center]
Elsewhere, there is evidence that tropical expansion is
affecting the ocean. Where the Hadley cell descends, bringing
cool air downward, it energizes the ocean and whips up currents
to high speeds. This energy powers the upwelling of cold,
nutrient-rich waters towards the surface, which feeds some of
the world's most productive fisheries. But there are hints that
some of these regions are suffering because of shifts in the
Hadley cell.
These upwelling zones could move south over time, or get weaker
or stronger, depending on what happens to the Hadley cell, says
Cook. In any case, it means that fishing communities that rely
on these resources will not be able to count on traditional
patterns.
On land, biodiversity is also potentially at risk. This is
especially true for the climate zones just below the subtropics
in South Africa and Australia, on the southern rim of both
continents. In southwestern Australia, renowned as one of the
world's biodiversity hotspots, flowers bloom during September,
when tourists come to marvel at some of the region's 4,000
endemic plant species. But since the late 1970s, rainfall there
has dropped by one-quarter. The same is true at South Africa's
Cape Floristic Province, another frontier known for its floral
beauty. “This is the most concrete evidence we have of tropical
expansion,” says Steve Turton, an environmental geographer at
James Cook University in Cairns, Australia.
Turton worries that the rate of change will be too rapid for
these ecosystems to adapt. “We're talking about rapid expansion
that's within half or a third of a human lifetime,” he says. In
the worst-case scenario, the subtropics will overtake these
ecologically rich outposts and the hotter, drier conditions will
take a major toll.
The Mystery of the Expanding Tropics
HTML https://www.nature.com/news/the-mystery-of-the-expanding-tropics-1.19271
Vermont is already experiencing the economy harming effects of
climate change. A Vermonter, concerned about this, wrote about
it. He has a right to be.
Watching Nature Collapse March 24th, 2018 by George Harvey
Sometimes it seems the best of everything is passing away.
SNIPPET:
A few years ago, someone threw a peach pit into shrubbery on the
front yard of the house where I live. The tree that sprouted
from the peach pit is now bearing fruit. Neighbors have paw-paw
trees growing in their yards. But Vermont’s maple sugar
industry, and the apple orchards, and the blueberry fields are
all suffering. Vermont is fast becoming a place unlike what it
has ever been, and it is not an improvement.
Watching Nature Collapse
HTML https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/24/watching-nature-collapse/
Don't look at what he wrote as the "new normal" and just think
we can 'adapt' to climate change by growing different crops and
so on. This is the leading edge of climate that will soon, much
sooner than many think, become intolerable for crop growing. We
are not just on a treadmill moving in the wrong direction; our
velocity on that deadly treadmill is increasing. Please keep
that in mind so you are not lulled into thinking it would be
'nice' to grow palm trees in Burlington. Yes, the fossil fuel
industry 🦖 does continue to try to pitch the 'warmer
weather good' out of context propaganda happy talk. They'll do
anything to keep their profit over people and planet suicide
machine going. Stupid is as stupid does.
All these deleterious effects of Catastrophic Climate Change
will continually get worse, not for a decade or so, but for over
a century.
Temperatures unsuitable for human life are baked in for at least
a couple of centuries, even if we stopped the insanity of
constantly making things even worse by going on a crash program
to stop burning fossil fuels. Yeah, we have to do that. Yeah, if
we don't, we are all dead. But, regardless of what we do, it
will take a while to catch up to all of us. I write this for
those who, though sadly unable to stop the insane suicidal
"business model" of the biosphere killing fossil fuel fascists,
wish to survive as long as possible.
HTML http://www.funny-emoticons.com/files/funny-animals/blue-bird-emoticons/801-listen-up!.png
I wish to stress that, though many confused voices out there do
not wish to face this, the one unifying aspect of the present
threat 🌡️ to human civilization is Catastrophic
Climate Change 🚩, NOT lack of fossil fuel based energy.
Have I got your attention? Good.
Then, look at this graphic from the Video, "Waking the Climate
Giant", and ask yourself if it reflects our current situation:
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-190722193007.png[/center]
The above graphic is already correct in its prediciton. In 2017
(the emissions data was for the years 2014, 2015 and 2016) the
greenhouse gas emissions INCREASED. Consequently, there is a
very, very high probability that the collapse of our
civilization will occur much sooner than we think.
Some humans in different parts of the globe are already well
acquainted with living on the edge of collapse. I am absolutely
certain that many jungle tribes in Brazil, Ecuador and Peru,
RIGHT NOW, live on the edge of starvation in a constant state of
collapse, while most of the city dwellers nearby live not much
better, but still avoid starvation.
My point in this quixotic exercise in hard truth logic is that
the lack of food in the past has eventually triggered
revolutions, not collapse of the civilization. It is after the
social upheaval, when no solution to the lack of food problem is
found, such as is in LONG WARS of aggression or extended harsh
climate conditions, that collapse ensues.
People tend to fear other people more than deleterious climate.
People can certainly be a threat to your life and stuff, but
Catastrophic Climate Change is a much greater threat to
everything you hold dear, past, present and future.
Catastrophic Climate Change is worse than a long war of
aggression because it will last much longer than a human
lifetime.
The climate change problem is intractable, but I believe some
WILL beat it for maybe a century or so. For example, there are
places near the equator with very high mountains. A world heated
plus 4° C by around 2060, despite happy talk by certain wishful
thinkers, will kill off most humans. BUT, in high mountains, the
tree line will move way up while the temperature becomes
temperate, even at the Equator. I stress the equator, though RE
(Reverse Engineer internet handle - Joe Smith) will did
vigorously disagree, because human civilization in a low food
environment with over acidified seas (no easy fish or whales or
seals to catch = NO ESKIMOS) with poor available sunlight is not
a recipe for long term survival, even if the temperature is mild
enough to grow crops.
There is a mountain in Ecuador (Chimborazo) about 20,000 feet
high that will, because of the horrendously altered atmosphere,
get plenty of rain even at high altitudes. There are several
other candidates in the HIGH tropics around the world. This will
enable the folks living there to grow enough food, thanks to an
ABUNDANCE of sunlight all year round, with low tech methods.
They just might be able to ride out the fossil fuel burning
stupidity that dooms most of human civilization.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-070422155202.jpeg<br
/>
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422180949.png
The tree line, the highest point on a mountain that trees will
grow, varies between 5,000 feet and up to 13,000 feet above sea
level. It varies so much mainly because of wind chill, though
the length of the summer growing season is important as well. A
tree in relatively mild wind conditions can grow all the way up
to the maximum recorded tree line altitude at temperatures well
below freezing (down to minus 40° F =- 40° C ;D), provided its
roots can get enough water.
Trees can have liquid water in their tracheal elements at such
low temperatures because of a wonderful combination of two
factors. The first is that the 'pumping' mechanism of a tree is
more a sucking mechanism than a pumping mechanism. The
transpiration of water vapor into the atmosphere at the branch
leaf pores creates negative pressure on the water molecules
inside the tree (as long as the tracheal elements vacuum is not
breached by air intrusion).
Water molecules, as they travel up the inside of tree, aided by
capillary action as well as transpiration, can be stretched by
as much as negative 25 atmospheres! That is how those Giant
Sequoias can move up to a 130 gallons of water a day over a 100
feet vertically.
The second factor is that the water in the tracheal elements, in
addition to being thoroughly stretched, is extremely pure. This
prevents the crystalization of water around non-water substances
that would normally trigger freezing at 0° C. But, when the wind
is howling during below freezing temperatures, the wind chill
can cause the water in the tree to freeze and eventually kill
the tree.
The closer to the equator a high mountain tree is located, the
longer it's growing season will be. If the growing season is too
short, like in the White Mountains of New Hampshire, the tree
line is only about 4,500 feet.
SNIPPET from an article about the Tree line:
The elevational limit of such suitable summer conditions varies
by latitude. In Mexico, for example, treeline occurs somewhere
around 13,000 feet, whereas farther north, in the Tetons, for
instance, it occurs lower, at approximately 10,000 feet. Again,
it’s a ragged line that may vary by hundreds of feet on any
mountain, depending largely on shelter and exposure.
Because the elevational treeline is so closely tied to
temperature, many suggest that it could be a particularly
sensitive indicator of global climate change. Presumably, rising
temperatures would increase the elevation of treeline in any
locale, altering forest distribution and potentially ousting
rare plant communities – and their inhabitants – that now exist
above treeline. Although the specific physiological mechanism of
treeline formation is not fully understood, there is growing
photographic and other evidence of upward shifts in treelines
worldwide.
Why Is the Treeline at a Higher Elevation in the Tetons than in
the White Mountains?
HTML https://northernwoodlands.org/articles/article/why_is_the_treeline_at_a_higher_elevation_in_the_tetons_than_in_the_white_m
A PLUS 4° C (and still going up) atmosphere by around 2060 will
enable trees to grow at much higher altitudes. For every degree
increase in average global temperature, a corresponding increase
in humidity of at least 7% to 13% will take place. We will have
an atmosphere expanding vertically, but also with increased
humidity. This will accelerate warming because water vapor is a
powerful greenhouse gas, but the good news is that high mountain
areas will, in some areas, experience more rain higher up.
As noted at the beginning of this article, humans need water and
other adequate growing conditions in order to have a viable
civilization.
The Catastrophic Climate Changed world of 2060 will be a stormy
place. The over acidified, mostly dead oceans, will be full of
giant waves.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/catastrophic-climate-change/future-earth/msg373/#msg373<br
/>The winds during storms will be off the charts in comparison
to
what we experience now. High up in the mountains, some type of
barrier will need to be erected to keep the fierce winds from
destroying the crops.
Finally, those hardy folks who carve out a life in year-round
sunny high mountains will have to deal with UV radiation. It is
a fact that, at present, the UV levels at around 10,000 ft. and
above are particularly hazardous to humans.
However, with the expanded atmosphere in an overheated planet,
this is the one area I see as hopeful for humans and animals
living on very high mountains. You see, in said expanded
atmosphere of plus 4° C and above, the massive increase in
humidity will inhibit UV radiaiton.
Nevertheless. Since the equator alpine areas are infamous for
high UV radiation, it would be prudent to plan to plant crops
that have high UV tolerant foliage, like tubers. Hopefully, the
greatly increased humidity will help protect the High Mountain
Human Heroes.
SNIPPET:
Everyone is exposed to UV radiation from the sun and an
increasing number of people are exposed to artificial sources
used in industry, commerce and recreation. Emissions from the
sun include visible light, heat and UV radiation.
The UV region covers the wavelength range 100-400 nm and is
divided into three bands:
UVA (315-400 nm)
UVB (280-315 nm)
UVC (100-280 nm).
As sunlight passes through the atmosphere, all UVC and
approximately 90% of UVB radiation is absorbed by ozone, water
vapour, oxygen and carbon dioxide. UVA radiation is less
affected by the atmosphere. Therefore, the UV radiation reaching
the Earth’s surface is largely composed of UVA with a small UVB
component.
Environmental factors that influence the UV level
Sun height—the higher the sun in the sky, the higher the UV
radiation level. Thus UV radiation varies with time of day and
time of year, with maximum levels occurring when the sun is at
its maximum elevation, at around midday (solar noon) during the
summer months.
Latitude—the closer the equator, the higher the UV radiation
levels. :(
Cloud cover— UV radiation levels are highest under cloudless
skies. Even with cloud cover, UV radiation levels can be high
due to the scattering of UV radiation by water molecules and
fine particles in the atmosphere. :(
Altitude—at higher altitudes, a thinner atmosphere filters less
UV radiation. With every 1000 metres increase in altitude, UV
levels increase by 10% to 12%.
HTML http://www.who.int/uv/uv_and_health/en/
HTML http://www.who.int/uv/uv_and_health/en/
What do you think are the chances of human civilization
achieving what the following graph says we HAVE TO DO?
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-140822181130-19271084.png[/center]
There is NO WAY in God's (formerly good) Earth that we can avoid
a climate that is almost entirely unsuitable for human life. The
above graphic illustrates that. Anyone who thinks that we can do
what needs to be done to avoid a PLUS 4° C (and above!) climate
that will kill most humans and cause the extinction of thousands
of other vertebrate species is engaging in magical thinking.
>:(
ALL the people near the surface in the tropics will die as
crispy critters, period. Those in temperate zones will perish
too. Those near the poles who live near the surface will last as
long as the food they have lasts. Unless they can maintain some
geothermally heated and powered high tech greenhouse CITY that
includes PLENTY of crop growing quality light and plenty of
water, they will die too.
I might add that those greenhouse giant domes, both near the
poles ond on high equatorial mountains, had better be MASSIVELY
strong. The storms that will visit them and the wind speeds they
will face in a PLUS 4 ° C planet
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-140822180449-1886809.png<br
/>will make any recent hurricane look like a gentle breeze.
In Antarctica, some vegetables have now been (sort of)
successfully grown.
SNIPPET:
These Antarctic vegetables were grown without pesticides,
daylight, or even soil — but they look absolutely delicious.
[center]
HTML https://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/11-scientistsha.jpg[/center]
[center]Various vegetables which were harvested from the
EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III on Antarctica.
Image credits: DLR[/center]
Germany’s southernmost workplace, the Neumayer-Station III, has
harvested the first crop of Antarctic vegetables. Biologists
report that they’ve successfully grown 3.6 kilograms (8 pounds)
of salad greens, 18 cucumbers and 70 radishes grown inside a
high-tech greenhouse, as temperatures around the research
station were plummeting to -20 degrees Celsius (-4 Fahrenheit).
The plants were grown without soil, in a closed-water circle. No
outside lighting was used — instead, researchers optimized and
used an LED system. The carbon dioxide cycle was also closely
monitored.
While this is a solid crop already, researchers are expecting
much more in the future. The German Aerospace Center DLR, which
coordinates the project, said that in the coming months, they
expect to harvest 4-5 kilograms of fruit and vegetables a week.
[center]
HTML https://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/9-scientistsha.jpg[/center]
[center]Image shows engineer Paul Zabel with fresh salad he
harvested in the EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III
on Antarctica. The project with — instead of soil — a closed
water cycle, optimized lightning and carbon dioxide levels is a
test of what may become part of the nutrition program for
astronauts in future moon or Mars missions. Image credits:
DLR.[/center]
Full article: Scientists harvest first batch of Antarctic
vegetables
HTML https://www.zmescience.com/science/scientists-harvest-first-batch-antarctic-vegetables/
I am skeptical of the nutritive value of crops grown this way.
Though it is good to know they used no pesticdes, the article
says nothing about any nutritive mineral analysis of these
vegetables, so there is no evidence yet that this is a
sustainable crop growing method in a harsh climate changed plus
4 degrees C world.
The article ends with optimistic talk about using the above
technique (and similar techniques like they use in the
International Space Station) to eventually grow food in
spaceships and on other planets.
Within a decade or less, successfully growing food near the
poles will be far more important for the survival of humanity
here on earth than in space or on some other planet.
Speaking of activity near the poles to deal with Climate Change,
Iceland is one of the few places on Earth that are seeing
benefits from Climate Change. They may be destined to be one of
the outposts of humanity in an increasingly overheated world.
Now they are planting evergreens. But, if we do not reverse the
overheating trend, they will eventually have to plant
these:🌴 :P
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/-hgAf8awLmQ[/center]
Vikings cleared the forests, now Iceland is bringing them back
HTML https://www.treehugger.com/conservation/vikings-cleared-forests-now-iceland-finally-growing-new-ones.html
Even with laudable efforts like the forest planting project in
Iceland, humanity needs to do far, far more to survive.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-280922121533-20231141.png[/center]
We will need gigantic, and I mean "miles in diameter" GIGANTIC,
greenhouses to get a reasonable amount of food grown near the
poles and/or on the equatorial mountains.
The giant greenhouse domes situated in the high equatorial
mountains would have to be something like the U.K. Eden Project
Domes, but way up high on a mountain. In England they have an
enclosed rainforest in these domes. They need to be ten or
twenty times bigger for an equatorial alpine community. If the
post collapse alpine community could control the atmospheric
pressure in the giant domes, more UV protection is guaranteed
and more comfortable living for humans too.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-161022150747.png[/center]
[center]Eden Project North UK
HTML https://www.edenproject.com/new-edens/eden-project-north-uk[/center]
For those still worried about fellow humans trying to kill you
for your stuff, remember that high mountains are a natural
defense against warlike humans during the initial phases of the
Climate Change Caused Collapse. The heat lower down will
eliminate any human threat after a couple of decades.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422132945-7012374.png[/center]
STOP thinking you are going to live on a planet that has the
remotest resemblance to the one you have lived in all your life.
THAT is WISHFUL THINKING! The LEAST of your problems is going to
be worrying about the "zombie" humans getting your stuff.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-020422164021.png[/center]
#Post#: 661--------------------------------------------------
Re: Future Earth
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: November 16, 2022, 10:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
NOVEMBER 15, 2022 by BILL MCKIBBEN 🌞✨
[center][glow=green,2,300]
Someday the [shadow=red,left]climate fight[/shadow] will be
dull--and that's how we'll know we're winning[/glow][/center]
[center]Egypt Dispatch 5: Looking back at America's elections
from Sharm el Sheikh[/center]
Let us stipulate that climate change shouldn’t be a politically
polarizing issue—physics has assigned us a straightforward task,
which is to stop burning fossil fuel, and given us a tight
timeline. As a world, we should be hard at work; it would be a
hard task, but—especially if we’d started when we got our first
warnings—well within our powers as a species.
Let us further stipulate that it clearly is a politically
polarizing issue, probably the biggest of all time, because
power and money are at stake, and the people who possess them
under the current system (Exxon, Putin, the Koch Brothers) will
do anything they can think of to avoid losing those possessions.
That’s what this COP and all the others are really about: an
effort to somehow overcome, or work around, that power. There
are 636 registered fossil fuel lobbyists on hand here, and the
biggest single delegation is from the United Arab Emirates; it’s
quite possible that more of the people here want to keep the
current order than undermine it.
This is a fighting newsletter. The fight is in its decisive
stages, and the next years will tell, so this comes to you for
free. But if you can afford the modest monthly subscription
without financial hardship, you’ll help keep it coming .
Upgrade to paid
Because the climate movement was decisively losing this fight,
we needed to make it dramatic—we needed, say, to go to jail.
That was absurd, at some level—why should someone have go to
jail on behalf of physics? But changing the narrative requires
getting people’s attention. That’s why my dear friend Svitlana
Romanko got carried out of a room at the Egypt talks today—she’s
the Ukrainian climate activist fighting fossil-fueled Russian
fascism, and she refused to sit silently while Russian
‘diplomats’ told their lies. “I am glad that I named evil by
name and I was able to tell them what all Ukrainians would like
to tell them if they were here,” she said. “You are a terrorist
state, you are genociding, torturing and killing us daily for
nine months, your oil and gas are killing us. You are war
criminals, you must not be here but in international court.”
But our job is not forever and just to make trouble; eventually,
when we start to win, it’s the other side that will need to get
desperate. And slowly, too slowly, it’s happening. This fall’s
elections are mnore important than anything that’s happening
here at Sharm el Sheikh, I think—the one in Brazil last month,
and the ones across America last week, and the one that could
come in Georgia early next month.
These elections were not, for the most part, fought on climate
change, which in itself is something of an accomplishment. In
the U.S., Biden’s main legislative accomplishment was the
passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, which is mostly a
climate bill, and arguably the most expensive new attempt by the
federal government to proactively tackle a problem since the LBJ
years. So the fact that the GOP didn’t go after it indicates
they understood its basic popularity.
But the news is better than that. Exit polling indicates that
for voters considered [glow=red,2,300]climate change[/glow] the
second most important issue facing the country—actually, it tied
with abortion, and came in ahead of crime, despite the fact that
those issues were the centerpieces of Democratic and Republican
strategy. (The first place issue, of course, was “economy/jobs”,
which is pretty much always the first place issue, because
everyone needs a job and has to live in the economy.) A tenth of
the populace now understands that climate counts more than
anything else—which means that a much larger percentage
understands that it counts an awful lot. In any event, a tenth
is a big share. And that tenth is obviously concentrated among
younger voters—who turned out in larger than expected numbers,
and helped turn the election from a toxic red tide into
something we can build on.
Still, the political fight continues, and will always continue
as long as serious money and power continue to be at stake.
Herschel Walker and Raphael Warnock come next, in a Georgia
runoff in early December. It’s a crazy battle—between the man
who may be the single most articulate U.S. Senator, and the one
who would definitely be the least. Walker seems slightly fixated
on climate change—early on he explained that we send “good air”
to China so…nevermind. This week he added to his legend with a
stirring defense of “gas guzzlers,” which is not what their
defenders usually call them, but he was saying the noisy part
out loud. Even Walker, however, understands there must be some
problem associated with the internal combustion engine, so he
added—mysteriously—”we got the good emissions under those cars.”
And he said (and again, note the concession to some kind of
reality) “If we was ready for the green agenda, I'd raise my
hand right now. But we're not ready right now.”
This has become the remaining defense of the
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622153114-13822364.jpeg<br
/>fossil fuel industry—’it would be good to get rid of us, but
we
can’t yet, so 😈 wait a while.’ It’s dangerous nonsense,
but it does illustrate how far we’ve moved the reality needle.
Raphael Warnock, meanwhile, is not particularly noted as a
climate warrior (he’s got other issues where he’s leading) but
he too illustrates how far we’ve come: one of his big boasts
headed into the runoff is that he helped land a big new battery
plant near Augusta. And here’s how he spoke about it: “Georgia
is open for business, and today’s announcement is good news for
both Georgia’s growing clean energy economy and Augusta workers.
I was proud to fight for and help secure the $178 million
needed for this new facility, and I’ll continue to work closely
with businesses looking to start or expand in Georgia to secure
critical investments that will help create local, good-paying
jobs.” Which is not the way I’d describe it—I’d go on and on
about the low-carbon future or some such, which is why I’d lose
the Georgia elections by a mile. (Also I live in Vermont). But
it’s the right way for him to speak about it, because it’s
almost dull.
In other words, Democrats have begun to normalize the transition
we need to make, to assimilate it into the standard language of
politics, and Republicans increasingly look like…morons. Walker
actually seems quite dumb, but in this case it’s not his fault;
he’s stuck by virtue of his party defending something stupid
(“gas guzzlers”). It’s a harder and harder case to make with
each passing quarter, because more and more people can read the
future. Earlier this year the University of Georgia (whose
football glory represents Walker’s main claim on voters)
announced a big new center focused on “electric mobility.”
“Developments in battery technology, the growth in electric
vehicle sales, and the transition to renewable energy are a
trifecta for significant societal and economic change delivered
by higher levels of energy efficiency and cheaper electricity,”
said Regents Professor Richard Watson. “UGA is poised to help
Georgia switch on a new future.” The trustees of the University
of Georgia are probably not particularly liberal, but they
understand about $178 million battery factories.
This normalization is crucial, and ongoing. Another important
development along these same lines yesterday, as Ben Jealous was
named the new head of America’s biggest environmental group, the
Sierra Club. The fossil fuel industry has worked long and hard
to try and carve away Black voters and politicians, with
donations and with common-man rhetoric. (If you’ve never read
the NAACP’s reports on this “fossil fuel foolery", they’re
enlightening). But Black Americans remain among the staunchest
supporters of action on climate change (because they are among
its prominent victims). And now this tie will grow even
stronger: Jealous, the former head of the biggest civil rights
group in America (the NAACP), is going to lead its biggest green
group. This represents a formidable kind of influence. (Jealous
is also just good at what he does).
I don’t know if we can address the climate crisis in time; I do
know it depends on this political evolution continuing, and
speeding up. We have to break the effective power of the fossil
fuel industry; it’s going to be close. We’ll need to continue
being dramatic, because for now they’re still ahead. But we also
need to be dull. Hail Mary passes, but also
four-yards-in-a-cloud of dust grind-it-out running game. We’re
starting to put points on the board.
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422122703-682813.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422133332.gif
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page