Topic: Arctic Ice situation (Read 2182 times)

Charlie you wouldn't know reality from oil company and Koch brother propaganda if it bit you in the ass.

The increase in cloud cover is linear while the decrease in ice extent is exponential.

If cloud cover properly compensated this thread wouldn't exist.

The net change in sea ice extent is hugely negative. Therefore the first reason is nonsense. Here is an analogy, the TV in the living room is shrinking by 10 inches. You state correctly that we don't care how thick the TV is to which I say I didn't mention thickness in the first place. I really like to eat herring but I'm not that easily distracted.

So, ice cover on the sea surface can be offset by...clouds created by (insert unknown process) that prevents the sunlight from hitting the surface to the same extent as it being completely covered in ice. (I'm interested if you have proof)

The extension of forests right in the middle of the arctic ocean is at best, a bad joke. Is your point that there are going to be trees growing on the open saltwater in the middle of the ocean in the summer or at any time?


What I want to focus on is not CO2 levels, or methane levels, but a change in the temperature of the arctic caused by the change of ice extent in the summer. The winter in the arctic is also irrelevant as there isn't as much sun there in the winter.

Algae sucking CO2 there can be nearly irrelevant and has, up to now been irrelevant as the composition of the atmosphere is still moving towards more CO2 despite all the melting ice and release of iron into the oceans.

Talking about the Arctic, can anyone explain this?

Anyone who learned the Scientific Method in sixth grade should be able to distinguish between the Science Fraud that is AGW and actual Science.

It's just plain sad how uneducated the Public are.

Perhaps they deserve to be taxed into poverty.

Precipitation might increase very slightly. But the overall ice cover will be reduced very noticeably. A lot of the glaciers in the border regions will break, and drift towards the ocean.

Well let me note a few of the reasons why it may not happen that way. 

• Reflectivity is a function of sea ice, and thin ice cover works as well as thick ice.  But thin ice forms in just a few hours.
  
  Open sea has a much higher microscopic life content, thus produces more offsetting oxygen and absorbs more CO2.
  
  A warmer Arctic would change one of the primary atmospheric climate issues.  That is water vapor does not exist, since it becomes ice crystals.  Water vapor, the gas, and side effects from that, such as cloud layers, have the effect of preventing sunlight from reaching the surface at all. 

As we know from the climate in lower Alaska, the region is effectively a tropical rain forest, although at a lower average temperature for sure.

So the extension of a "summer Juneau climate" northwards would be what you are looking at in those circumstances. 

Increased precipitation in Antarctica could lock a lot of water on the colder areas, off-setting a lot of the sea level rise that is due to thermal expansion. One third of it according to the IPCC, although the IPCC is always overly conservative.

Even if all that ice in that region melts that would only mean less than 10% of whole ice in Antarctica.
And most of it will reform in winter.

I'm focusing on the arctic ice because that is going to happen soon. The difference in temperature if the ice melts will fall drastically changing climate patterns, rainfall, wind, currents.

Check the summer temperatures in Antarctica.



A lot of the area currently falls within the 0 degree and -10 degree range.

Highly unlikely.
With an average of -50C termpreature it's almost impossible to melt that ice.

What will happen when, in the short years after 2014 the arctic will be ice free in the summer?

This could be it ladies and gentleman, the world could be a lot different if by chance there are any unintended consequences. We're not climatologists here, but we can all have our educated guesses.

My view:

Worst Case scenario: Hurricanes hit the US more often causing a lot of death, certain areas get less rain than they used to, dry out and burn as a result, perhaps even a new dustbowl. Certain areas get much more rain and snow then before disrupting a significant amount of people's lives. The melting causes the release of large amounts of methane accelerating climate change. Greenland ice melts faster than predicted next to an ice free arctic (in the summer) causing rapid sea level rise the likes of which was not predicted in the current models.

Realistic Scenario: ... Climate changes but people cannot pinpoint the extra disasters on climate change and simply blame it on bad luck. The media has it's frenzy over the summer ice situation but as the winter starts and the ice begins to form again on the arctic people do not understand the difference between summer and winter in the north. Petroleum interests have to be heeded by politicians who have been bought out and everything is swept under the rug. Most people are distracted, oblivious to the change and how it might affect everyone until it does.

Best Case scenario: Arctic is free of ice in the summer, an event that causes the extinction of several animals. The change in climate is mild but noticeable. Globally there is consensus to fight the problem, many radical solutions are deployed at once, among the many solutions being feeding extra iron into the sea, like the iron that was leaked due to the melting of arctic ice that had never melted before in order for plancton to capture excess Co2.

In the years to follow the arctic gets a little more ice and eventually has ice even in the summer. It's a changed world, with more farmland available to the north. Many people have moved north and higher up. We've adapted for the change and we're slowly going to reverse it.

1. If the ice-cap covering Antarctica melts completely, then the ocean levels will rise by 61 meters (6,100 cm or 200 feet).