Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Could we refreeze the Arctic?

refreeze arctic greenlandís ice cap

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1    Still Waters

Still Waters

    Deeply Mysterious

  • 38,020 posts
  • Joined:01 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • "Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better." - Albert Einstein

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:44 PM

A record loss of Arctic sea ice and faster-than-expected melting of Greenland’s ice cap made worldwide headlines in 2012, but research published in major science journals in the fall suggest warming in the North doesn’t have to continue.

We could refreeze the Arctic, proposed a paper in Nature Climate Change. It wouldn’t even cost that much, said an affiliated study in Environmental Research Letters.

The question is should we?

http://blogs.windsor...-but-should-we/

Posted Image

#2    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 8,169 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:46 PM

but it will melt, sea levels will rise.


#3    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,401 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 11 December 2012 - 10:06 PM

Quote

Scientists have long theorized that injecting reflective particles of some kind into the high atmosphere could reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface and compensate for the greenhouse effect. High CO2 levels would continue to trap heat, but with less energy coming in to begin with, temperatures on the surface would go down.

What if they miscalculate how much reflective particles are needed and we end up in a ice age.  I think we need to leave it alone and develop other forms of energy before its too late.


#4    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:03 AM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 11 December 2012 - 09:46 PM, said:

but it will melt, sea levels will rise.
arctic ice cap is sea ice.
sea ice melt won't raise sea levels.
ask archimedes.


#5    BFB

BFB

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,308 posts
  • Joined:25 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:04 PM

View PostLittle Fish, on 12 December 2012 - 09:03 AM, said:

arctic ice cap is sea ice.
sea ice melt won't raise sea levels.
ask archimedes.

I'm sorry but this is not correct.

Basic physics tell us your statement is correct. But this is not basic physics. If anyone wants me to explain the science behind this i'll gladly do it, just ask.

You statement would be correct if salt wasn't in the equation.
But would it have a big impact on sea levels? No, if the world's entire sea ice melted the sea level would only increase with a few centimeters (0,5 - 1,5  inches roughly)

This subject will also be in the upcoming IPCC report, as its a fairly new scientific discovery.  . .

"Its not true, before my brain says so" - BFB

#6    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,197 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:06 PM

View PostHilander, on 11 December 2012 - 10:06 PM, said:

What if they miscalculate how much reflective particles are needed and we end up in a ice age.  I think we need to leave it alone and develop other forms of energy before its too late.
Have no fear.  We know how to warm the planet back up - just do nothing and CO2 emissions will make it happen.


Little Fish and BFB are both right:  when floating ice melts, sea levels are not affected (For BFB:  at least, not significantly.).  But when on-land ice melts, the melt water runs into the sea, raising sea levels.


As the article says:  this is a bad idea whose time may have come.  If we cannot control emissions, we may have no choice.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#7    Doug1o29

Doug1o29

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,197 posts
  • Joined:01 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:oklahoma

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:11 PM

View PostBFB, on 12 December 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

This subject will also be in the upcoming IPCC report, as its a fairly new scientific discovery.  . .
New?  When I took Freshman chemistry way back in 1967, the instructor did a demonstration/experiment in which he poured an entire box of table salt into a 1-liter beaker of water and only raised the water level a centimeter or so.  The salt dissolved into the water, essentially fitting between the water molecules.
Doug

If I have seen farther than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. --Bernard de Chartres
The beginning of knowledge is the realization that one doesn't and cannot know everything.
Science is the father of knowledge, but opinion breeds ignorance. --Hippocrates
Ignorance is not an opinion. --Adam Scott

#8    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,048 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:21 PM

Sounds like the 'how do we get rid of these bugs, oh wait cane toads' solution in Australia. We barely know the direction climate change may take and they wanna try something as crazy as this? Well, at least someone's thinking seriously, unlike the politicians and their 'carbon taxes'.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#9    BFB

BFB

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,308 posts
  • Joined:25 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:51 PM

View PostDoug1o29, on 12 December 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

New?  When I took Freshman chemistry way back in 1967, the instructor did a demonstration/experiment in which he poured an entire box of table salt into a 1-liter beaker of water and only raised the water level a centimeter or so.  The salt dissolved into the water, essentially fitting between the water molecules.
Doug

I'm talking about Shepherd et al. 2010.

"Its not true, before my brain says so" - BFB

#10    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,140 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 12 December 2012 - 04:22 PM

View PostHasina, on 12 December 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Sounds like the 'how do we get rid of these bugs, oh wait cane toads' solution in Australia. We barely know the direction climate change may take and they wanna try something as crazy as this? Well, at least someone's thinking seriously, unlike the politicians and their 'carbon taxes'.
A culture addicted to techno-fixes rather than addressing the real issues would inevitably take this risky course of action.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#11    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 12 December 2012 - 05:35 PM

View PostBFB, on 12 December 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

I'm sorry but this is not correct.

Basic physics tell us your statement is correct. But this is not basic physics. If anyone wants me to explain the science behind this i'll gladly do it, just ask.

You statement would be correct if salt wasn't in the equation.
But would it have a big impact on sea levels? No, if the world's entire sea ice melted the sea level would only increase with a few centimeters (0,5 - 1,5  inches roughly)

This subject will also be in the upcoming IPCC report, as its a fairly new scientific discovery.  . .
thinking it about it, salt water has more bouyancy, easier to float yourself in the dead sea, etc.
so ice would not displace water as much in higher salinty?
is that what you are alluding to?


#12    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 12 December 2012 - 06:35 PM

View PostBFB, on 12 December 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

I'm talking about Shepherd et al. 2010.
according to shepherd 2010, sea ice melt between 1994 and 2004 equates to 0.049 millimeters sea level rise.
one 20th of a millimeter over 10 years = insignificant.
http://www.agu.org/p...0GL042496.shtml

al gore is investing in sea front properties, didn't he claim sea level would rise 20 feet?

Edited by Little Fish, 12 December 2012 - 06:37 PM.


#13    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,140 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:02 PM

View PostLittle Fish, on 12 December 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

according to shepherd 2010, sea ice melt between 1994 and 2004 equates to 0.049 millimeters sea level rise.
one 20th of a millimeter over 10 years = insignificant.
http://www.agu.org/p...0GL042496.shtml

al gore is investing in sea front properties, didn't he claim sea level would rise 20 feet?
Sea level rise in the short term has always been a distraction - its a pleasure reserved for our childrens children - unless you happen to live on a South Sea Atoll.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#14    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:15 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 12 December 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

Sea level rise in the short term has always been a distraction - its a pleasure reserved for our childrens children - unless you happen to live on a South Sea Atoll.

Br Cornelius
our children's children is 2 generations = 40 years.

40 years @0.049mm/decade = 0.196 millimeter.


#15    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,140 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 12 December 2012 - 07:24 PM

About 6inchs in the AGW period since 1870.

http://academics.eck...8SLRSustain.pdf

Certainly not insignificant. Whats worthy of note is that the previous 4thousand years showed almost no rise.
Thermal expansion seems to account for most of the rise and this is not surprising considering that the majority of the warming so far has been sequestered in the oceans.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 12 December 2012 - 07:26 PM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users