Global Warming Opens Up Antarctic Waterways

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Domestic cats kill billions of birds each year, let's start there.

Global warming creates more cats???

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Seasiq

Aha! You've nailed it. The fewer birds flapping wings = less cooling from wings = more heat.

Plus birds have very high body temperatures so more birds = more heating :-)
The system remains in equilibrium.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Well, feel free to show us the disasters. If you want people to return the the stone age in order to return to your 1880's climate, ya gunna need an ironclad case, good sir.

Miami, Florida is in the beginning phases of a slow-motion disaster.

Goodbye, Miami | Rolling Stone Magazine

By century's end, rising sea levels will turn the nation's urban fantasyland into an American Atlantis. But long before the city is completely underwater, chaos will begin.

Sea Level Rise Threatens to Drown Miami Even Faster Than Feared, UM Researcher Finds | Miami New Times

Before sea level rises, Miami Beach officials want to raise West Avenue 1½ to 2 feet | Miami Herald Miami Herald

Treading Water - National Geographic Magazine

Scientist: 'Miami, As We Know It Today, Is Doomed. It's Not A Question Of If. It's A Question Of When.' | ThinkProgress

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

(nice little hate on windmills there, sport. But misplaced)

Battery game-changer right here. Local storage, as opposed to a grid-based storage solution. Other battery improvements being pursued; as you know storage is the keystone that will make renewables more practical as the prime source.



We might get there sooner if people would stop regurgitating all the much-disproven BS about the science, and conspiracy, blah blah blah.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way, as they say.

It's not hate for windmills to say they don't work as base load sources of energy. That's just fact. You seem to indicate you know that by posting the "game changing" battery link. But when I click on the link it's just speculation about a lithium ion battery pack with no details and no actual facts about capacity or price or anything else about it that would make it an actual "game changer," apparently just more blah, blah, blah wishful thinking from an alarmist hoping that SOMEBODY will invent a true "game changing" battery that will help make all the silly things they've been claiming about wind/solar have some chance of actually becoming true, someday.

In the meantime, we could be building and operating nuclear power plants all over the US that would make all this angst about CO2 generation go away. it's the only other REALISTIC option to supply base load power but the same people who are all worked up about AGW have managed to make the permitting process and financing for them to be prohibitively expensive, even though the actual energy generation is safe, cheap, and clean. But the joy of nuclear fear mongering apparently trumps their supposed concern for the environment.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by SailOar

Miami, Florida is in the beginning phases of a slow-motion disaster.

Goodbye, Miami | Rolling Stone Magazine
Sea Level Rise Threatens to Drown Miami Even Faster Than Feared, UM Researcher Finds | Miami New Times

Before sea level rises, Miami Beach officials want to raise West Avenue 1½ to 2 feet | Miami Herald Miami Herald

Treading Water - National Geographic Magazine

Scientist: 'Miami, As We Know It Today, Is Doomed. It's Not A Question Of If. It's A Question Of When.' | ThinkProgress

If Miami has had a 6 inch "sea level rise" in 5 years as one article would have us believe, then the problem isn't being exclusively caused by sea level rise. Current level of rise is 20 to 30 mm per decade depending on what literature you read so the numbers don't add up. Some places are also subsiding from issues like groundwater extraction, for example.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by SailOar

Miami, Florida is in the beginning phases of a slow-motion disaster.

Goodbye, Miami | Rolling Stone Magazine
Sea Level Rise Threatens to Drown Miami Even Faster Than Feared, UM Researcher Finds | Miami New Times

Before sea level rises, Miami Beach officials want to raise West Avenue 1½ to 2 feet | Miami Herald Miami Herald

Treading Water - National Geographic Magazine

Scientist: 'Miami, As We Know It Today, Is Doomed. It's Not A Question Of If. It's A Question Of When.' | ThinkProgress

This is too perfect, and what timing! Are you REALLY citing Rolling Stone as a credible source of information?

When you build a major city just a couple of feet above sea level in a location where hurricanes have always frequented, it shouldn't come as any big surprise that a 24' storm surge will cause lots of damage and that is bound to happen no matter what you think about AGW. Maybe the lesson is more that it's really arrogant and stupid to build structures on the shore barely above sea level and expect them to last much past the next big hurricane. Maybe we should stop doing that?! Luckily we've had quite a lull in big hurricanes in Florida but it's only a matter of time.

[OutOfControl]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

In the meantime, we could be building and operating nuclear power plants all over the US that would make all this angst about CO2 generation go away. it's the only other REALISTIC option to supply base load power but the same people who are all worked up about AGW have managed to make the permitting process and financing for them to be prohibitively expensive, even though the actual energy generation is safe, cheap, and clean. But the joy of nuclear fear mongering apparently trumps their supposed concern for the environment.

Nail meet hammer.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

It's not hate for windmills to say they don't work as base load sources of energy. That's just fact. You seem to indicate you know that by posting the "game changing" battery link. But when I click on the link it's just speculation about a lithium ion battery pack with no details and no actual facts about capacity or price or anything else about it that would make it an actual "game changer," apparently just more blah, blah, blah wishful thinking from an alarmist hoping that SOMEBODY will invent a true "game changing" battery that will help make all the silly things they've been claiming about wind/solar have some chance of actually becoming true, someday.

FFS. We've all known from Day 1 that solar, windmills and some other renewable sources would not be 100% drop-in replacements for fossil fuels, and would pose challenges to to the current grid structure. Does that mean we don't start developing? Or changing the grid?

The link was from Tesla, a company with a big stake in the game, AND a track-record for delivering, if their stock is any indication. Hardly empty speculation.

EVERYONE (with a clue) knows that energy storage is currently the weak link, and whoever solves it will make a killing, so there's lots of effort being applied there. Or have you given up on capitalism, too?

In the meantime, we could be building and operating nuclear power plants all over the US that would make all this angst about CO2 generation go away. it's the only other REALISTIC option to supply base load power but the same people who are all worked up about AGW have managed to make the permitting process and financing for them to be prohibitively expensive, even though the actual energy generation is safe, cheap, and clean. But the joy of nuclear fear mongering apparently trumps their supposed concern for the environment.

No, people worked up by a less than perfect nuclear safety record have put the brakes on further nuclear development (sometimes unreasonably so, I agree). A bigger factor is that nuclear power has never been a 100% private enterprise, governments have always had to be involved in financing and permits etc... and when a government has to commit near a trillion to clean up after some misbehaving bankers, or drop a trillion there on a wasted 10 years of mayhem... not alot left over for government support of new nuclear plants, is there?

And NIMBY. Try to find a state that would embrace a new reactor or two. As 3rd Day has repeatedly told us, voters may not be rational, but they can still steer the country.

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

If Miami has had a 6 inch "sea level rise" in 5 years as one article would have us believe, then the problem isn't being exclusively caused by sea level rise. Current level of rise is 20 to 30 mm per decade depending on what literature you read so the numbers don't add up. Some places are also subsiding from issues like groundwater extraction, for example.

You are astute to note the discrepancy, and yes, much of the US east coast is subsiding as part of a post-glacial rebound from ice melting in eastern Canada 12K years ago. So Global Warming and the resulting rise in the ocean is only one of many variables affecting any particular location.

Post-glacial rebound - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...In the near field outside the former ice margin, the land sinks relative to the sea. This is the case along the east coast of the United States, where ancient beaches are found submerged below present day sea level and Florida is expected to be submerged in the future.[3] GPS data in North America also confirms that land uplift becomes subsidence outside the former ice margin.[2]...

J&J Hunt Submerged Archaeological Site - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sea-level rise

During the Late Glacial Maximum (ca. 18,000 years ago) the continental shelf around the Gulf Coast of Florida was exposed for at least 185 km from the present-day mouth of the Aucilla River. At this time and for the next 7,000 years the sea-level was around 90 m lower than today’s present level. Then around 14,000 B.P. until approximately 11,000 B.P., at the onset of the Younger Dryas, massive melting of the ice sheets resulted in sea-level rise and transgression of the continental shelf to about 140 km from the mouth of the Aucilla River (Faught 2004b). A second glacial melting began after 10,000 B.P. and lasted until about 7,000 B.P. when sea levels became relatively constant. It is important to note that as sea levels rose it forced people settled along the coast to move further and further inland. During late Pleistocene and early Holocene times, the coastline was much farther out on the continental shelf, and this segment of the PaleoAucilla was forested and well inland. Later, during the middle Holocene stages of transgression, the segment was more of a wide grassy marsh with brackish water tidal creeks and oysters. In this continental shelf setting, submerged archaeological sites remain in clustered arrays accessible by underwater archaeological methods, and the data provide a critical supplement to our present understanding of late Pleistocene and early Holocene settlement patterns and paleolandscape utilization(2004b). The Underwater Archaeology of Paleolandscapes, Apalachee Bay, Florida. American Antiquity, Vol. 69, No. 2. (Apr., 2004), pp. 275-289.

Land subsidence and sea level rise on the Atlantic Coastal Plain of the United States

Abstract

Land subsidence due to decline in head in confined aquifers, related to municipal and industrial water pumpage, is widespread in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Although not a major engineering problem, subsidence greatly complicates adjustment of precise leveling and distorts prediction of future sea-level rise. When preconsolidation stress equivalent to about 20 m of head decline is exceeded compaction of fine-grained sediments of the aquifer system begins, and continues until a new head equilibrium is attained between fine and coarse units. The ratio subsidence/head decline is quite consistent, ranging from 0.0064 in southeastern Virginia to 0.0018 at Dover, Delaware and Atlantic City, New Jersey. Higher values are related to the occurrence of montmorillonite as the predominant clay mineral present. Review of tide gauge records indicates that gauges not affected by land subsidence or other local secular effects have been sinking relative to sea level since 1940 at rates averaging about 2.5 mm/yr, of which 0.6 mm/yr is ascribed to glacio-isostatic adjustment to unloading of North America resulting from melting of late Pleistocene glaciers, and about 0.9 mm/yr is ascribed to steric sea-level rise related to ocean warming. The residual 1 mm/yr of relative sea-level rise is not well understood, but may be related to regional tectonic subsidence of the Atlantic coast.

See also:

South Florida Faces Ominous Prospects From Rising Waters | New York Times

The Flood Next Time | New York Times


Coastal Cities And Climate Change: You're Going To Get Wet - Business Insider

Obama advisor in Fort Lauderdale says president is committed to fighting global warming - tribunedigital-sunsentinel

Broward creates "climate change'' chapter in plan for future - tribunedigital-sunsentinel

If ALL the polar ice melted, say good-by Florida (not likely in the near term.)
Rising Seas - Interactive: If All The Ice Melted

[SailOar]

A fun tutorial on how sea level is determined.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q65O3qA0-n4

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

EVERYONE (with a clue) knows that energy storage is currently the weak link, and whoever solves it will make a killing, so there's lots of effort being applied there. Or have you given up on capitalism, too?

No, people worked up by a less than perfect nuclear safety record have put the brakes on further nuclear development (sometimes unreasonably so, I agree). A bigger factor is that nuclear power has never been a 100% private enterprise, governments have always had to be involved in financing and permits etc... and when a government has to commit near a trillion to clean up after some misbehaving bankers, or drop a trillion there on a wasted 10 years of mayhem... not alot left over for government support of new nuclear plants, is there?

And NIMBY. Try to find a state that would embrace a new reactor or two. As 3rd Day has repeatedly told us, voters may not be rational, but they can still steer the country.

A worthwhile read - the whole thing, the headline is misleading.

What It Would Really Take to Reverse Climate Change - IEEE Spectrum

James Hansen and some other greenies, including me, support nuclear power.

Nuclear is also safer.

Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh) CORRECTED

Coal (elect, heat,cook –world avg) 100 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal electricity – world avg 60 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal (elect,heat,cook)– China 170
Coal electricity- China 90
Coal – USA 15
Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass 12
Peat 12
Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (0.2% of world energy for all solar)
Wind 0.15 (1.6% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)

[Group9]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

This is too perfect, and what timing! Are you REALLY citing Rolling Stone as a credible source of information?
.

After seeing the recent study into their journalistic methodology for fact checking, I would be more inclined to believe in man made global warming if Rolling Stone said it didn't exist.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/bu...lism.html?_r=0

[conachair]

[QUOTE=SailOar;1795989]A fun tutorial on how sea level is determined.



Fantastic, thnx!

Here's one on sun spots

The 315-Year-Old Science Experiment - Issue 22: Slow - Nautilus

Those silly scientists, what do they know

[Tensen]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

But that's not what you said at all.

Oh, but it is.

And we might be seeing "massive spikes" (to avoid another Rustic incident, I'll interpret that as "steep increase" instead) in CO2, but it's still very much up in the air about temperature in relation to the theory of CO2 greenhouse.

It's only "up in the air" in your imagination.

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

I don't know. That's why I guessed. Why don't you enlighten me with the facts and figures?

You made the assertion that wind farms kill more, you provide the evidence.

[Tensen]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

It's not hate for windmills to say they don't work as base load sources of energy.

No-one's pretending that they do (without storage).

In the meantime, we could be building and operating nuclear power plants all over the US that would make all this angst about CO2 generation go away. it's the only other REALISTIC option to supply base load power but the same people who are all worked up about AGW have managed to make the permitting process and financing for them to be prohibitively expensive, even though the actual energy generation is safe, cheap, and clean. But the joy of nuclear fear mongering apparently trumps their supposed concern for the environment.

The people who care about AGW and the people who dislike nuclear power may have some overlap, but they most certainly aren't the same groups.

Nuclear is quite a good option for combating AGW (although safety, waste and the huge water requirements mean it has problems of its own), and there are plenty of supporters for it.

And it isn't the only realistic non-fossil fuel base load. Hydro is one, wave power is another. And energy storage is a fast-advancing field, with the potential to make wind and solar capable of base load.