• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Misterbadexample On July - 17 - 2014
English: AIRS 2006-2009 annual mean upper trop...

English: AIRS 2006-2009 annual mean upper troposphere(359Hpa) methane concentration(ppm). Data source:http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/giovanni/ (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Following up on the article I posted last week– a few days ago, a really large (80 M across, a bit smaller than a football-field) hole was punched into the ice from the Siberian Permafrost. The article is here. From the article: Aerial images posted on YouTube indicate a hole up to 80m wide in Yamal, a peninsula jutting into Arctic waters whose name translates as “the end of the world”. There seems to be some indication that the hole was created by a methane ‘burp’. Methane escaping from under the ice may have caught fire due to chemical interaction, blowing a big hole in the permafrost.

The most compelling problem with climate collapse/global warming currently being discussed by scientists is that while the progressive climb upward of c02 (or methane) in parts per million seems gradual, there are numerous feedback loops that have been set off by warmer temperatures. These include the melting of the Siberian permafrost, which will free huge amounts of methane (a far more potent greenhouse gas) as well as a not-insignificant amount of carbon dioxide. Such events will greatly accelerate warming trends, which is one reason why some scientists are predicting the end of human habitability on Earth well before the end of the century–possibly as early as 2035.

A list of the feedback loops is here. Last count there were some 38 identified positive feedback loops that have been set off by the .9 c warming we’ve already seen on the planet. Some of these are under our control–setting up drilling for oil in the Arctic can be stopped, as can using the now-open Arctic waters as a convenient bypass of the Panama Canal. It’s hard to see either of these happening. Most of the feedback loops cannot be turned off. Plan B’s should be on the table.

Which brings me to MSM. Last year, Meet the Press did not have a single segment about climate change/global warming. There was a lame ‘debate’ recently over whether it was even happening, with Bill Nye ‘winning’. The other TV network shows weren’t much better. There’s no other industrialized country in the world where  there’s debate about this issue.

Keep all this in mind the next time someone in your hearing vicinity mouths off about the issue. Just saying.

14 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. funksands says:

    Mr., I find it fascinating that some think that 7 billion people can shit into a balloon 24 hrs a day and there not be any effects.

    I guess all of the stuff we burn just “goes away”.

  2. To all: thanks for your comments. I am hoping at least some of these effects can be ameliorated. But we would have to throw industrial civilization into reverse--all the carbon we’re adding to the atmosphere would have to stop.

    While much of the problem is in human population overshoot, our crisis can be blamed on an economic system that expects infinite growth on a finite planet. What we can do about that now is up for debate. But we can’t all move to Mars.

  3. sillylittleme says:

    MBX, thanks for the cheery news. Saw this today but was unsure if I was reading the scientists eval correctly. Glad that you put this altogether, great piece.

  4. SueInCa says:

    MBX

    This is pretty scary. Think about it, if you are right, there is less than 16 years for Planet Earth, at the least. That is incredibly sad, if true. I don’t pretend to know a great deal about global warming/climate change, but I can see the signs and no amount of ignoring the issue is going to make it go away.

    I wonder, if at the last second, the deniers will be able to face their folly? This is the price we pay for not putting more stock in science education. Of course, people who took science courses could still deny it, but at least they would have the scientific knowledge to know that they were lying to themselves and others.

    I saw a report on this earlier but I did not even really understand the impact as you have described it, thanks for keeping me better informed.

    • sillylittleme says:

      Sue, the planet will still be here. It is humans that will be the first wave of a new mass extinction.

      • Sillylittleme--While the planet may still be here, it’s not clear if it will be able to support multi-cellular life. the late Michael C Ruppert enumerated all the problems facing human species from climate change and noted that the REAL extinction threat now is from Fukushima. I won’t bore with the details, but it’s pretty clear from recent statements by Tepco that the corium of three of the reactors melted through their containment vessels and are on their way to the China syndrome. And because they’ve been pouring water on the plant for three years in an attempt to keep other fuel from going critical, the ground underneath the buildings is being turned into mud. I wrote about Ruppert on my site here. http://brooklynculturejammers.com/2014/04/17/farewell-michael-ruppert/

        Even if we manage to get Fukushima under control in the next ten years, there are 440 other nuclear reactors worldwide. Absent regular human intervention, they’ll all melt down. Observers at Chernobyl recently saw black moss growing on one side of the containment vessel. That’s what will be left of living species if humans go the way of Tyrannosaurus Rex.

        • sillylittleme says:

          Bore away. I have been having this argument with a friend who still thinks nuclear energy is safe. I send him article after article (thanks Kalima) and yet he is still unconvinced. For him it is a matter of the body count. Until he sees large swaths of a nation dying from radiation poisoning he will still support nuclear. Every week we have been walking the beach at Salisbury (MA). If you walk up far enough (about 2.5 miles) you can see the plant at Seabrook (NH). I keep trying to explain to him that when the oceans rise enough we will have our own Fukushima. He pointed out a UN report that says my theory is bunk. So thanks for more fuel. Oh and he considers himself a conservative although he can’t give me a legitimate reason why that is. We remain friends because he needs a liberal voice in his life, even as he derides liberalism and progressivism.

          • The pro-nuke folks (especially the smart ones) scare me. On my link above, there’s a Youtube where Ruppert talks about Fukushima in detail. Guy McPherson has also touched on nuclear as being a threat to existence, again because of the cooling issue.
            Beyond all the dangers, the fuel is in short supply. Jeremy Rifkin has talked about ‘peak uranium’. Why are we building plants when we’re short on fuel to run them?

            • sillylittleme says:

              Why are we trying to get every lump of coal from the ground, every drop of oil, every instance of natural gas? Because we humans, in general, stopped taking care of the planet.

      • SueInCa says:

        Right, we are all Planet Earth. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I was talking about humans though that might not have been clear

        • sillylittleme says:

          Possibly only the plants will survive and those animals that can tolerate higher rates of CO2. I can’t believe we are doing this to ourselves!!!

  5. Nirek says:

    MBX, this ties in with solar power and other renewable energy use. The only way to reverse the effects of over a hundred years of fossil fuel use is to get off them ASAP! You are pointing to the effects of our use of fossil fuels. I agree it is only going to get worse unless we act now. Solar does zero harm, hydro and wind are excellent ways to use renewable energy, also.


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features