Arctic sea ice shrinks to third lowest area on record

I couldn't agree with you more. They are letting it melt to take its resources with another false choice because by doing so when the climate tips, the greatest resource we have will be lost. So do you foresee the Arctic War coming soon? Russia already planted a flag there, and Canada is doing military maneuvers.

This is very true water wise and it has been calculated that the equivalent of ones years global input to finance CO2 based schemes would provide clean water for every person on the planet indefinitely, but to a further point not all countries source their water from Glaciers. India for example obtains over 90% of its water from the Monsoon. A problem there is exacerbated by poor water management, much of it is sucked out for agriculture which is a necessity but there are large losses. The Indian Government is now stepping in to tighten up illegal and wasteful use. In Africa there is even less supply by glacier and a major problem in recent decades has been land usage change resulting in changes in precipitation. This may be of interest, many African countries have now stepped up to use a mixed land use system known as Evergreen Agriculture. The following is from a Kenyan report at http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/Kenyanews/Kenya-could-triple-its-maize-yield-978...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NAIROBI, Kenya, Sept 13 - The World Agro Forestry Centre says Kenya can increase its maize yield by up to 200 percent irrespective of the impacts of climate change.

Director General Dennis Garrity said on Monday that a new concept known as Evergreen agriculture which integrates trees into food crop systems could save Kenya and other parts of the world that experience constant food shortages.

“The options of Evergreen agriculture are trees that will increase the fertility of the soil and increase the yields of the crops that they are growing with. These are trees that are very compatible with crop yields particularly the indigenous acacia tree from Africa,” Dr Garrity said.

He noted that Kenya was yet to advance in evergreen agriculture as fast as some of the neighboring countries but still had an opportunity to develop the concept with trees that would be suitable for Kenyan farmers.

The government through the Ministry of Environment recently introduced a new rule where farmers were required to have 10 percent of their land under tree plantations.

“We recommend that the trees be planted at about 100 trees per hectare so that you get a full canopy of trees producing the nitrogen rich fertiliser that is useful for the crops,” Dr Garrity said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But if you want a related horror story, this story of how cash crops funded by the world bank are draining and depriving the native populations of water so that we in the developed west can eat Asparagus on demand.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/15/peru-asparagus-british-wells

"This is very true water wise and it has been calculated that the equivalent of ones years global input to finance CO2 based schemes would provide clean water for every person on the planet indefinitely"
_ And just what schemes are you talking about? Reforestation? Carbon sequestration in soil? The overriding theme with your responses along wth another on these threads seems to tie everything into denouncing anything that would seek to reign in carbon emissions. Why is that? Surely if you are as intelligent as your responses make you look you know that an overabundance of carbon in our atmosphere leads to other consequences that affect water. Why would working to decrease those emissions take water away from others? Not spending TRILLIONS on war would actually save more. And actually working to decrease those emissions will go a long way in mitigating droughts that actually take water away from people as well as water evaporation. Working to give people in developing countries drip irrigation would save more water. Working to hold polluters accountable for their water toxification would give more potable water to others. Standing up against privitization and industrial agriculture that uses vast amounts of water would give more water to others. Working to wean ourselves off fossil fuels like coal, oil, and nuclear that use billions of gallons of water a day to process would save water for others. But you just care about not doing anything to reign in CO 2 emissions. Right?

Great. And yet in another post trashing Greenpeace you posted an article linking Charles Manson to the environmental movement. So just what are your real motivations here all of a sudden? And even in this long response you subtly infer that CO2 is not the culprit in any of this at all. I am well aware of black carbon and have posted on it here as well but that isn't the only reason either. So don't wonder why your motivations are questioned in regards to this topic when one of the biggest causes of this is totally ignored by you as you sow your seeds of doubt.

It was a reflection on the method being employed, what with the events at the TV company and how the likes of Manson also claimed similar motives and justification to Lee shows it is nothing new, with such a stance he coerced others to kill.

Motivations, read the last couple of posts.

Edit:
"So don't wonder why your motivations are questioned in regards to this topic when one of the biggest causes of this is totally ignored by you as you sow your seeds of doubt."

I did not subtly infer, I replied to you questions and gave the reasons quoting studies. hence with the growing information there is a need to adapt responses. I never said to ignore CO2, I said "I am not pushing that CO2 does not have the potential for issues in principle, " but where there are several causes becoming known they all need attention in some manner. You say that you have mentioned Black carbon, that is fine but the point is still there that there is little or no mitigation in play and not on the Agenda. Hopefully it will be soon.
Think about it, if reducing Black Carbon in a 15 year time frame removes one third of the input to the current warming curve then that gives more time for other solutions to kick in. Have you ever checked what the mitigation value is for an 80% CO2 reduction by 2050?
There are also some exciting developments that will sequester CO2 and convert back to a usable fuel thus creating a closed loop system.
As I listed in another post the DOE report paints a vivid picture of hydrocarbon availability anyway.

The water vapor content is usually given as between 1 and 4%, often just referenced as 2%. This obviously equates to about 20000ppm. The atmospheric residency time is usually given as a few days so there is much recycling going on but as I mentioned the presence of water vapor in the stratosphere and the role that it plays in global temperature is being noted along with its variability. When I read the easy bits of the paper, specific reasons as to why the content does vary is unknown. The density dropped by 10%. It could link back to an anthropogenic cause or maybe due to Solar intensity, the Sun was very active through the nineties and early noughties. Since becoming inactive then atmospheric layers have somewhat collapsed, there has also been an increase in Galactic Cosmic Radiation reaching down into the atmosphere as a result.

Yes, considering that Water Vapor absorbs at the same wavelengths as CO2 and other GHGs it carries a warming threat and for that matter a cooling threat but also mitigates and exacerbates as clouds in mysterious ways that are still being figured out. The basic warming effect of GHGs is about 60degC but feedbacks including some clouds bring it down to about 32degC so we wait and see.

I am now wondering just what volume is generally suspended in the atmosphere... If I find anything I will add it.
I suspect that this is very complicated, if water vapor drops then there will be a cooling within the atmosphere generally as experienced in Deserts at night. But with more sunshine due to less clouds maybe reaching the sea surface so more water vapor will then be liberated. Hm, food for thought somewhere in there. The Earths rotation is probably a great modulator of this process and keeps it in a check blocking some other cycles that might develop. All guess work of course. :)

"It might be important for someone capable like yourself to figure it all out,"

If only. :)
My reading is that a major difference between the Earth and Mars is that Mars has no magnetic field to speak of hence it is not protected from space storms including the solar wind. This means its atmosphere is stripped into space leaving it somewhat thin in comparison. But as you say it still experiences high winds with much erosion.
The Earth also loses atmosphere to space for the same reason but proportionally less, there was a study earlier this year suggesting that amounts had previously been underestimated but the gases are also produced so some replacement occurs also.

I did watch a TV series that explored just how much of the Mars environment could be used as a proxy for Earth but for every argument there was a counter argument. :)

"a polar icecap no more scenario?"
Most forecasts in the detail tend to talk of ice disappearance during the late summer season about September which has happened before within this interglacial so is always on the cards. The Polar region for a large chunk of the year is well below the freezing point of water at about -35 to -40degC, even during the summer it only gets to about 2degC on average using the available thermometers so is likely to always be present for a large part of the year although some make a case that once the sea is exposed to sunlight it will further warm but also the Sun does not get much above the horizon so is a winter sun in that respect. http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php has a record going back to 1958 where it can be seen that little changes but notwithstanding the ice cover and volume does vary, about 10 million square kilometres melts and refreezes every year anyway. Staggering really, there are animations on youtube that run for 30 years (satellite era) showing the coming and going. An amount of the variability is also attributed to currents and winds, sea bed volcanoes have also been suggested as a cause but this is discounted due to how the water layers work as effective blocks. The Atlantic Conveyor has of late been driving warm water up into the west coast of Greenland that is placing some warming around that region of Canada e.g. the north west passage.

I think what is of interest is the developing role of the Arctic Oscillation, this apparently is a very poorly understood process, read, not understood. Its role is being increasingly linked to wider weather events it seems, the extended snow cover last year and the impact on the summer weather impacts in Asia are laid at its door. There is a recent published paper that claims correlations with stat. significance for it being the driver of Arctic ice extent and a recent Paper from University of Reading in the UK is proposing links between Solar Activity and the Arctic Oscillation.

So to your question, my guess is that the next few years will see it on the margins in summer but refreezing during the winter, the test is whether the various oscillations that have gone negative will dominate or not. But more importantly perhaps is that the science with its new tools is further identifying the players and extending the understanding of the processes involved.
The Himalayas have had their first snow fall of the year, nearly a month early so watch that space. :)

Ice extent AO link
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Data Analysis of Recent Warming Pattern in the Arctic
Masahiro Ohashi1) and H. L. Tanaka2)1) Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba2) Center for Computational Sciences, University of Tsukuba

Abstract:In this study, we investigate the mechanism of the arctic warming pattern in surface air temperature (SAT) and sea ice concentrations over the last two decades in comparison with global warming since the 1970s.According to the analysis result, it is found that the patterns of SAT and sea ice before 1989 are mostly determined by the Arctic Oscillation (AO) in winter. In contrast, arctic warming patterns after 1989 are characterized by the intensification of the Beaufort High and the reduced sea-ice concentrations in summer induced by the positive ice-albedo feedback. It is concluded that the arctic warming before 1989 especially in winter was explained by the positive trend of the AOI. Moreover the intensified Beaufort High and the drastic decrease of the sea ice concentrations in September after 1989 were associated with the recent negative trend of the AOI. Since the decadal variation of the AO is recognized as the natural variability of the global atmosphere, it is shown that both of decadal variabilities before and after 1989 in the Arctic can be mostly explained by the natural variability of the AO not by the external response due to the human ctivity.
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/sola/6A/SpecialEdition/6A_1/_articleAuthor’s Commentary
“According to our result, the rapid warming during 1970-1990 contains a large fraction of unpredictable natural variability due to the AO. The subsequent period of 1990-2010 indicates a clear trend of the AO to be negative. The global warming has been stopped by natural variability superimposed on the gentle anthropogenic global warming. The important point is that the IPCC models have been tuned perfectly to fit the rapid warming during 1970-1990 by means of the ice-albedo feedback (anthropogenic forcing) which is not actually observed. IPCC models are justified with this wrong scientific basis and are applied to project the future global warming for 100 years in the future. Hence, we warn that the IPCC models overestimate the warming trend due to the mislead Arctic Oscillation.”

Solar AO Link.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
In recent weeks, meteorologists have noticed a change in the jet stream's normal pattern. Its waves normally shift east, dragging weather systems along with it. But in mid-July they ground to a halt, says Mike Blackburn of the University of Reading, UK (see diagram). There was a similar pattern over the US in late June.

Stationary patterns in the jet stream are called "blocking events". They are the consequence of strong Rossby waves, which push westward against the flow of the jet stream. They are normally overpowered by the jet stream's eastward flow, but they can match it if they get strong enough. When this happens, the jet stream's meanders hold steady, says Blackburn, creating the perfect conditions for extreme weather.

A static jet stream freezes in place the weather systems that sit inside the peaks and troughs of its meanders. Warm air to the south of the jet stream gets sucked north into the "peaks". The "troughs" on the other hand, draw in cold, low-pressure air from the north. Normally, these systems are constantly on the move – but not during a blocking event.

There is some tentative evidence that the sun may be involved. Earlier this year astrophysicist Mike Lockwood of the University of Reading, UK, showed that winter blocking events were more likely to happen over Europe when solar activity is low – triggering freezing winters (New Scientist, 17 April, p 6).

Now he says he has evidence from 350 years of historical records to show that low solar activity is also associated with summer blocking events (Environmental Research Letters, in press). "There's enough evidence to suspect that the jet stream behaviour is being modulated by the sun," he says.

Blackburn says that blocking events have been unusually common over the last three years, for instance, causing severe floods in the UK and heatwaves in eastern Europe in 2007. Solar activity has been low throughout."

I suspect that factors such as wind friction inputs are included in some manner. The main suite of General Circulation Models from what I read do embody a wide range of factors but sometimes reduced to constants due sometimes to lack of computing power and indeed knowledge. There are a few models that are relatively simple in comparison and from a few results look to do just as well. To your point about highly-touted, there is a press release just in the last few days that the capability of such models have plateaued now for several years and indeed some agencies have stopped publishing longer range forecasts due to poor predictive quality. The PDF
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-i...
discusses plans to open up the system and look for opportunities to improve the methodology (I think they want bigger computers :) ), there are now also parallel moves by several agencies world wide to redetermine the Temperature record as this has been questioned, apparently some US climate scientists do not use NASA-GISS preferring HADCRUT for accuracy and there are even law suits regarding the various products. So a lot of challenging stuff taking place and also a move to be more open with the data to enable wider study.
There are some amateur groups that are rebuilding some models in current computer languages as some of it is a motley collection of historic code. Will make it easier to actually evaluate and try such as you mention.
I do see metrics quoted sometimes for what does get moved around but no links to hand. If spot anything will post. I did read something related to your point about water vapor, it discusses a process that is close to what you are addressing I think. Unfortunately the full report is behind a paywall.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/325/5946/1374
but have a intro:
~~~~~~~~~~
a new report has identified even more places where current climate models get atmospheric circulation and the hydrological cycle wrong. Christian Frankenberg of the SRON-Netherlands Institute for Space Research, et al., in a paper entitled “Dynamic Processes Governing Lower-Tropospheric HDO/H2O Ratios as Observed from Space and Ground,” used a previously overlooked technique to obtain global information with high sensitivity near ground level. This part of the lower troposphere, the bottom 1-2 km of the atmosphere, has previously been missed because earlier satellites used thermal infrared frequencies lacking sensitivity in that area. At the start of the report the authors explain the motivation for their work:

Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. As saturation vapor pressure increases exponentially with temperature, a positive feedback effect with respect to the current global warming trend is expected and confirmed by satellite measurements over the ocean. However, highly complex interactions via cloud formation and the release of latent heat, impacting convection, complicate matters and seem not to be well represented in climate models, especially in the tropics. Land-atmosphere coupling adds further uncertainties. An accurate knowledge of hydrological cycles and feedback mechanisms is therefore indispensable for reliable weather and climate predictions.

Evaporation, precipitation and atmospheric circulation are all part of the hydrological or water cycle that constantly recirculates water throughout the biosphere. People have kept rainfall records on land for centuries, but there are many isolated regions and vast expanses of ocean for which no records are available. Isotope measurements of water vapor can give important information regarding precipitation and evaporation. Using remote sensing from satellites, proxy readings from even Earth's remotest regions can be gathered. Atmospheric applications have traditionally focus on isotopes as a proxy for exchange processes in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere and few models incorporated any water vapor components for other factors. The results of this report, which extends observations to the lower atmosphere, will hopefully allow current models to be corrected.

The trick here is that part of the water vapor in Earth's atmosphere has, as one of its molecule's two hydrogen atoms, an isotope of hydrogen called deuterium or D. Such isotropic water molecules are referred to as Hydrogen Deuterium Oxide, or HDO for short. Owing to the large spectral displacement of the rotational and vibrational modes of HDO, it has spectroscopic absorption lines distinctly different from those of H2O. This allows simultaneous measurements of the relative abundance of HDO and normal H2O by the SCIAMACHY (Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric Chartography) instrument aboard the European Space Agency (ESA)’s environmental research satellite ENVISAT.

For the first time a global picture of near surface HDO/H2O levels can be constructed. The HDO abundance relative to standard mean ocean water (SMOW) in delta-notation (δD) is shown below. Figure 1A from the Sciencereport shows the global δD distribution as derived from 3 years of SCIAMACHY spectra. From these data, the isotopic fractionation of water provides deeper insight into the global hydrological cycle as evaporation and condensation processes deplete heavy water in the gas phase.

yes, very succinct. :)

And I get marked down for bringing details to the discussion. Are there really that many people who do not check details for themselves?
I blame the consumer society. :)

The idea of adding water to combustion engines has a lot going for it, seems to be revived whenever there is an oil shock. Of course, older cars have this feature of being open to modification. :) I know those that seek them out. A challenge for the modern car is handling the Engine Management system, with so many sensors to manage efficiency and emissions. It may have a tendency in the worse case it may declare a serious problem and switch to safe mode. Such is modern life. :)

I have come across an answer to another question, the volume of water in the atmosphere is 3,094 cubic miles, that is about 0.001% of all water. Human contribution is about 0.001% of that.
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/watercycleatmosphere.html
The role of additional clouds has been in the news, the low Solar activity is creating an opportunity to look at the role of GCRs in cloud formation. There is the Earthshine project that has been reporting an increase in cloud/albedo extent and this was falling up to about 1998 and has had a rise since, about 3%.

Similar to your idea there is that idea of using ships lofting sea water into the atmosphere. With the above current residence figures the contribution by such devices can be considered. There is the caveat that the amount of water that can be suspended is dependent on atmospheric temperature and likely other factors. Recent data suggests that water vapour content has been falling but poor measurement regimes also might prevail here.
Talking of car based schemes, I do recall one idea to fit filters to car radiators to be used to catch airborne particles.

Getting back to the Icecap I came across this site.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/

It provides data from the buoys placed in the ice, records the drift and temperatures and also some have Web Cams. :)

the disease is GREED

Way to go Jan thanks i voted you up your a trooper for the good fight keep it up!!!

^1

Wow, just like another certain stalker here, you can't stay away from me, can you?

I can't even begin to bother with people who say CO2 is not part of this. It is obvious those who do are just regurgitating talking points.

Yes, just like the 35,000 who died in France in 2003. We are way beyond the stage when we should have to educate people about how Co2 works in the atmosphere to trap heat.

For a current sea level guide this is actively updated: http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

For a longer duration http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Wikipedia:Sea%20level%20rise

well shit

I know, the news generally doesn't talk about all the catastrophes occuring because of warming. Morocco is so hot now that people have to have ac whereas before it got cold enough at night that people's houses would cool down. Glaciers that have been around for centuries are melting and causing floods that wipe out villages in the himalayas. ocean currents are changing so warm air doesn't get swept up to colder places like the northwest or new england so they are getting colder. It's a systematic change that we're not ready for, but people are so shortsighted they just hear global warming and assume everything is supposed to get hotter.

someone voted your comment down and what exactly have you said that was incorrect... nothing why are people so afraid what do we have to lose by going green , nothing! Its weird what do we have to gain jobs and at the very least renewable energy oh how horrible. The conspiracy to have abundant safe energy.

"Companies that emit less carbon than their credits allow can profit by selling any excess credits on the open market, "
I have yet to see how this works other than inserting another layer of financial trading imposing a burden on the back of those putting real value into the economy. We have recently seen where this gets us. Look at the early warning signs from Enron that was pioneering this. Taking credits from one user and selling to another does not reduce consumption, the initial caps may help but there are already many examples of fraud in this area and Italian investigators have just seized 2 Billion from a Mafia run "green" scam.
Then we read just this week that people in India are being dispossessed of their land by US and European offset schemes.

The energy problem needs real solutions, not a new colonialism and exploitation no matter where it is happening.
For a reminder of the urgency here this might be of interest.
Some are into the mass die-off but rest assured it will not be selective accept for the few.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/conference/2009/session3/Sweetnam.pdf

And it isn't only the carbon, it's the methane which lasts longer, and we've had quite a lot of it released to trap more heat since the BP ecocide disaster, and the natural gas drilling we are doing all over the world. Deforestation, agricultural methods that are driving carbon out instead of keeping it in soil, destroying wetlands and places that once were natural sinks, etc. It is all culminating into one perfect storm.

______________________
For example:

A frozen peat bog in western Siberia the size of France and Germany put together contains about 500 billion tons of carbon. Western Siberia has warmed faster than almost anywhere else on the Earth, with an increase in average temperature of about 3C in the last 40 years.

Even more Siberian permafrost is under the ocean, an area six times the size of Germany containing about 540 billion tons of carbon. That submarine permafrost is perilously close to thawing. Three to 12 kilometers from the coast the sea sediment is just below freezing. The permafrost has grown porous, there is a loss of rigor in the frozen sea floor, and the surrounding seawater is highly oversaturated with solute methane.

f the Siberian (submarine) permafrost-seal thaws completely and all the stored gas escapes, the methane content of the planet's atmosphere would increase twelve fold. The result would be catastrophic global warming.” --"A Storehouse of Greenhouse Gases Is Opening in Siberia," Spiegel, 17 April '08
____________________

So again I ask: WHY THE HELL ARE WE STILL ARGUING WITH PEOPLE WHO WILL NEVER GET IT? They are the guilty ones. What has to happen to impress on people that this is damn serious? And yet, the BIG discussion question for the day is about Lady freaking Gaga. ARGHHHH.

Well personally based on my own research on this, I think we will pass it within the next decade if things stay as they are now.

You may well be right. I will still try to hope that the human species wakes up in time instead of getting caught up in all of the noise. It is very disconcerting.

I truly appreciate that. I do believe we are entering a period of consequences we are ill prepared for because we are too busy fighting about it.

And just to add Gravity_Man, I wish with all of my heart that every last bit of ice ever lost would return. I wish that all of the methane would be sucked back into the permafrost. There seems to be some misconception by skeptics and partisan politicians and their followers that we are enjoying this, and it is asburd. Those who truly love this planet and want to preserve it for future generations are heartsick over this, and I and many others are justifiably angry that our government does absolutely NOTHING but stand there as if watching a car crash happening. So , in the end they too are the guilty ones.

And you are correct in that natual variations happening are part of this and being greatly accentuated by human activity. For anyone to dispute that humans are part of this is clearly not thinking of the big picture for their own personal reasons at this point. And it isn't just about the climate, it is about the disease and pollution these fuel sources are creating. Potable water will be in short supply as well within the next fifteen years, and then you ain't seen nothing when it comes to resource wars.

i agree with you..so when do we impeach the president about BP?? he said the bucks stops at him..

are you still driving your car?? are you still using paper?? are you still farting..how much garbage do you throw out?? is your computer running on solar power??? do you live in a treehouse?? how about your clothing???? did you make it yourself out of a garden or was it manufactured by a factory???

what you need to do is SEE YOUR own part on your death equation..then we start from there..and are you willing to change your life for your crusade..NOT UNTIL I SEE THAT...i see it just another money making con...

again.....i will let you know as soon as it gets hot here in southern california..cause im freezing my ass

LOL.. a so-called catastrophic global warming will pass in a decade??????????
your research??

okay let me play along..what do we need to do so all of this will end in 10 YEARS....

WHERE DID I SAY THIS WILL ALL END IN 10 YEARS? Point it out, because I said no such thing. I stated that based on what I am researching and reading and the data out here, I believe that the planet will reach a tipping point within the next decade should current rates of emissions and our behavior remain the same. That is not saying the world will end. This is one reason why Anyone who posts on these threads who you already know is a usual suspect in posting msinformation and twisting the language to dismiss the importance of the information presented isn't worth the time to respond to. And you teach a great lesson: pay attention in English class. And what's with the LOL? This isn't a joke.

http://Current.com

Marked down again for providing relevant current information, For a site called Current.com there does seems to be a fear of current knowledge. The picture of energy uplift is from just a week ago.