• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

AGW and rising sea levels (2 Viewers)

Chosun,

To put this into reasonable historical and scientific perspective I'd recommend reading section "4.2.1 Glaciers and Greenland ice sheet" in Judith Curry's 2018 "Special Report: Sea Level and Climate Change," pg. 24. Although I attached the article to an earlier post I suspect not many people read it. I've attached it again for those who may have missed/dismissed it.

Curry serves on [the] NASA Advisory Council Earth Science Subcommittee whose mission is to provide advice and recommendations to NASA on issues of program priorities and policy. She is a recent member of the NOAA Climate Working Group and a former member of the National Academies Space Studies Board and Climate Research Group. (from Wiki)

Ed

The Curry "Special Report" ignores a large and comprehensive body of literature and observations from the Greenland ice cap, including records spanning thousands of years. It is a classic example of cherry picking, as is pretty much everything else in the piece; and yes I have read it, read a fair few of the cited references, looked up the 'consensus view' papers that were often omitted or selectively quoted from, etc. It is a highly selective article and the author commits several academic no-no's (e.g. presenting ideas as her own that have been extensively published on already by others). I see no reason why anyone would recommend this, other than to reinforce already entrenched (and in this case erroneous) views.
I also want to point out that Prof. Curry left academia several years ago, and that she is not an expert on sea level rise (her specialty is in atmospheric physics). She is/was a highly distinguished scientist, so I am frankly baffled by the poor quality of this "special report".

I've attached two recent studies that provide a historical and scientific perspective of Greenland ice cap dynamics (neither was cited by Curry).
As always, happy to provide additional material if anyone is interested.

Cheers,
J
 

Attachments

  • Graeter et al 2018 Geophysical Research Letters.pdf
    6.3 MB · Views: 5
  • Trusel et al 2018 Nature.pdf
    10.2 MB · Views: 7
Nohatch,

I'd encourage you to read this book first before announcing that she's clueless about sea-level dynamics.

From pg. 23 of the Curry report:
Chen et al. (2017) provides an updated analysis of the budget of sea level rise during the
satellite era (Figure 4.2). The key finding is that global mean sea level rise increased
from 2.2 ± 0.3 mm/year in 1993 to 3.3 ± 0.3 mm/year in 2014. The mass contributions
(from glacier and ices melting) increased from about 50% in 1993 to 70% in 2014. The
largest increase has come from the contribution from the Greenland ice sheet, which is
less than 5% of the global mean sea level rate during 1993 but more than 25% during
2014. The increase in the rate of sea level rise is largely attributed to increased melting
of the Greenland ice sheet.

So what's the beef? I'm not at all convinced you read the report or have the knowledge to criticize it. The two reports you attached have to do with glacier dynamics, not sea-level rise.

Ed
 
Last edited:
This one is unbelievably out of date. Now down to close to $100 per kW/h.

Rob
I posted this just as food for thought and as a launchpad for further research on specific current numbers.

It is not so much about the cost, as the efficiencies, resource limits, and the amounts of alternative energy required, particularly for heavy transport. It's quite sobering to think how the whole distribution system underpins the modern global economy.

The last time the world explored biofuels to any great extent the price of food crops soared to deleterious levels, and the world's soil resource is in worse condition since then, so the answer doesn't lie there.

Food for thought !




Chosun :gh:
 
Freedom gas. . ..

The Department of Energy Is Now Calling Fossil Fuels “Molecules of Freedom” and “Freedom Gas”

Photons from the sun are free too.

I'm very surprised that for a country that is so whoo-har and ra-ra about it's military, that it hasn't 'plugged' the strategic deficit of relying upon foreign oil and the unsavory regimes connected (fracking the living heck outta your environment notwithstanding ! :)

My military connections tell me that Generals regularly raise the issue .....
I know it's something Trump has mentioned too, but I don't see any big renewable energy and sustainability push :h?:

Thank goodness for Elon Musk .... I hope some shadowy black ops department is working on cloning him ! :) :t:




Chosun :gh:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top