We live in Grenada in the Caribbean. Plenty of sun, trade winds and strong possibilities of geothermal energy. We own a small hotel and have the only electric bus on the island, there are 4 electric cars. Our government does not want electric vehicles as they do no generate taxes from fuel and spares parts. So there is a 75% import tax imposed on electric vehicles. We have significant PV solar panels at the hotel (true blue bay) but these are considered illegal by the utility company that is 50% owned by the government. We live under the threat of being shut off by the utility. Our power on the island comes from imported diesel generation and we pay about 35p ($0.45 usd) per kwhr for this polluting form of power. We could easily have 100% renewables. A few wind generators and solar arrays and we would be independent of foreign oil for ever. But we won’t do it. Big money and greedy politicians who mouth platitudes about climate change have no interest in moving away from the carbon based fuels. They will go to cop 26 have a wonderful time on tax payers money, they will make meaningless pledges and return home to the status quo. Fortunately the young folks around the world are becoming more proactive. We can only hope they can make the necessary changes soon and quickly.
Agree. But be careful not to greenwash electric vehicles, electricity pollutes by its means of productions (most of it is still coal and nuclear). What is required is as little private vehicles as possible.
@@bonatoc he did cover that, he mentioned the diesel generator, try Citroen Ami, little electric plastic cube car, that's where the efficiency lies, in size.
You, as a citizen of Grenada should not expect the young people to do it; you should be taking action. You have it a lot easier than bigger countries where nearly nothing gets done unless a pandemic breaks out. The city I live in has more people than all of Grenada. Where there's a will, there's a way. 😠😷😷
I'm very impressed. Lots of people talk, desire, and dream, but you're actually doing something, at your own risk, and in the teeth of considerable official hostility. BRAVO! Also, it's interesting to hear the particulars of your political obstacles. The status quo is entrenched everywhere and needs shaking up! Best wishes.
We humans are easily distracted. We get so interested in one crisis after another that we tend to forget about the greater problem at hand. Meanwhile the clock keeps ticking.
the clock has ticked past the point of us doing anything even more so with the pandemic putting climate to the back of most peoples minds, along with the economies needing to ramp back up. China is also putting a coal plant online every week and India isnt far behind they are industrializing and its hard to argue with them they want what the rest of the world has had, its going to devastate the environment two of the worlds largest populations having an industrial revolution at the same time at a pace unseen before, enjoy the ride once things ramp up its going to be wild
I started tracking Arctic sea ice disappearance back in August 2000. Made a move out of California during record breaking hot summers in 2006, to Oregon, where we are having record wildfires driven by unusually high winds and dry conditions. I thought I wouldn't experience the effects of abrupt climate change or see the Arctic sea ice disappear during my lifetime, but it's happening. As a species, humans have earned rapid extinction due to their exploitation of each other, other species, and the planet as a whole, and I say good riddance.
Penguin Uprighter spoken like a religious zealot that will not address facts. Speak to facts, science and truth to discredit someone if you don't you are preaching a faith.
Lol! Where are we going, exactly?? Does anyone believe the Earth or God cares??? The over whelming majority of people on the planet believe in some God existing as a true fact. Based on that, what is there to worry about besides absolutely NOTHING? New York City was predicted to be underwater 40 years ago by now by Al Gore, but it's not. Not to worry, AOC and Bernie is America's salvation and socialism will save us. Look at how Russia, China, Cuba and Venezuela have become their promised paradises for their people.
Beeg - even if the end is near, it feels good to use human knowledge to lessen your impact on our demise. The ipcc recommend that a plant based diet is the best way to curtail climate change on a personal level. Peace!
Rick Dees is a product of human hubris. Hell, you have 200k dead in the US and they're still arguing over the semantics. Throw in something as slow-moving as global warming and it just flies over their heads. The video did mention an odd point though of which I had an interesting debate with a person who believed that CO2 rather than being a blanket, is rather instead a harbinger of the planet's control. In most other warming trends COs followed instead of led.
@@alainarchambault2331 When did YOU stopped using Air Conditioning, driving your car, or using carbon based electricity? After YOU do then YOU will be justified in YOUR hubris. Until them F.O. with your blaming others you never met and know nothing about. When you clean up your life then you won't be a hypocrite any more.
@@rickdees251 I stopped using air conditioning , I no longer have a car , and I am building a couple solar trackers and hope to be on solar , wind , and ethanol (for cooking and my welder) in 18 months. By then then I will also have my garden going well , I can tell you everything that could go wrong has gone wrong , but it has become my hobby and I like working on it , and how many hobbies will pay for themselves ? My latest crazy project is a ethanol fueled toaster , since my electric toaster died.
To think that the energy required to melt ice can heat up water from 0 to 79 degrees Celsius is mind-boggling on its own, and should freak everybody out when considering the vast areas around the world where ice is currently melting away due to global warming.
Sea level has been rising for 10,000+ years, as it naturally should given natural global warming. Stop trying to fight it because you can't without making things worse, environmentally, in the long run. The real problem is liberal overpopulation. The world would be much greener if we stopped trying to feed the starving and let Sick Olds dies from a pandemic... Really, slaughtering everyone under the age of 30 would be the most humane solution for The Future Kids (the weapon of choice for all blackmailing liberal wet dreamers of La La Land)... blah, blah... The best thing we can do for the Future Kidz is KILL 5 BILLION KIDS AND OAPs...! Everything else is liberal, wishy-washy bullshit... from WILD NATURE'S POV.
@@Dundoril If all the ice covering Antarctica , Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt, sea levels would rise about 70 meters (230 feet). The ocean would cover all the coastal cities. And land area would shrink significantly. "not that bad" really?
yes, it is.. and in many cases uncovering artifacts from thousands of years ago telling you the ice was this low or lower before, probably many times. As more ice melts, you get more freshwater in the system. as you get more water that can be picked up by evaporation and dropped again as rain. you will get more rain as the snow melts then you will get more snow. it's a cycle that happens frequently in our planet's history. This is not man-made and that narrative is only to control you and take control of all aspects of your life. it's bullshit. the scientists that back that claim are all in the employ of the politicians that push that narrative.
All of this was detail by the Lovelock's Gaia theory. I wish more people had an understanding of multiple non linear feed back systems. The example of acoustic feedback provided a good analogy. Working with electronics it is easy to see how the erosion of gain and phase margins in feed back networks leads to growing system instability resulting in oscillations that can swing between extremes in the form of limit cycles, ending with the whole system switching to a new state. I have worked with digital audio circuits that include multi loop digital IIR filters, with these it is possible to change the feed back coefficients and watch the system output gain increase, and change from a stable state, to one of oscillation, sometime with a chaotic nature. Obviously, even complex analogue/digital electronics are simple compared to those which control the earth's climate, but watching the output of such systems on an oscilloscope does give a feel of how the climate changes might evolve, and why extremes of low as well as high temperatures are a feature, and an indication of increasing instability. It's all about pumping more and more energy into the system. For those who have a feel for what is happening, it is terrifying, because positive feedback speeds up the response of a system, and the feedback builds exponentially from a tiny trigger event. One can speculate that an event such as a storm, or a volcanic eruption, might be the trigger that shows the earth's overall feedback has moved from negative to positive, rapidly moving the climate to a new stable state, which maybe completely incompatible with life.
@@incognitotorpedo42the characteristics of even a simple linear audio amplifier can be changed to that of a digital monostable by application of increasing positive feedback. If voltage is used as an analogue for temperature, this represents rapid switching of temperature from one extreme to the other. The ripples in the jet stream are now very good at forecasting the weather in the UK, as it passed almost directly overhead. It is only necessary to observe which side of the jet stream the UK is with respect to the north pole. If we are on the pole side it is going to be cold and wet as the air flows down from the pole, on the other side we are blasted by equatorial hot air plumes, and it is very hot. The climate is like a juggernaut with its own inertia and momentum. While the feedback is negative it resists events that might change it. When the feedback becomes positive, even a small event make it change dramatically. Like a HGV at the top of a hill, start it rolling and it will be impossible to stop. Thinking about it, the latent heat of melting ice introduces hysteresis into the system. Where heat can be added with no change in temperature. Coupled to other feedback loops, this allows stresses to build in the system before a sudden jump in temperature once all the ice has melted.
@@jeffdunnell508 apples and oranges do not share similar differential equations unless refering to their motion. There are ample examples of physical and electrical/electronic being described by similar sets of equations, producing similar results. Every school student is taught a concept of voltage and current in terms of water pressure and flow rate. Mass spring and damper systems are modelled as resistors, inductors and capacitors. The same equations apply to temperature and heat flow. Before the invention of the digital computer, analogue computers used these principles to model such systems with operational amplifiers, resistors, inductors and capacitors. My analogy is not stretching this very far. Obviously the climate models are far more complex with a web of cross linked feedback systems, but the principles are the same. The important thing is that an understanding of one gives a good feel for the other. The latent heat of ice melting is clearly going to put a plateau point of inflection in the temperature curve, and will hide the effects of heat being added to the system. Once the ice has gone, the full effects of the heat input will become apparent in a rapid rise in temperature. This will appear as hysteresis, with a snap action change in temperature. There are other areas where a trigger point is reached, that will result in a sudden change in temperature. One example is the melting of methane hydrates in the deep ocean. The sudden release of these stored green house gases will be a permanent modification to the system response, as the methane released will not spontaneously return to its trapped ice state. The HGV analogy was included for those not familiar with activation energy and potential energy diagrams.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Thank you for the clear and concise format. I have spent my entire adult life working in power plants, mines and oil refineries. Those who deny human agency in climate change are deluding themselves.
My dad who was making millions, got out of the oil business in the 50's because he said he couldn't keep being a part of killing the planet. He was a simple man who knew what he saw happening was true. How hard could it have been for the leaders of this world to see what he saw? Ignorance is bliss, but not for long.
Thanks for this clear, concise, relatable presentation and the calm, coherent delivery free of flash, gimmicks and especially jump cuts! Other creators would be wise to emulate your work.
I feel myself going back and forth so much between being hopeful and utterly depressed when it comes to the climate. Technology is evolving, big finance is starting to see the risk of climate risk and shifting money, renewable energy is cheaper in many parts of the world than fossil fuels... but I fear we are too late... And personally it's killing me. My wife and I would love to start a family. We have biological clocks ticking and don't have 10-15 years to monitor the situation for a bit longer. But... is it even ethical to bring a child into this world right now? On the other hand: people have always found their ways, even during huge wars.... but then again, this is global... Can you understand the feeling and see the emotional pendulum ?!? All this is so unnecessary and we could have everything we have now, more and better if we weren't so @# short-sighted on a collective scale.
A bit bi polar, we certainly need some global approach to steadying numbers, at times gone by governments and royalty have exalted their citizens to have as many as possible Victorians wanted ten or more to populate the new world, Commonwealth and as recently as after the war we've had baby booms, conditions have been optimised to triple in the last fifty years, by emphasising food production and house building, sure its slowing in the west but not through any political policy, just apathy by the women.
Why is no one even remotely realistic when it comes to climate change? People are either denying it or they are building an apocalyptic cult around it. Rapid climate change is bad, and we should prevent it, but even if we don't, live will be better for the average person 100 years in the future than it was 100 years in the past.
I understand your pain - I feel family and friends are just not interested in changing if it costs them any more money, and at 52 with no kids I'm glad in a way as I see things in the next 50 years not looking good for children born today. I do have hope that some kids born now find ways to fix some of these things, eg carbon capture, Fusion power, I just wont be around to see it.
@JZ's Best Friend Nobody can predict for sure but I think there will be another human population bottleneck...another reset. And if that does happen you can almost guarantee advanced technology will not be in the reboot program.
The BBC frequently have climate alarmists - sorry scientists on there broadcasts, you never hear the other side of the storey though - sceptics no matter how qualified they are. Check out Tony Heller
@@lorenzoblum868 Estimated as is the entire scare story! It's estimated that developing China and India over the next 4 decades will produce 10 times more Man-made CO2 than in all of mankind's history! YIKES! Here is what they're not telling you, The Percent Of Naturally produced greenhouse gasses will exceed man-made by %99.5 Let that sink in!
Between the Coronavirus and the global recession, which we're being told is 8x worse than the banking crisis. I don't believe there'll be the money, or anybody not distracted by other crises that will even be looking at dealing with the climate crisis. It's going to be a tough ask due to this "perfect storm".
Thing is, fighting climate change is not a money-gone-for-good type of thing. Strict Co2 taxing would radically reset the incentives on how we do things (convincing/forcing those thriving under our current setting which is immensly harmful might come at a cost) but ultimately we'd be doing things differently but not necessarily have to put up with "less". As long as we come up with a forseeable set of new rules everyone would be in board. Whats really bothering me is the uncertainty about the US and wether they are headed for some Civil War 2.0 type scenario that'll drag us all down with them or if these past years are the last roar or #boomersupernova before changing demographics can overcome what at this point is corrupt minority rule : /
The economic crash will not look like 'The Economy' if it gets anything like 8x as bad. It will look like famine. That wont be good for most corporations. Putting the world back together will be quite profitable. Poverty has a way of making people aware of their surroundings. The 2 may make us less likely to repeat the worst mistakes and maybe even fix some of the damage. Self interest and all. People will be less tolerant of greed [not all, of course] and more into life as a thing to be lived, not just endured. Possibly. If we dont allow complete Dictatorship to take hold.
Very consistent with all that I've learned to date. Peer-reviewed science tends to be quite conservative in their predictions but some experts estimate that the pace of global warming will now be rapid going forward. Dramatic climate disruption is therefore inevitable which will have devastating effects on the habitat which we depend upon to grow food at scale.
As usual, your approach is proffesional, accurate and clear. Thank you. Since I was a young man I was worried about the climate change. I saw with my own eyes the glaciers of the Patagonian continental ice sheet dissapear or reduce in my lifetime. When I saw for the first time the Upsala glacier, in 1995, it had 65km long, and 130m height, 15 years later it had 55km long and 70m height in the front. Recently it is completely fracturated, with no more than 50m tall. This is in the north of the formation, the warmest place. The Spegazzini glacier, in 1995 was 130m tall, 15 years later only 50m, it is in the middle of the ice sheet. And the famous Perito Moreno glacier keeps its dimensions because all the other glaciers give it ice at an increasing rate, and because that keeps its size, when the other melts, Perito Moreno, in the south, recieves more ice than loses. But this is temporary. When I was a child, Patagonia was very cold and dry, with very few places habitable. Now in northern Patagonia (La Pampa province) the climate is less dry, and the winters aren't as cold as they were. In central Patagonia, winters with -30°C was common, not anymore. All this happened in only 30 years, it is terrifying.
Thanks for this first hand testimonial. The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
How can the arctic be "melting faster than we thought" when we used to have predictions of ice free summers by 2005? Saying we might have ice free summers by 2035 is 30 years behind the predictions made in the 1990's.
Glad to see someone is finally discussing the heat of fusion of ice. If that doesn't begin to wake people up, maybe add in what happens to air if all that excess heat goes into the atmosphere. We become quite literally (ahem) toast.
well, this pandemic is somehow show how people react about that, ...do people know about the virus? most likely they know, ...do they care?....well....
The pedant in me is thinking that when ice melts it is a diffusion process. So even though the sentiment is around using 'fusion' rather than 'melting' is unhelpful,
@@BernardLS Nope it takes exactly the same amount of energy. IE the amount you have to take out to take water to ice is exactly the same as what you put in to turn ice into water. That;s the physics I was learning at 13.
Unfortunately, it would seem a large segment of the human population is indirectly descended from the ostrich family and refuse to pull their heads out of the sand.
There are too many humans. We urgently need to get rid of about 5 billion people that just consume resources without doing anything useful. Or at least prevent them from reproducing.
There is another wrinkle in the latent heat story. I'll use a mixed British/modern notation since for this (and possibly only this) example it is easier to follow It takes 80cal (small calories)to melt a gram of ice and that same 80cal, as mentioned, would raise the temperature of a gram of water by 80 degrees. It takes 540cal of energy to evaporate a gram of water. Of course when a gram of water vapor condenses into water it gives out exactly that amount of heat. Now consider what happens when a warm wet wind from the ever warmer ocean flows over that big ice cube we call Greenland. Each gram of water vapor that condenses on the ice gives out enough heat to melt 6.75grams of ice. Add to this that the cooled air, containing less water vapor, then flows down the slope in a density current and heats up as it is pressurized and you have some serious melting from Greenland. (by the by, dry air is denser than humid air). A body of air flowing from the top of Greenland at about 3km up, down to sea level would increase in temperature by about 30 degrees C. Of course it would not heat up as it would be giving up this heat to the ice, melting more of it.
Do you think there is such a thing as "knowledge amplification" where if you get the facts close enough to the ear, enough brains will be warmed with truth that a tipping point will occur and some change will take place?
Nice concept but no. For some no facts are acceptable enough even if driven into the skull with a 12lb sledgehammer. The only chance is to educate people properly before they get exposed to propaganda.
Short of the mass media telling the truth on climate change and putting out a load of programmes on what government, people and organisations must do and are doing I don't know. Even weekly and sometimes daily record breaking extreme weather events don't seem to get people on the street to demand action least of all our politicians acting on the scale necessary. A frequent summary of the climatic events that have occurred in the last week or fortnight and a monthly or bimonthly summary would be a good start to get a groundswell of people changing their behaviour. It can be done as governments well know with the covid pandemic and their very own government advisory adverts on various issues but notably alcohol, tobacco and gambling but alos drink drive, seatbelts and various other advertising campaigns. The SR 1.5 Celsius report was very clear in that we need action across all levels and sectors of society. It involves change on the personal and national levels and everything in between. At the moment what we see is government giving thinly veiled excuses, targets that are way off in the future and scapegoating of individuals for plastic waste etc.There is more concern about the discarded fizzy water bottle than the energy gone into its manufacturing, distribution, waste of resources and a quiet disregard of its marginal contribution to GDP and party coffers. We certainly need "knowledge amplification" which is what NGOs seek to do translating that into action needs a lot more coordination and involvement. Consider this: Around 70% of people vote, a smaller percentage give to environmental NGOS, a smaller proportion still are involved in letter writing and lobbying and an even smaller proportion gets on the streets. A smaller proportion still are prepared to be arrested and defend themselves in court. Yet over 80% of people are concerned. Have you seen how many followers the IPCC youtube channel has?
It's really hard to argue warming with science when the actual science says it's cooling. I wonder how long it takes to convince those people they've been fooled. MAYBE I SHOULD SHOUT IT AT YOU!
Everything we do comes with a cost. The problem is not enough of us have a clue what this cost is. The ones that do know and could do something about it are generally in denial or don't care.
@@grindupBaker I don't mean the cost of widgets or anything other products or service on which business (some humans) put a monitory value. I mean the mass extinctions going on all around us that will eventually result in the extinction of civilisation as we know it. Not withstanding the inevitable unpredictable catastrophes, volcanic eruptions or a large meteor strikes occur in the mean time. Nothing lasts for eternity in this chaotic universe.
It sucks living in this time but having a conscience. It's worse if you're broadly educated and can see how these things are going to interact. I goddamn wish I had the sociopathy of some of our leaders. I mean....I know that's basically why we are in this position now... but at this point it would be a blessing. At least for me personally.
I think there was a study that found that 30% of CEOs of large corporations were sociopaths. Ruthless drive for profit and no social conscience. Walmart and Amazon come to mind.
experiment. Place two glasses below the lamp. In one fill with cold water and ice cubes, in the second fill with just water at near freezing . Place a thermometer in each and watch the temperature change over a period of time.
We are already too late massive carbon reduction should have started in the 1970's as Pres Jimmy Carter wanted. Our oceans are already dying that is extremely major.
Massive carbon reduction means massive forest and plant reduction...we already have TOO little CO in the atmosphere to sustain healthy plant and forest life.
This video lecture for the citizen scientist provides a good overview of the convergence of multiple feedback loops hitting this delicate region at once and latent heat. This doesn't typically get enough attention. This is a potentially deadly oversight as we continue to learn that the modeling is not robust enough. Also, I got the JHAT App! Nice work JHAT! Your channel and resources are much needed. BTW Dave, did you hear the rumor going around that the ORNL Summit Supercomputer (MOSAIC Polarstern) has predicted a BOE/ice-free summer Arctic in the next 3 years? I have not seen an actual paper to this effect, but it would be worth finding if there is one. Likely, we in the citizen science community need to Ask a Scientist on the MOSAIC Project, an online service. I will look into it. But if you hear anything about this keep us all posted too. Most of the scientific literature in the credible and peer-reviewed sector is saying 2035, 2032 at the earliest for a BOE or ice-free summer Arctic. Everyone's watching this like hawks, so we will stay tuned.
I searched Google for the Summit Supercomputer prediction and there are no results that say within 3 years anywhere. Sounds like a doomer rumor. lol Besides, scientists make projections not predictions.
Thank you. This is the closest to a 'Understand Climate Change for Dummies' video I've come across. I'm not saying people are dummies but it breaks it down into a logical progression and in a way that non-scientists can understand. It also covers a lot of ground. Videos like these are important as it's not academia who needs to get a grasp of this but the masses. Most people with a Grade 12 level knowledge of science will understand what you've said. I'm going to post this on a website I moderate.
There is a chance that insane technological power will give us the ability to reverse climate change faster than we created it... but I wouldn't bet on it.
@SHEISTER CAM Few things: 1. We are dangerously CLOSE to next Glaciacion period: ua-cam.com/video/FR2aZc5bjUU/v-deo.htmlm59s our interglacial "Holocene" is nearly at the end if you look at *Eemian* itergacial. "Average" warm period length is 6000 year shorter than modern interglacial. 2. We will be FIRST time from 100 000 years in that planetary combination: when Four *Gas Giants* will do square in 2024. That will trigger the Glaciaion. 3. The Sun is in the Grand solar minimum! Without the Sun magnetic field, cosmic Rays will pierce the atmosphere and cool our world by seeding the clouds. Polar cold air will close to Equator warm air causing the rough weather around the world. 4. I do NOT believe in "manmade" climate change. The core of that theory "GHG effect" was proven FLASE by: - *Ideal Gas Law* www.omicsonline.org/open-access/ideal-gas-law-and-the-greenhouse-effect-2157-7617-1000468-101034.html - Atmospheric transmission graph calculation upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Atmospheric_Transmission.png (CO2 effect only +0.06 °C) - the *UN IPCC* carbon-13 isotope content: ua-cam.com/video/jr3NCCEf58A/v-deo.html Overall: think BEFORE you talk with trained *Meteorologist*
@SHEISTER CAM No matter WHAT you say, in 2024 Gas Giants do square, making the Earth orbit elongation when it will be WINTER in the Norther Hemisphere. That is CONSIDERABLE since most of the lands are there! Plus you can't do math and solving the PV=nRT equation!
@SHEISTER CAM Bahahaha! The truth is burning your eyes? Let's see you can keep with my math: *Ideal Gas Law* : PV =nRT T = 101.3 / (8.314 x 1.225/28.97) = 288.14 K ~15°C Earth black body temperature is -18.8 °C degree or 254.3 K All of that 33 degree rise without greenhouse gas effect. Venus: T=9200/8.314 x 65/43.35 = 737.99 K or ~464°C Titan: T=146.7/8.314 x 5.25/28 = 94.1K or -179°C Let's see evidence on other worlds: ua-cam.com/video/BuTmHCRJovc/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/1Y_n283fYbc/v-deo.html A coincidence? 5 time in the row? And citate from the page i linked above: "The ideal gas law is a pillar of thermodynamics for which we do not need to know the physical details. As RT is a measure of the stored thermal energy per mol, the gas law only describes a specified equilibrium condition. It does not give any details as to how the equilibrium is achieved nor to its contributing causes. Accordingly, the mean surface temperature, T0, deduced from the gas law should be equal to the one determined by other means. Therefore, it does not give any new insight concerning the energy balance, but it gives T0 a real physical meaning" And the knockout punch about the SATURTION of the CO2: ua-cam.com/video/17aNU9fKzho/v-deo.html - CO2 saturation and the cycles basing on the Sun!
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
You didn't mention the massive melting of permafrost in the affected artic circle regions that have seen record temperatures this summer. You already have a bad situation with the CO2 released annually but put into that mix the massive release of methane from these Arctic regions, then you have a much worse situation. Since Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Sad reality: its already too late, and world leaders will never do anything significant since that costs too much money. My condolences to today's young people.
I am for a plate on every grave that shows if that person denied climate change! So that i can shit and piss on this grave to give my opinion about the irresponsibility of this person!
Does not cost anything. We just have to stop financing world greatest polluters. The elephant in the room ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Not contradicting you, but European governments are considering a 500 billion Euro sea wall to protect the North sea coasts and closing off Gibraltar while some in America are considering closing off San Francisco bay to protect the Napa valley. Similar things will protect other food production zones. There are other things that can be done to address other issues, the problem is that the plebs will pay for it instead of the ones responsible. We can also move underground, but certainly there will be a population crash from 7 Billion to maybe 1-2 Billion.
Simple straightforward language that even the deniers could understand, if they could bring themselves to spend the time to listen to your explanation ! Nice one.
@@charlesnelson5187 Some people want to belive "the end" is coming soon. People like you and me we are "deniers". But, i do not think denying weather is possible?
@@1972martind28 sun has nothing to do with climate change. 3 billion years of co2 that USED to exist in the atmosphere but over 3 billion years, was stored in plant life, causing atmospheric tempatures to plung from 300F to 59F before the start of the industrial revolution. Humans are REVERSING 3 billion years of carbon sequestration. co2 REGULATES the global temperature.
You make the most difficult and sometimes confusing subjects that are relevant now,a joy to listen and learn by.calm in the face of any disaster or possible scenario. Good man
I'm alarmed only because I've been alive long enough to see for myself 4 billion extra humans in 60 short years. We've broken our only arctic air conditioner because burning rubber and gas is loud and oh so much fun. Now stupid Biden is calling Trump a climate arsonist as if he's misinformed the public all these wasted decades. Reagan immediately removed Jimmy Carter's solar panels off the white house. It was never mentioned in the nightly news. I was alive that year too.
7.812 billion at the moment. 3 billion in 1960 so at least 4.8 billion in 60 years. That I believe is about 2.5 people of an increase in global population for every second that has passed in said 60 years. Seems like a race to the bottom though I haven't lived as long. It's a pity we ever discovered that oil.
The only issue with Guy McPherson is that he lies through his teeth with his 2 huge lies in addition to his one bit of absurd baby bit of drivel about thermodynamics. If he only used a bit of junk science now & then like a "Paul Beckwith" then he'd be good enough overall. As it is though he's worse than useless.
@Bob Trenwith shouldn't be too hard to find out for sure, he was professor at the University of Arizona for twenty years, so I'm sure someone there knows. I'll leave you to unearth that "lie".
Scary but true. All those sci-fi movies about dastardly events happening? They are now coming true, before our very eyes. WE have watched Nature writhe in pain for many decades, now it's our turn. Humans are over-rated.
@@camazotzz That's an incredibly lazy analysis. Boomers were on the cutting edge of environmentalism. A carbon-based energy economy has been with us since the 1700's. Every generation has its saints and sinners. Carter and Reagan were both of the generation before the boomers. One cared about the environment, the other wanted to trample it. The oldest Gen-Xers are 55 now; they've had plenty of time to have an effect on things. There are millennials who are denialists. If you want to point fingers, point them at the people who vote for the party of climate denialism. Don't denigrate an entire generation, no matter which one it is.
@@incognitotorpedo42 It's the "Greatest Generation's" fault, they were the ones who over-produced the Boomers like popcorn! It was the destiny of the Boomers to destroy mankind, and they were remarkably efficient at it; all other talk and speculation is merely noise!
Canadian prepper.....Liked your last video....Mass production equals mass consumption equals mass destruction...It's so obvious, yet, buried so deeply in our indoctrination....
hey CP just satched your interview with Angry Prepper, tried to get him to ask if you were on the reddit page called r/Collapse? I ask this because I saw you made some comments on "slow collapse" and "activity in the arctic." I've always been a big fan of yours and not many preparing channels consider climate change as a major threat, so hearing you talk about it was pretty refreshing
Good video. Not a good situation. Things are progressing very fast. I’m starting to think that Guy McPherson is going to be close with his 2027 prediction... 🔥😫🔥
@@twirlyspitzer Sorry to hear that you have been hoodwinked by the lies. Please inform yourself about the reality, then you will be able to calm down. Well, calm down about the climate, then you will be angry at the liars.
Thanks, man. Great video. I know the movie that came out about the futility of many of our so-called solutions, and the comments on your video, probably depressed you in a frustration-overload sort of way. But this video is talking about the sort of thing that generated the pessimism of those of us who agreed with the movie ... in other words, yes, when you speak the truth of how bad it is, i do enjoy your videos. If the world were turning into a paradise, would I be as excited to read about the science of that? I don't know. But I love science, and the science says that the paradise we've enjoyed for thousands of years is going to die, so I prefer to stick with the latest facts and research. Love your intentions and your personality, you really do your best and it makes a big impact for those who need to understand these complexities. Thanks!
Thank you paintedwings74. It is a difficult line to walk between laying out the truly appalling facts about our future if we do not change quickly, and trying to champion the various ways in which we could act very quickly if we chose to. My goal is to keep as positive as possible in the presentations to try to ensure as many people as possible feel like at least trying to make the change. My fear is if I was to revert to a more fatalistic 'doom and gloom' angle, I might depress people into complete inertia. It's a tricky one, that's for sure. Thanks for your continued support though. I appreciate the candour and grace that you've demonstrated in your posts over the months.:-)
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Trolls and Deniers...pawns of extinction! They're most to blame for the fact that it's too late to save ourselves. When TSHTF, they'll be the first one's at your door demanding what you have!
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
I fell asleep around 2 videos ago and then the microphone happened and I absolutely jumped out my skin because I thought the fire alarm went off. Which was actually quite good because I was taking a nap and needed to get back to work.
Thank's a lot for your Information, you became very very good to explain and no wonder the earth behave as the earth is doing now, I do hope all the World begin to wake up.
@@charleslindsey6789 Check yourself, the liberal cult of climate change are the same cult burning cities and now forests for not getting their way. But yeah keep banging on about climate change when the world just locked down about as much as we can. Pollution is waaay below pre-pandemic levels, so jam a sock in it. :-)
@Desmond Bagley Yeah that sounds like an absolute train wreck for the environment. We're not going to be destroying the planet to save it. Also, you're wrong, the virus shut down manufacturing and reduced emissions globally. So I call bullshit.
@Kieran Kinney You're right about one thing... you are sad. Nice grand claim of seeing extinction. That's alright though, Australian Commies will throw you in jail for disagreeing, before you can hurt yourself, or the planet. Thoughts on this Desmond douchebag wanting to pollute the air and oceans further? Effing idiot, EVERYTHING means warming to that one.
The complexity of the climate is way beyond human understanding. Even NASA admits this saying, “today’s models must be improved by about a hundredfold in accuracy”, why? Because at the ocean surface, clouds generate a radiative signal 8 times greater than tripled CO2 (1120 ppm). We can't even model clouds. We don't understand the Milankovitch cycles, aerosols and the ocean currents, nor the effect of solar winds. We don't even have a reliable global temperature record. The only long term thermometer temperature record of any scale is the USA and the raw data says over the last 120 years the USA has gotten cooler. That's a fact. The models can't work. Even the great scientist Freeman Dyson knew that and said so. He says we don't have the ability to model climate, it's just too complex. Also once CO2 hits about 400 ppm it's ability to absorb heat is almost nonexistent. The physics of this is well known between water vapor and CO2 all the heat in a specific wavelength has already been absorbed. So doubling CO2 will produce very little warming. Of course the models have to put more water vapor increase in the models to get more heat absorption but that never happened in the past and is a very, very dubious assumption. CO2 was 7000 ppm in the past. We all die when CO2 hits 180 because plants can't live. The more CO2 the better!! Yes, I know I am not suppose to upset this echo chamber. Yet, if your serious go look at the the research from those that are not getting paid to produce this hysteria. Try to make a steel man out of the counter argument and you will find a different answer. It doesn't matter anyway because you can wipe the whole USA off the map and turn it into a forest it won't make a difference and the Chinese and Indian's are going to built 100's of coal plants over the next 20 years. So for sure we will see the failure of these models because CO2 is going to double again.
"The only long term thermometer temperature record of any scale is the USA and the raw data says over the last 120 years the USA has gotten cooler. That's a fact." Really? We in the Netherlands also have temperature data from the beginning of the 20th century and this clearly shows it's getting warmer. That's also a fact.
Not worse than I thought. Everyone has been high off hopium... We have never heard the phrase "not as bad as we thought". This train only goes in one direction: worse than expected. #SeeYouInHell
Humans might survive thanks to their technology, albeit in significantly reduced numbers. I feel bad for all the other species that will go extinct because of us. So much beauty will be lost.
The Exxon executives that knew about this 30 years ago and suppressed their research will be remembered as war criminals within our lifetimes. Keep up the good fight.
Remember, we still have a 5-10 year time frame to take serious action and hopefully avoid the absolute worst. Do not give up just yet. Take to the streets, defund the fossil economy, force money out of politics. It’s in actual fact now or never.
Hans, BOTH heat (110 Degrees F or 43 Degrees Celsius) AND DROUGHT DRIES trees and bushes out, so even a LITTLE spark can cause a BIG Fire! Last year, a fire resulted when a Truck in California, skidded and a spark from the truck's metal hitting a rock "sparked" a fire! THIS year, a California Couple fired off Pink or Blue Fireworks, to announce the Sex of their New Baby! The Firecrackers caused a BIG Wildfire that burned 1,000s of Acres! That would NOT happen if the Heat had not made the vegetation so dry and vulnerable to fire! In Phoenix, Arizona, it was 110 Degrees for 55 days! I submit that is NOT normal!
Very good summary, this is pretty bloody terrifying. Sadly we are stuffed as a planet. I believe some technological solutions will help mitigate the effects but we are well past the point of no return. I'm glad I don't have kids.
we are well past the point of no return, China pumps out as much pollution as Australia in 16 days as they do in a whole year, and theyve only ramped things up and are bringing a coal fired plant on every week, also India is also industrializing although at a slower rate than China. Enjoy life until the biosphere collapses then its everyone for themselves
James Lovelock, the popularizer of the Giya hypothesis, suggested that by the middle of this century the population of the earth could well be one billion. Whether or not his time line is correct, he is likely correct in the not so distant future.
Interesting, only the ocean surface temperatures have been increasing - not by alot. As the water cycles back into the deep it rapidly loses that heat. Go 50 meters down and temperatures are not changing at all. Also the latest research on ice age causation has returned some unexpected results. That as the Pacific Ocean surface temperatures increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere increases resulting in the climate cooling. Water vapor is by far the biggest green house gas. Atmospheric methane is worth a video on its own. It has a very complex interaction with the atmosphere and ultimately breaks down, on average, over 8 years into CO2 and H2O. This is through an oxidation process which again is dependent on how much water vapor is in the atmosphere i.e. different rates in different regions. And Greenland is still gaining significantly more ice than it loses every year. A particular pet hate that I have is how videos like this disingenuously show only the last 2000 years of temperature when talking about the last 10,000 years. Explaining what and why things have changed during that time is something I long await to see a video on.
Change your channel's name to "The climate and sustainable lifestyles" and take some time off researching systems science and systems dynamics, collapse of civilizations, ecological overshoots, coextinctions and evolutionary psychology. Believing that there're techno-fixes to our predicament is wasting your time and your audience's time. I know you never reply to my criticism but I hope you at least consider it. By the way, this is a great video with great analogies.
A "sustainable lifestyle" wouldn't support the type of civilisation we want. We need 24/7 electricity (you can't rely on renewables on a dark windless night), heating, medical care, food...if there were only seven people on this planet we might be able to revert to the simple life, but there are 7 billion.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
But ingenuity is the only thing sustainable, I mean regressive movement will just lead to a economic collapse. If it wasn't for the Green revolution in the 1950's vegans and vegetarians wouldn't have a say in the matter since old ways of agriculture required so so so much land if we used the same methods prior to 1950 (and was worst prior to the 1600's) we would use the equivalent land mass of USA, Canada and China just to sustain us today, that's a shit load and most lands can't be used for agriculture the world would pretty much have no forest and everything would be purely agriculture
How come nobody is talking about the Soil Carbon - 1% increase in soil organic matter captures 100 tons of CO2 per hectare and we can do this on every farm land on earth at a rate of 0.5% per year.
Nope, it is not doable. If it were, it would already have been done. The only functioning hydrogen fuelcell in service is with the German submarine fleet. Nuclear would be better and cheaper, but politically impossible there.
@@cbmech2563 Hope that's a joke. A solar minimum won't be nearly enough. As I'm sure you know, we're already heading towards it, and yet look what's happening to the temperature. Besides, what happens when it ends?
The number of views of this video is seriously depressing...Granted, I only came across it 4 months later than published. Maybe if it was titled "Polar ice-cap melting irreversible" it would've generated ten times the views but even that figure would be disheartening... considering that 2020-21 is fast proving true the worst predictions even amongst a global economic slow-down...
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Greenland still ended up at the end of this year's ice melt at just above the 10 year average. That was because it gained excess ice in the previous 2 years. The amount of snow that falls on Greenland in winter has a significant effect on the total ice mass at the end of summer. You have also not taken on board that the effect CO2 increase is logarithmic, not linear. Also you have not considered the saturation point, which some scientists think is already reached. By that I mean the point at which extra CO2 can have no further effect because it is already absorbing all the available IR radiation at the 13 to 18 micron wavelengths.
Replevideo I’ve also heard that the effect of CO2 increase is logarithmic. You sound a bit more scientific than myself but I have had practical experiences in dealing with heat and solving related problems as an industrial electrician and while servicing steam sterilisers it was completely obvious that steam is a much better conductor of heat than dry air is. Therefore I conclude that the so called number 1 green house “water vapour” would actually help heat to escape the earth more so if the earth warmed. I can’t help thinking that there might be some confusion of the definition of a green house gas, I thought that green house gases are the gasses that build up in a green house because of the design of the greenhouse.
@@Cooliemasteroz Greenhouse gases is a misnomer. It refers to atmospheric gases which are claimed to take part in the greenhouse effect, which scientists chose to call it to dupe the public. In fact it has no relationship to what happens in a real greenhouse, where heat builds up because the air is enclosed and can't escape. The atmosphere is open to the sky, so that cannot happen. So called greenhouse gases are those which absorb upwelling infra red radiation from the earth's surface. Water vapour is responsible for 95% of the effect, and CO2 about 3%. The rest is a collection of other gases with small effects such a methane. The logarithmic effect of CO2 is expressed by the claim that a doubling of CO2 causes 1° C of warming, so if 120 parts per million has caused 1° as claimed, you need to add another 240 ppm to get another 1°, then another 480 to get a second degree extra, and so on. However scientists do not agree on this, with various claims on this that the effect is smaller than than the claim because some of the warming is natural and not caused by CO2. Scientists do not all agree with each other, with a few at the genius level saying that the human element is insignificant, such as William Happer, the world's foremost expert in CO2 physics, who developed a CO2 laser gun for the American military, among many other scientific achievements during his working life. He is retired now.
While there is a perception that we can control the climate if only we reduced CO2, the reality is the climate is very complex and is only partially understood hence many predictions and forecasts are not accurate. That doesn't mean we can't predict if there is a large Volcano eruption there will be a few years of cooler temps. But predicting when the summer ice on the Arctic will have disappeared is a trickier question. At it is just the summer ice that predictions are being made on. And if the Arctic melts over summer completely it will cause some major problems. But on the positive side just take a look at the engineering feats in the Netherlands and places like Dubai. Going from glacial to interglacial is like a pendulum but it is not regular and some interglacials can be shorter or longer. Life generally through interglacial times thrives ...better crops more food etc and during glacial times life generally perishes in extreme cold. The main affected areas are the areas near the poles and life along the equator generally is much less affected. The various tipping points for these events to take place are mixed but over the last 800,000 years, they have been more firmly connected to the various cycles/orbits of the earth and planets/tilts etc - Milankovich Cycles. Increased 20 century CO2 has possibly given a delayed transition to a glacial cycle although the timings still could be thousands of years from these cycles naturally starting. It always seems to be forgotten that CO2 and temperature is not a linear scale and there is a point when increased CO2 has much less effect on temperature. I am not saying we shouldn't mitigate for CO2 as I think we should but targets like Zero Carbon by 2050 are knee jerk reactions to alarmist media. I am for reduction and less reliance on fossil fuels but most of all we have to think sustainability about things like overfishing, and waste management. Last point. Even when we break down the 20/21st century we can see there has been an Early Warming 1910 to 1940s which was not caused by CO2 as the main factor. It is still not clear what caused the warming but scientists generally think increased solar activity and reduced volcanic activity. But if you think that there were two world wars in that time you would have thought that would have made up for the reduced volcanic activity. The 50s to the early 70s is what is called a cool phase and many believed at the time this could be the trigger/tipping point for a coming glacial/ice-age. Scientists generally believe that this was caused by volcanic activity and increased pollution /smog. From 1976 to the present day is the current warm period and this is when most believe the increaed heat is from the extra CO2 generated by people, and I would go along with that. 10 cents worth of thoughts on this.
Almost fair enough excepting only you need to point to the specific items in IPCC SR 1.5 January 2019 that you disagree with or state like "Coral reefs matter little or not at all" and so on for each and every item in IPCC SR 1.5 With that WG2 instead of your sloganeering version it would then be fair enough. Go for it.
You have a very gentle and detailed way of explaining we are royally screwed since so far our dear leaders have done exactly nothing at all to steer us away from the future you describe. Videos like this should be headlining the evening news every single day.
The information you present is so clear and convincing, you deserve a vastly larger audience to help increase the sense of urgency. BBC should let you host a special daily climate change news update.
Yes. Something like that would be good. Let's all talk Auntie into it. At a minimum Mister Think should have a slot on Radio 6 (the smallest radio inside the others) at 1 am.
My step-granddaughter is doing some experiment in school with ice melting, so I came back to this to get the term "latent heat of fusion", which I could not remember. The wiki page for that concept is: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_fusion.
Do they have a large pool? see if a wall can be developed and get a dump truck full of ice and drop it in one side of the pool with orange die, and red die on the other half. Remove the walls if possible. Perhaps a small pool can demonstrate does warm migrate to cold?
An obvious cheap trick simply to get in a mention of your step-granddaughter. I would never stoop to this simply to mention either my larger granddaughter Natalie nor my new small granddaughter Ayla. You should be ashamed.
This comment is for ua-cam.com/video/osmzTSYRJJE/v-deo.html At 7:55 & 8:11 the timing depends mostly by far on the ice fraction in the zone between the 2 thick dashed horizontal lines labelled "permafrost boundaries" by Natalia Shakhova, Igor Semiletov & Evgeny Chuvilin. Since it's "permafrost" according to Shakhova et al then it contains ice because that's what permafrost is. Bone dry sand at -50 degrees isn't "permafrost", it's just cold sand. If the ice fraction in that zone shown has average 10% ice by weight then it will take 12.5x as long to thaw as it would if it had only 0.4% ice by weight. Using the 10% ice by weight example and the 7:55 start point with Arctic Ocean sea bed 5.5 degrees warmer than the pre-industrial (a realistic possibility for a significant area in the next few decades) then starting at the shallowest permafrost depth of 95 m depicted the warming heat flux will be 1.9 * 5.5 / 95 = 0.11 w/m**2 and this will thaw the ice in each 1 metre depth with a 10% by weight ice fraction in 28 years so it thaws the 112 m permafrost thickness to the greatly-reduced "permafrost boundaries" shown at 8:11 over 28 * 112 = ~3,100 years. And that is the relevant point. If it should turn out that ice fraction within "permafrost boundaries" shown by Shakhova et al is, for example, 0.4% ice by weight instead of 10% then it thaws the 112 m permafrost thickness over ~250 years instead of ~3,100 years. This is why I have stated in many comments "the timing depends mostly by far on the ice fraction".
Thank you for your detailed, masterful presentations. Warming questions, please: 1. How will increased rainfall from hurricanes dumping tons of water on the land affect the fertility of food-growing regions? 2. Will new food-growing regions open up as tundra regions warm up?
New food growing regions will be compromised by oscillations between warm/cold during spring/fall which will cause killing frost to occur more often. The jet stream oscillation noted in this video due to polar warming has already caused problems in fruit growing regions of the upper midwest. It warms up too early in the spring which caused trees and crops to bloom too early and then a cold blast blows down from the north freezing the blooms and that's it for your peaches, cherries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, etc. This happened this year in N. Arkansas.
5:45 warm air won't do much to the Greenland ice sheets. But warm rain will. And once we get an ice free Arctic we'll start to see greater evaporation leading to summer thunderstorms and major precipitation over the greater Arctic, including Greenland. That's when the fun starts.
Soo, how did the temperature get down from the highs in the past? How hot were the hottest temperatures historically? Kind of forgot to talk about this.
@@datacourier2944 " Evolution itself would come up with trees that grow faster, using more CO2 and self-regulating." Well yes and no... Trees can aborb Co2 and under the right conditions bind it for millions of years...After all thats how fossil fuels were formed...But this process takesn millions of years... Chemical weathering is another process that can reduce CO2 over millions of years
At least one of the channels worth to visit. Thank you for persisting in trying to explain what’s happening with our environment. Never mind the bullocks.
We live in Grenada in the Caribbean. Plenty of sun, trade winds and strong possibilities of geothermal energy. We own a small hotel and have the only electric bus on the island, there are 4 electric cars. Our government does not want electric vehicles as they do no generate taxes from fuel and spares parts. So there is a 75% import tax imposed on electric vehicles. We have significant PV solar panels at the hotel (true blue bay) but these are considered illegal by the utility company that is 50% owned by the government. We live under the threat of being shut off by the utility. Our power on the island comes from imported diesel generation and we pay about 35p ($0.45 usd) per kwhr for this polluting form of power. We could easily have 100% renewables. A few wind generators and solar arrays and we would be independent of foreign oil for ever. But we won’t do it. Big money and greedy politicians who mouth platitudes about climate change have no interest in moving away from the carbon based fuels. They will go to cop 26 have a wonderful time on tax payers money, they will make meaningless pledges and return home to the status quo. Fortunately the young folks around the world are becoming more proactive. We can only hope they can make the necessary changes soon and quickly.
Agree. But be careful not to greenwash electric vehicles, electricity pollutes by its means of productions (most of it is still coal and nuclear). What is required is as little private vehicles as possible.
@@bonatoc he did cover that, he mentioned the diesel generator, try Citroen Ami, little electric plastic cube car, that's where the efficiency lies, in size.
You, as a citizen of Grenada should not expect the young people to do it; you should be taking action. You have it a lot easier than bigger countries where nearly nothing gets done unless a pandemic breaks out. The city I live in has more people than all of Grenada. Where there's a will, there's a way.
😠😷😷
I'm very impressed. Lots of people talk, desire, and dream, but you're actually doing something, at your own risk, and in the teeth of considerable official hostility. BRAVO! Also, it's interesting to hear the particulars of your political obstacles. The status quo is entrenched everywhere and needs shaking up! Best wishes.
Russ, I'm sorry to hear that your government is so corrupt and ignorant. At least you have a nice place to live.
We humans are easily distracted. We get so interested in one crisis after another that we tend to forget about the greater problem at hand. Meanwhile the clock keeps ticking.
the clock has ticked past the point of us doing anything even more so with the pandemic putting climate to the back of most peoples minds, along with the economies needing to ramp back up. China is also putting a coal plant online every week and India isnt far behind they are industrializing and its hard to argue with them they want what the rest of the world has had, its going to devastate the environment two of the worlds largest populations having an industrial revolution at the same time at a pace unseen before, enjoy the ride once things ramp up its going to be wild
@@Kektamusprimethis sounds like a preface to a terrible science fiction novel.
There is always someone to remind us of immediate danger. We call them dictators.
I started tracking Arctic sea ice disappearance back in August 2000. Made a move out of California during record breaking hot summers in 2006, to Oregon, where we are having record wildfires driven by unusually high winds and dry conditions. I thought I wouldn't experience the effects of abrupt climate change or see the Arctic sea ice disappear during my lifetime, but it's happening. As a species, humans have earned rapid extinction due to their exploitation of each other, other species, and the planet as a whole, and I say good riddance.
From Oregon to B.C. to Alaska where we can talk the polar bears migrating south.
You’re believing such bull - watch Tony Heller for a balance
@@erea3355 Heller is a liar and a kook.
Penguin Uprighter spoken like a religious zealot that will not address facts. Speak to facts, science and truth to discredit someone if you don't you are preaching a faith.
@@davidramsay6142 Nice try. The dumbest of denier pretzel logic.
And the fact is Potholer54 has shown Heller to be a liar on numerous occasions.
Just like what the great grumpy gramps George Carlin said: The planet isn't going anywhere. WE are.
Lol! Where are we going, exactly??
Does anyone believe the Earth or God cares???
The over whelming majority of people on the planet believe in some God existing as a true fact. Based on that, what is there to worry about besides absolutely NOTHING? New York City was predicted to be underwater 40 years ago by now by Al Gore, but it's not.
Not to worry, AOC and Bernie is America's salvation and socialism will save us. Look at how Russia, China, Cuba and Venezuela have become their promised paradises for their people.
Beeg - even if the end is near, it feels good to use human knowledge to lessen your impact on our demise. The ipcc recommend that a plant based diet is the best way to curtail climate change on a personal level. Peace!
Rick Dees is a product of human hubris. Hell, you have 200k dead in the US and they're still arguing over the semantics. Throw in something as slow-moving as global warming and it just flies over their heads.
The video did mention an odd point though of which I had an interesting debate with a person who believed that CO2 rather than being a blanket, is rather instead a harbinger of the planet's control. In most other warming trends COs followed instead of led.
@@alainarchambault2331 When did YOU stopped using Air Conditioning, driving your car, or using carbon based electricity? After YOU do then YOU will be justified in YOUR hubris. Until them F.O. with your blaming others you never met and know nothing about. When you clean up your life then you won't be a hypocrite any more.
@@rickdees251 I stopped using air conditioning , I no longer have a car , and I am building a couple solar trackers and hope to be on solar , wind , and ethanol (for cooking and my welder) in 18 months. By then then I will also have my garden going well , I can tell you everything that could go wrong has gone wrong , but it has become my hobby and I like working on it , and how many hobbies will pay for themselves ? My latest crazy project is a ethanol fueled toaster , since my electric toaster died.
To think that the energy required to melt ice can heat up water from 0 to 79 degrees Celsius is mind-boggling on its own, and should freak everybody out when considering the vast areas around the world where ice is currently melting away due to global warming.
But there is much more water than ice overall, so it's not that bad in the end
Sea level has been rising for 10,000+ years, as it naturally should given natural global warming. Stop trying to fight it because you can't without making things worse, environmentally, in the long run. The real problem is liberal overpopulation. The world would be much greener if we stopped trying to feed the starving and let Sick Olds dies from a pandemic... Really, slaughtering everyone under the age of 30 would be the most humane solution for The Future Kids (the weapon of choice for all blackmailing liberal wet dreamers of La La Land)... blah, blah... The best thing we can do for the Future Kidz is KILL 5 BILLION KIDS AND OAPs...! Everything else is liberal, wishy-washy bullshit... from WILD NATURE'S POV.
@@Dundoril If all the ice covering Antarctica , Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt, sea levels would rise about 70 meters (230 feet). The ocean would cover all the coastal cities. And land area would shrink significantly. "not that bad" really?
yes, it is.. and in many cases uncovering artifacts from thousands of years ago telling you the ice was this low or lower before, probably many times. As more ice melts, you get more freshwater in the system. as you get more water that can be picked up by evaporation and dropped again as rain. you will get more rain as the snow melts then you will get more snow. it's a cycle that happens frequently in our planet's history. This is not man-made and that narrative is only to control you and take control of all aspects of your life. it's bullshit. the scientists that back that claim are all in the employ of the politicians that push that narrative.
@@American_Made wow....and the earth is flat, liberals eat babies, and there's no such thing as science. Hahahaha nut case.
All of this was detail by the Lovelock's Gaia theory. I wish more people had an understanding of multiple non linear feed back systems. The example of acoustic feedback provided a good analogy.
Working with electronics it is easy to see how the erosion of gain and phase margins in feed back networks leads to growing system instability resulting in oscillations that can swing between extremes in the form of limit cycles, ending with the whole system switching to a new state. I have worked with digital audio circuits that include multi loop digital IIR filters, with these it is possible to change the feed back coefficients and watch the system output gain increase, and change from a stable state, to one of oscillation, sometime with a chaotic nature.
Obviously, even complex analogue/digital electronics are simple compared to those which control the earth's climate, but watching the output of such systems on an oscilloscope does give a feel of how the climate changes might evolve, and why extremes of low as well as high temperatures are a feature, and an indication of increasing instability. It's all about pumping more and more energy into the system. For those who have a feel for what is happening, it is terrifying, because positive feedback speeds up the response of a system, and the feedback builds exponentially from a tiny trigger event.
One can speculate that an event such as a storm, or a volcanic eruption, might be the trigger that shows the earth's overall feedback has moved from negative to positive, rapidly moving the climate to a new stable state, which maybe completely incompatible with life.
Brilliant analogy, Nigel. If only more people had your gut feel for metastable systems then we might see more urgency to address climate change.
@@incognitotorpedo42the characteristics of even a simple linear audio amplifier can be changed to that of a digital monostable by application of increasing positive feedback. If voltage is used as an analogue for temperature, this represents rapid switching of temperature from one extreme to the other.
The ripples in the jet stream are now very good at forecasting the weather in the UK, as it passed almost directly overhead.
It is only necessary to observe which side of the jet stream the UK is with respect to the north pole. If we are on the pole side it is going to be cold and wet as the air flows down from the pole, on the other side we are blasted by equatorial hot air plumes, and it is very hot.
The climate is like a juggernaut with its own inertia and momentum. While the feedback is negative it resists events that might change it. When the feedback becomes positive, even a small event make it change dramatically. Like a HGV at the top of a hill, start it rolling and it will be impossible to stop.
Thinking about it, the latent heat of melting ice introduces hysteresis into the system. Where heat can be added with no change in temperature. Coupled to other feedback loops, this allows stresses to build in the system before a sudden jump in temperature once all the ice has melted.
Comparing oranges to apples,ok
@@jeffdunnell508 apples and oranges do not share similar differential equations unless refering to their motion. There are ample examples of physical and electrical/electronic being described by similar sets of equations, producing similar results. Every school student is taught a concept of voltage and current in terms of water pressure and flow rate. Mass spring and damper systems are modelled as resistors, inductors and capacitors. The same equations apply to temperature and heat flow. Before the invention of the digital computer, analogue computers used these principles to model such systems with operational amplifiers, resistors, inductors and capacitors.
My analogy is not stretching this very far. Obviously the climate models are far more complex with a web of cross linked feedback systems, but the principles are the same. The important thing is that an understanding of one gives a good feel for the other.
The latent heat of ice melting is clearly going to put a plateau point of inflection in the temperature curve, and will hide the effects of heat being added to the system. Once the ice has gone, the full effects of the heat input will become apparent in a rapid rise in temperature. This will appear as hysteresis, with a snap action change in temperature. There are other areas where a trigger point is reached, that will result in a sudden change in temperature. One example is the melting of methane hydrates in the deep ocean. The sudden release of these stored green house gases will be a permanent modification to the system response, as the methane released will not spontaneously return to its trapped ice state. The HGV analogy was included for those not familiar with activation energy and potential energy diagrams.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Thank you for the clear and concise format. I have spent my entire adult life working in power plants, mines and oil refineries. Those who deny human agency in climate change are deluding themselves.
My dad who was making millions, got out of the oil business in the 50's because he said he couldn't keep being a part of killing the planet. He was a simple man who knew what he saw happening was true. How hard could it have been for the leaders of this world to see what he saw? Ignorance is bliss, but not for long.
It's the delusion they desire. Nobody likes difficult truths, or there wouldn't be religion.
Clear and consise - but woefully out-of-date and dumbed down...
Thank you Brian. We need people like you to tell the true story to as many folks as possible.
Anyone who doesn't accept that humans are deliberately controlling the climate is ignorant beyond belief.
Thanks for this clear, concise, relatable presentation and the calm, coherent delivery free of flash, gimmicks and especially jump cuts! Other creators would be wise to emulate your work.
Absolutely, not to mention the shiny, highly-polished presentation.
Metalheads not only do love feedback loops, but also science. 😆🎸🎙️🎚️
I feel myself going back and forth so much between being hopeful and utterly depressed when it comes to the climate.
Technology is evolving, big finance is starting to see the risk of climate risk and shifting money, renewable energy is cheaper in many parts of the world than fossil fuels... but I fear we are too late...
And personally it's killing me. My wife and I would love to start a family. We have biological clocks ticking and don't have 10-15 years to monitor the situation for a bit longer. But... is it even ethical to bring a child into this world right now? On the other hand: people have always found their ways, even during huge wars.... but then again, this is global... Can you understand the feeling and see the emotional pendulum ?!?
All this is so unnecessary and we could have everything we have now, more and better if we weren't so @# short-sighted on a collective scale.
A bit bi polar, we certainly need some global approach to steadying numbers, at times gone by governments and royalty have exalted their citizens to have as many as possible Victorians wanted ten or more to populate the new world, Commonwealth and as recently as after the war we've had baby booms, conditions have been optimised to triple in the last fifty years, by emphasising food production and house building, sure its slowing in the west but not through any political policy, just apathy by the women.
Why is no one even remotely realistic when it comes to climate change? People are either denying it or they are building an apocalyptic cult around it.
Rapid climate change is bad, and we should prevent it, but even if we don't, live will be better for the average person 100 years in the future than it was 100 years in the past.
I understand your pain - I feel family and friends are just not interested in changing if it costs them any more money, and at 52 with no kids I'm glad in a way as I see things in the next 50 years not looking good for children born today. I do have hope that some kids born now find ways to fix some of these things, eg carbon capture, Fusion power, I just wont be around to see it.
I have 3 kids including a six year old. I wonder what the hell my kids will suffer, at times I get pretty depressed about it tbh
Don't have kids. Adopt.
"We might have a bit of an issue here" is the most birtish way of saying: We are f*cked!
thx for the likes but jees... relax in the comments guys.
@JZ's Best Friend
Nobody can predict for sure but I think there will be another human population bottleneck...another reset. And if that does happen you can almost guarantee advanced technology will not be in the reboot program.
@JZ's Best Friend How long before you realize the Earth isn't warming? It's been hotter in the past. Spoiler alert: it cooled down.
That‘s how Stephen Emmott frankly put it in „Ten Billion“.
what about the good stuff? no ones talking about the good stuff, there must be some?
@@kparker2430 The good things are for other people. Activists cannot be happy.
30 yrs too late.Sooo true.
1990 was the last year where co2 was 360 ppm and stable 360.org
What a clear, comprehensible video (as usual). This is the sort of thing we really ought to be getting on the national news these days!
Well in Canada our Peter Mansbridge host of The National went bald during his career. Not sure whether this counts.
The BBC frequently have climate alarmists - sorry scientists on there broadcasts, you never hear the other side of the storey though - sceptics no matter how qualified they are. Check out Tony Heller
Clear as Mudd? It's all BS propaganda!
This man is an idiot
My research shows the opposite
Of his blather
@@lorenzoblum868 Estimated as is the entire scare story! It's estimated that developing China and India over the next 4 decades will produce 10 times more Man-made CO2 than in all of mankind's history! YIKES! Here is what they're not telling you, The Percent Of Naturally produced greenhouse gasses will exceed man-made by %99.5 Let that sink in!
Between the Coronavirus and the global recession, which we're being told is 8x worse than the banking crisis. I don't believe there'll be the money, or anybody not distracted by other crises that will even be looking at dealing with the climate crisis. It's going to be a tough ask due to this "perfect storm".
Thing is, fighting climate change is not a money-gone-for-good type of thing. Strict Co2 taxing would radically reset the incentives on how we do things (convincing/forcing those thriving under our current setting which is immensly harmful might come at a cost) but ultimately we'd be doing things differently but not necessarily have to put up with "less".
As long as we come up with a forseeable set of new rules everyone would be in board. Whats really bothering me is the uncertainty about the US and wether they are headed for some Civil War 2.0 type scenario that'll drag us all down with them or if these past years are the last roar or #boomersupernova before changing demographics can overcome what at this point is corrupt minority rule : /
@An Appeal to Heaven if u ain't got that swing?!
Jordan Peterson said same thing. Go watch my channel.
@@velotill But that takes long-term diplomacy with no distractions. That's another tough call.
The economic crash will not look like 'The Economy' if it gets anything like 8x as bad. It will look like famine. That wont be good for most corporations. Putting the world back together will be quite profitable. Poverty has a way of making people aware of their surroundings. The 2 may make us less likely to repeat the worst mistakes and maybe even fix some of the damage. Self interest and all. People will be less tolerant of greed [not all, of course] and more into life as a thing to be lived, not just endured. Possibly. If we dont allow complete Dictatorship to take hold.
Very consistent with all that I've learned to date. Peer-reviewed science tends to be quite conservative in their predictions but some experts estimate that the pace of global warming will now be rapid going forward. Dramatic climate disruption is therefore inevitable which will have devastating effects on the habitat which we depend upon to grow food at scale.
A Master Educator with concise graphics . Another thought provoking presentation.
As usual, your approach is proffesional, accurate and clear. Thank you.
Since I was a young man I was worried about the climate change.
I saw with my own eyes the glaciers of the Patagonian continental ice sheet dissapear or reduce in my lifetime.
When I saw for the first time the Upsala glacier, in 1995, it had 65km long, and 130m height, 15 years later it had 55km long and 70m height in the front.
Recently it is completely fracturated, with no more than 50m tall. This is in the north of the formation, the warmest place.
The Spegazzini glacier, in 1995 was 130m tall, 15 years later only 50m, it is in the middle of the ice sheet.
And the famous Perito Moreno glacier keeps its dimensions because all the other glaciers give it ice at an increasing rate, and because that keeps its size, when the other melts, Perito Moreno, in the south, recieves more ice than loses. But this is temporary.
When I was a child, Patagonia was very cold and dry, with very few places habitable. Now in northern Patagonia (La Pampa province) the climate is less dry, and the winters aren't as cold as they were.
In central Patagonia, winters with -30°C was common, not anymore.
All this happened in only 30 years, it is terrifying.
That's very sad.
Thanks for this first hand testimonial.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
How can the arctic be "melting faster than we thought" when we used to have predictions of ice free summers by 2005?
Saying we might have ice free summers by 2035 is 30 years behind the predictions made in the 1990's.
Because he's referring to actual scientific studies not tabloid headlines which frequently exaggerate and lampoon scientists to generate outrage.
Glad to see someone is finally discussing the heat of fusion of ice. If that doesn't begin to wake people up, maybe add in what happens to air if all that excess heat goes into the atmosphere. We become quite literally (ahem) toast.
well, this pandemic is somehow show how people react about that, ...do people know about the virus? most likely they know, ...do they care?....well....
The pedant in me is thinking that when ice melts it is a diffusion process. So even though the sentiment is around using 'fusion' rather than 'melting' is unhelpful,
@@BernardLS Nope it takes exactly the same amount of energy. IE the amount you have to take out to take water to ice is exactly the same as what you put in to turn ice into water. That;s the physics I was learning at 13.
Unfortunately, it would seem a large segment of the human population is indirectly descended from the ostrich family and refuse to pull their heads out of the sand.
@@valkyriefrost5301 I'm not sure the sand is where they have stuffed their heads. LOL/
Thoughts... hmm... we screwed ourselves
There are too many humans. We urgently need to get rid of about 5 billion people that just consume resources without doing anything useful. Or at least prevent them from reproducing.
@@apacheattackhelicopter8185 : If you feel so strongly about it, please lead by example.
@@apacheattackhelicopter8185 thats very hitler-esq
Royally
Leave the adults and just decrease the formation of embryos with implantables
There is another wrinkle in the latent heat story. I'll use a mixed British/modern notation since for this (and possibly only this) example it is easier to follow It takes 80cal (small calories)to melt a gram of ice and that same 80cal, as mentioned, would raise the temperature of a gram of water by 80 degrees. It takes 540cal of energy to evaporate a gram of water. Of course when a gram of water vapor condenses into water it gives out exactly that amount of heat. Now consider what happens when a warm wet wind from the ever warmer ocean flows over that big ice cube we call Greenland. Each gram of water vapor that condenses on the ice gives out enough heat to melt 6.75grams of ice. Add to this that the cooled air, containing less water vapor, then flows down the slope in a density current and heats up as it is pressurized and you have some serious melting from Greenland. (by the by, dry air is denser than humid air). A body of air flowing from the top of Greenland at about 3km up, down to sea level would increase in temperature by about 30 degrees C. Of course it would not heat up as it would be giving up this heat to the ice, melting more of it.
"Mankind's Pointless Disintegration is Much Worse Than We Thought"
Do you think there is such a thing as "knowledge amplification" where if you get the facts close enough to the ear, enough brains will be warmed with truth that a tipping point will occur and some change will take place?
Money denigrates nature, and we're not ever going to be free of money.
Nice concept but no.
For some no facts are acceptable enough even if driven into the skull with a 12lb sledgehammer.
The only chance is to educate people properly before they get exposed to propaganda.
@@williamgoode9114 Cleaning up the environment costs money. How do you build a GHG-free society without money?
Short of the mass media telling the truth on climate change and putting out a load of programmes on what government, people and organisations must do and are doing I don't know. Even weekly and sometimes daily record breaking extreme weather events don't seem to get people on the street to demand action least of all our politicians acting on the scale necessary.
A frequent summary of the climatic events that have occurred in the last week or fortnight and a monthly or bimonthly summary would be a good start to get a groundswell of people changing their behaviour.
It can be done as governments well know with the covid pandemic and their very own government advisory adverts on various issues but notably alcohol, tobacco and gambling but alos drink drive, seatbelts and various other advertising campaigns.
The SR 1.5 Celsius report was very clear in that we need action across all levels and sectors of society. It involves change on the personal and national levels and everything in between. At the moment what we see is government giving thinly veiled excuses, targets that are way off in the future and scapegoating of individuals for plastic waste etc.There is more concern about the discarded fizzy water bottle than the energy gone into its manufacturing, distribution, waste of resources and a quiet disregard of its marginal contribution to GDP and party coffers.
We certainly need "knowledge amplification" which is what NGOs seek to do translating that into action needs a lot more coordination and involvement.
Consider this:
Around 70% of people vote, a smaller percentage give to environmental NGOS, a smaller proportion still are involved in letter writing and lobbying and an even smaller proportion gets on the streets. A smaller proportion still are prepared to be arrested and defend themselves in court. Yet over 80% of people are concerned.
Have you seen how many followers the IPCC youtube channel has?
It's really hard to argue warming with science when the actual science says it's cooling. I wonder how long it takes to convince those people they've been fooled. MAYBE I SHOULD SHOUT IT AT YOU!
Everything we do comes with a cost. The problem is not enough of us have a clue what this cost is. The ones that do know and could do something about it are generally in denial or don't care.
Yes. We all know that "cost" is invented by humans and represents the time & effort of human bods so "cost" is fine as a quickie analog.
@@grindupBaker I don't mean the cost of widgets or anything other products or service on which business (some humans) put a monitory value.
I mean the mass extinctions going on all around us that will eventually result in the extinction of civilisation as we know it. Not withstanding the inevitable unpredictable catastrophes, volcanic eruptions or a large meteor strikes occur in the mean time.
Nothing lasts for eternity in this chaotic universe.
Brilliant, clear, concise and I even want to say, perfect, description of what is presently going on. Thanks.
It sucks living in this time but having a conscience. It's worse if you're broadly educated and can see how these things are going to interact.
I goddamn wish I had the sociopathy of some of our leaders. I mean....I know that's basically why we are in this position now... but at this point it would be a blessing. At least for me personally.
There are many steps you can take in your personal life to lessen your impact and not be a part of the sociopathy.
@@planetvegan7843 sure. Unfortunately behaviour on the macro level is dictated by people like Trump at the worst and Bezos at the best. So....
Agreed. Feel the same way and Express it on my channel.
I think there was a study that found that 30% of CEOs of large corporations were sociopaths. Ruthless drive for profit and no social conscience. Walmart and Amazon come to mind.
Beth - try 100%. It is a prerequisite to the job.
experiment. Place two glasses below the lamp. In one fill with cold water and ice cubes, in the second fill with just water at near freezing . Place a thermometer in each and watch the temperature change over a period of time.
And what's the point of this experiment?
We are already too late massive carbon reduction should have started in the 1970's as Pres Jimmy Carter wanted. Our oceans are already dying that is extremely major.
Massive carbon reduction means massive forest and plant reduction...we already have TOO little CO in the atmosphere to sustain healthy plant and forest life.
Co2 can not hold or trap heat You have No evidence it does. its plant food
This video lecture for the citizen scientist provides a good overview of the convergence of multiple feedback loops hitting this delicate region at once and latent heat. This doesn't typically get enough attention. This is a potentially deadly oversight as we continue to learn that the modeling is not robust enough. Also, I got the JHAT App! Nice work JHAT! Your channel and resources are much needed.
BTW Dave, did you hear the rumor going around that the ORNL Summit Supercomputer (MOSAIC Polarstern) has predicted a BOE/ice-free summer Arctic in the next 3 years?
I have not seen an actual paper to this effect, but it would be worth finding if there is one. Likely, we in the citizen science community need to Ask a Scientist on the MOSAIC Project, an online service. I will look into it. But if you hear anything about this keep us all posted too. Most of the scientific literature in the credible and peer-reviewed sector is saying 2035, 2032 at the earliest for a BOE or ice-free summer Arctic. Everyone's watching this like hawks, so we will stay tuned.
I searched Google for the Summit Supercomputer prediction and there are no results that say within 3 years anywhere. Sounds like a doomer rumor. lol
Besides, scientists make projections not predictions.
@@猫福-f4k I thought it said that a SUPERCOMPUTER made the projection of the ice-free Arctic, not a scientist.
@@charleslindsey6789 Exactly, but the scientists have to feed it data so it's just semantics.
Someone should get to the bottom of this. It would also be a great video about the supercomputer.
Thank you. This is the closest to a 'Understand Climate Change for Dummies' video I've come across. I'm not saying people are dummies but it breaks it down into a logical progression and in a way that non-scientists can understand. It also covers a lot of ground. Videos like these are important as it's not academia who needs to get a grasp of this but the masses. Most people with a Grade 12 level knowledge of science will understand what you've said. I'm going to post this on a website I moderate.
I am old and I will probably die before all the ice is gone, however my sons may have a very bleak future. This bothers me a great deal of late.
The problem is...Ice Age is coming.
There is a chance that insane technological power will give us the ability to reverse climate change faster than we created it... but I wouldn't bet on it.
@SHEISTER CAM
Few things:
1. We are dangerously CLOSE to next Glaciacion period:
ua-cam.com/video/FR2aZc5bjUU/v-deo.htmlm59s
our interglacial "Holocene" is nearly at the end if you look at *Eemian* itergacial.
"Average" warm period length is 6000 year shorter than modern interglacial.
2. We will be FIRST time from 100 000 years in that planetary combination: when Four *Gas Giants* will do square in 2024.
That will trigger the Glaciaion.
3. The Sun is in the Grand solar minimum!
Without the Sun magnetic field, cosmic Rays will pierce the atmosphere and cool our world by seeding the clouds. Polar cold air will close to Equator warm air causing the rough weather around the world.
4. I do NOT believe in "manmade" climate change. The core of that theory "GHG effect" was proven FLASE by:
- *Ideal Gas Law*
www.omicsonline.org/open-access/ideal-gas-law-and-the-greenhouse-effect-2157-7617-1000468-101034.html
- Atmospheric transmission graph calculation
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Atmospheric_Transmission.png
(CO2 effect only +0.06 °C)
- the *UN IPCC* carbon-13 isotope content:
ua-cam.com/video/jr3NCCEf58A/v-deo.html
Overall: think BEFORE you talk with trained *Meteorologist*
@SHEISTER CAM
No matter WHAT you say, in 2024 Gas Giants do square, making the Earth orbit elongation when it will be WINTER in the Norther Hemisphere. That is CONSIDERABLE since most of the lands are there!
Plus you can't do math and solving the PV=nRT equation!
@SHEISTER CAM
Bahahaha! The truth is burning your eyes?
Let's see you can keep with my math:
*Ideal Gas Law* :
PV =nRT
T = 101.3 / (8.314 x 1.225/28.97) = 288.14 K ~15°C
Earth black body temperature is -18.8 °C degree or 254.3 K
All of that 33 degree rise without greenhouse gas effect.
Venus:
T=9200/8.314 x 65/43.35 = 737.99 K or ~464°C
Titan:
T=146.7/8.314 x 5.25/28 = 94.1K or -179°C
Let's see evidence on other worlds:
ua-cam.com/video/BuTmHCRJovc/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/1Y_n283fYbc/v-deo.html
A coincidence? 5 time in the row?
And citate from the page i linked above:
"The ideal gas law is a pillar of thermodynamics for which we do not need to know the physical details. As RT is a measure of the stored thermal energy per mol, the gas law only describes a specified equilibrium condition. It does not give any details as to how the equilibrium is achieved nor to its contributing causes. Accordingly, the mean surface temperature, T0, deduced from the gas law should be equal to the one determined by other means. Therefore, it does not give any new insight concerning the energy balance, but it gives T0 a real physical meaning"
And the knockout punch about the SATURTION of the CO2:
ua-cam.com/video/17aNU9fKzho/v-deo.html - CO2 saturation and the cycles basing on the Sun!
Beautiful, calm presentation of dire facts. This is exactly what is needed for communication on this topic. Neither complacency, nor screeching.
Thanks Mike. Much appreciated.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
You didn't mention the massive melting of permafrost in the affected artic circle regions that have seen record temperatures this summer.
You already have a bad situation with the CO2 released annually but put into that mix the massive release of methane from these Arctic regions, then you have a much worse situation. Since Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Sad reality: its already too late, and world leaders will never do anything significant since that costs too much money. My condolences to today's young people.
I think the world 'powers' are doing something, but theirs is a sneaky wrong-way-round way of doing things that will do as much damage as good.
I am for a plate on every grave that shows if that person denied climate change!
So that i can shit and piss on this grave to give my opinion about the irresponsibility of this person!
Does not cost anything. We just have to stop financing world greatest polluters.
The elephant in the room
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
Have to be egoist and irresponsible to want to add more people into the world
Not contradicting you, but European governments are considering a 500 billion Euro sea wall to protect the North sea coasts and closing off Gibraltar while some in America are considering closing off San Francisco bay to protect the Napa valley. Similar things will protect other food production zones. There are other things that can be done to address other issues, the problem is that the plebs will pay for it instead of the ones responsible. We can also move underground, but certainly there will be a population crash from 7 Billion to maybe 1-2 Billion.
I don’t wanna die. I basically just got here...
Likely we’ll all be alive, but modernity is going to be utterly transformed. A lot of people may not be alive.
@@teacup755 ua-cam.com/video/hESunUuFrzk/v-deo.html
Dont worry we are locking down the world for the common cold.
We're all just waiting to die. An inconvenient fact.
Same this is sad
It's more obvious here in Washington state. Mt Ranier has never been more bare of glaciers and snow pack
Simple straightforward language that even the deniers could understand, if they could bring themselves to spend the time to listen to your explanation ! Nice one.
'deny this'
earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-292.27,86.20,461
@@charlesnelson5187 Some people want to belive "the end" is coming soon. People like you and me we are "deniers". But, i do not think denying weather is possible?
@@arnehofoss9109 its not like people want to go extinct.
What a coherent synopsis. Excellent. Terrifying but excellent.
wrong with no mention of what the sun is doing
@@1972martind28 sun has nothing to do with climate change. 3 billion years of co2 that USED to exist in the atmosphere but over 3 billion years, was stored in plant life, causing atmospheric tempatures to plung from 300F to 59F before the start of the industrial revolution. Humans are REVERSING 3 billion years of carbon sequestration. co2 REGULATES the global temperature.
You make the most difficult and sometimes confusing subjects that are relevant now,a joy to listen and learn by.calm in the face of any disaster or possible scenario. Good man
Outstanding, as usual!
Guy Mcpherson is looking less and less of an alarmist by the day now.
I'm alarmed only because I've been alive long enough to see for myself 4 billion extra humans in 60 short years. We've broken our only arctic air conditioner because burning rubber and gas is loud and oh so much fun. Now stupid Biden is calling Trump a climate arsonist as if he's misinformed the public all these wasted decades. Reagan immediately removed Jimmy Carter's solar panels off the white house. It was never mentioned in the nightly news. I was alive that year too.
7.812 billion at the moment. 3 billion in 1960 so at least 4.8 billion in 60 years. That I believe is about 2.5 people of an increase in global population for every second that has passed in said 60 years. Seems like a race to the bottom though I haven't lived as long. It's a pity we ever discovered that oil.
The only issue with Guy McPherson is that he lies through his teeth with his 2 huge lies in addition to his one bit of absurd baby bit of drivel about thermodynamics. If he only used a bit of junk science now & then like a "Paul Beckwith" then he'd be good enough overall. As it is though he's worse than useless.
Didn't he give up a six figure salary voluntarily in 2009, or was that just heresay.
@Bob Trenwith shouldn't be too hard to find out for sure, he was professor at the University of Arizona for twenty years, so I'm sure someone there knows. I'll leave you to unearth that "lie".
With the permafrost line moving northward along with the spring snow line, Arctic amplification is a triple whammy.
Whatever happens we're going to be here to find out.
Scary but true. All those sci-fi movies about dastardly events happening? They are now coming true, before our very eyes. WE have watched Nature writhe in pain for many decades, now it's our turn. Humans are over-rated.
i hope there are still boomers around, they did this to us
@@camazotzz That's an incredibly lazy analysis. Boomers were on the cutting edge of environmentalism. A carbon-based energy economy has been with us since the 1700's. Every generation has its saints and sinners. Carter and Reagan were both of the generation before the boomers. One cared about the environment, the other wanted to trample it. The oldest Gen-Xers are 55 now; they've had plenty of time to have an effect on things. There are millennials who are denialists. If you want to point fingers, point them at the people who vote for the party of climate denialism. Don't denigrate an entire generation, no matter which one it is.
@@incognitotorpedo42 It's the "Greatest Generation's" fault, they were the ones who over-produced the Boomers like popcorn! It was the destiny of the Boomers to destroy mankind, and they were remarkably efficient at it; all other talk and speculation is merely noise!
no you wont... the worst is over 100 years out.
8:51 is what people came for
didn't think I'd see you here! lol
I am sure you are aware of canadian youtuber Paul Beckwith?
Canadian prepper.....Liked your last video....Mass production equals mass consumption equals mass destruction...It's so obvious, yet, buried so deeply in our indoctrination....
hey CP just satched your interview with Angry Prepper, tried to get him to ask if you were on the reddit page called r/Collapse? I ask this because I saw you made some comments on "slow collapse" and "activity in the arctic." I've always been a big fan of yours and not many preparing channels consider climate change as a major threat, so hearing you talk about it was pretty refreshing
i came here for raid shadow legends
Your channel has grown exponentially! Well done 🌹
Good video. Not a good situation. Things are progressing very fast. I’m starting to think that Guy McPherson is going to be close with his 2027 prediction... 🔥😫🔥
The situation is bad, but, McPherson is a crank. He previously predicted 2018 to 2020.
CaseAgainstFaith1 I thought he predicted something around 2035 and then he moved it up to 2027. He may be off by 10 or 20 years but regardless WASF.
I thought Guy's prediction was 2026 for the last psychopath in his bunker with his can of beans. Much sooner for the rest of us...
Paul Beckwith says September 2022
Regan Parenton 2022 for a blue ocean event??
I'm overwhelmed at the presentation excellence of this site. Just great!
Thank you Ken. That's very kind feedback.
@@JustHaveaThink you"re very welcome
@@twirlyspitzer Sorry to hear that you have been hoodwinked by the lies. Please inform yourself about the reality, then you will be able to calm down.
Well, calm down about the climate, then you will be angry at the liars.
Thanks, man. Great video. I know the movie that came out about the futility of many of our so-called solutions, and the comments on your video, probably depressed you in a frustration-overload sort of way. But this video is talking about the sort of thing that generated the pessimism of those of us who agreed with the movie ... in other words, yes, when you speak the truth of how bad it is, i do enjoy your videos. If the world were turning into a paradise, would I be as excited to read about the science of that? I don't know. But I love science, and the science says that the paradise we've enjoyed for thousands of years is going to die, so I prefer to stick with the latest facts and research.
Love your intentions and your personality, you really do your best and it makes a big impact for those who need to understand these complexities. Thanks!
Thank you paintedwings74. It is a difficult line to walk between laying out the truly appalling facts about our future if we do not change quickly, and trying to champion the various ways in which we could act very quickly if we chose to. My goal is to keep as positive as possible in the presentations to try to ensure as many people as possible feel like at least trying to make the change. My fear is if I was to revert to a more fatalistic 'doom and gloom' angle, I might depress people into complete inertia. It's a tricky one, that's for sure. Thanks for your continued support though. I appreciate the candour and grace that you've demonstrated in your posts over the months.:-)
Think most people are going to be shocked by how fast the environment and climate can deteriorate. And everyone's quality of life along with them.
@frank lazarewicz Try an enema. You'll be less angry and able to think a little clearer.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
yep, we are starting to see it now!
I had to dig deep but even here be trolls. The stupid defend the stupidly rich?
Trolls and Deniers...pawns of extinction! They're most to blame for the fact that it's too late to save ourselves. When TSHTF, they'll be the first one's at your door demanding what you have!
The trolls are paid by the Oligarchs who conspire to keep burning the fossils: Koch Industries, Putin and Bin Salman really run the show.
Yes. They do.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
John Peric that’s an unfounded load of crap.
The 2012 and 2020 ice thickness comparison is shocking.
Imagine if we have a storm like in 2012 now, I mean next year or any year in this decade. It will be game over for ice.
Good to know there's an alternative to UA-cam for watching these podcasts.
Ice free Arctic by 2035 seems a conservative estimate at this point. At any rate,j well done video. Thanks for posting.
Well no it's probably in the earlier side.
Completely False the earth is cooling in a grand solar minimum.
@@1972martind28 😂
I fell asleep around 2 videos ago and then the microphone happened and I absolutely jumped out my skin because I thought the fire alarm went off. Which was actually quite good because I was taking a nap and needed to get back to work.
Thank's a lot for your Information, you became very very good to explain and no wonder the earth behave as the earth is doing now, I do hope all the World begin to wake up.
Hes wrong with No mention of the sun
Unfortunately as an Earth Scientist I agree we are in deep deep trouble.
A bit like Christian Science, a little culty
@@pgtmr2713 I think denialism is a cult, much like the cult of tRump.
@@charleslindsey6789 Check yourself, the liberal cult of climate change are the same cult burning cities and now forests for not getting their way. But yeah keep banging on about climate change when the world just locked down about as much as we can. Pollution is waaay below pre-pandemic levels, so jam a sock in it. :-)
@Desmond Bagley Yeah that sounds like an absolute train wreck for the environment. We're not going to be destroying the planet to save it. Also, you're wrong, the virus shut down manufacturing and reduced emissions globally. So I call bullshit.
@Kieran Kinney You're right about one thing... you are sad. Nice grand claim of seeing extinction. That's alright though, Australian Commies will throw you in jail for disagreeing, before you can hurt yourself, or the planet. Thoughts on this Desmond douchebag wanting to pollute the air and oceans further? Effing idiot, EVERYTHING means warming to that one.
What a fantastic, straightforward, informative and frightening video. Superb work Sir.
The complexity of the climate is way beyond human understanding. Even NASA admits this saying, “today’s models must be improved by about a hundredfold in accuracy”, why? Because at the ocean surface, clouds generate a radiative signal 8 times greater than tripled CO2 (1120 ppm). We can't even model clouds. We don't understand the Milankovitch cycles, aerosols and the ocean currents, nor the effect of solar winds. We don't even have a reliable global temperature record. The only long term thermometer temperature record of any scale is the USA and the raw data says over the last 120 years the USA has gotten cooler. That's a fact. The models can't work. Even the great scientist Freeman Dyson knew that and said so. He says we don't have the ability to model climate, it's just too complex. Also once CO2 hits about 400 ppm it's ability to absorb heat is almost nonexistent. The physics of this is well known between water vapor and CO2 all the heat in a specific wavelength has already been absorbed. So doubling CO2 will produce very little warming. Of course the models have to put more water vapor increase in the models to get more heat absorption but that never happened in the past and is a very, very dubious assumption. CO2 was 7000 ppm in the past. We all die when CO2 hits 180 because plants can't live. The more CO2 the better!! Yes, I know I am not suppose to upset this echo chamber. Yet, if your serious go look at the the research from those that are not getting paid to produce this hysteria. Try to make a steel man out of the counter argument and you will find a different answer. It doesn't matter anyway because you can wipe the whole USA off the map and turn it into a forest it won't make a difference and the Chinese and Indian's are going to built 100's of coal plants over the next 20 years. So for sure we will see the failure of these models because CO2 is going to double again.
"The only long term thermometer temperature record of any scale is the USA and the raw data says over the last 120 years the USA has gotten cooler. That's a fact."
Really? We in the Netherlands also have temperature data from the beginning of the 20th century and this clearly shows it's getting warmer. That's also a fact.
I'm expecting to see the live action adaptation of Days of Tomorrow within my lifespan.
Thank you for keeping us more informed in understandable conversation and video. You do a great service.
Not worse than I thought. Everyone has been high off hopium... We have never heard the phrase "not as bad as we thought". This train only goes in one direction: worse than expected. #SeeYouInHell
Donald McCarthy LMAO! 😂😂 See you at BBN ✊🏾
Lex Mortis you're a bit of a whiner... 😂
The planet will be fine, I wish I could say the same thing for the HUMANS!
Humans might survive thanks to their technology, albeit in significantly reduced numbers. I feel bad for all the other species that will go extinct because of us. So much beauty will be lost.
Have you ever heard of the Plasma-Electric Universe? The sun is not constant! That's what causes the Ice Ages.
Unflinchingly unpleasant global climate news delivered with deliciously cool smirk of British satire.
It can only be Just Have a Think.
A much warmer planet would be nice, after 35 of fear porn I'm convinced the warning is caused by BS.
The Exxon executives that knew about this 30 years ago and suppressed their research will be remembered as war criminals within our lifetimes. Keep up the good fight.
Co2 plant food can not hold or trap heat
@@1972martind28 wat
"Remembered"... implying anyone is gonna survive this... hmmm
Remember, we still have a 5-10 year time frame to take serious action and hopefully avoid the absolute worst. Do not give up just yet. Take to the streets, defund the fossil economy, force money out of politics. It’s in actual fact now or never.
Ähm, heat doesn’t create fires, it is the drought!
Absolutely, but heat drys the land surface more than cold.
Hans, BOTH heat (110 Degrees F or 43 Degrees Celsius) AND DROUGHT DRIES trees and bushes out, so even a LITTLE spark can cause a BIG Fire!
Last year, a fire resulted when a Truck in California, skidded and a spark from the truck's metal hitting a rock "sparked" a fire!
THIS year, a California Couple fired off Pink or Blue Fireworks, to announce the Sex of their New Baby!
The Firecrackers caused a BIG Wildfire that burned 1,000s of Acres!
That would NOT happen if the Heat had not made the vegetation so dry and vulnerable to fire!
In Phoenix, Arizona, it was 110 Degrees for 55 days!
I submit that is NOT normal!
California could be decreasing the Biotic pump of the land with them trying to save water
Very good summary, this is pretty bloody terrifying. Sadly we are stuffed as a planet. I believe some technological solutions will help mitigate the effects but we are well past the point of no return. I'm glad I don't have kids.
we are well past the point of no return, China pumps out as much pollution as Australia in 16 days as they do in a whole year, and theyve only ramped things up and are bringing a coal fired plant on every week, also India is also industrializing although at a slower rate than China. Enjoy life until the biosphere collapses then its everyone for themselves
James Lovelock, the popularizer of the Giya hypothesis, suggested that by the middle of this century the population of the earth could well be one billion. Whether or not his time line is correct, he is likely correct in the not so distant future.
Interesting, only the ocean surface temperatures have been increasing - not by alot. As the water cycles back into the deep it rapidly loses that heat. Go 50 meters down and temperatures are not changing at all. Also the latest research on ice age causation has returned some unexpected results. That as the Pacific Ocean surface temperatures increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere increases resulting in the climate cooling. Water vapor is by far the biggest green house gas. Atmospheric methane is worth a video on its own. It has a very complex interaction with the atmosphere and ultimately breaks down, on average, over 8 years into CO2 and H2O. This is through an oxidation process which again is dependent on how much water vapor is in the atmosphere i.e. different rates in different regions. And Greenland is still gaining significantly more ice than it loses every year. A particular pet hate that I have is how videos like this disingenuously show only the last 2000 years of temperature when talking about the last 10,000 years. Explaining what and why things have changed during that time is something I long await to see a video on.
More then you think! climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ocean-heat/
Change your channel's name to "The climate and sustainable lifestyles" and take some time off researching systems science and systems dynamics, collapse of civilizations, ecological overshoots, coextinctions and evolutionary psychology. Believing that there're techno-fixes to our predicament is wasting your time and your audience's time. I know you never reply to my criticism but I hope you at least consider it. By the way, this is a great video with great analogies.
A "sustainable lifestyle" wouldn't support the type of civilisation we want. We need 24/7 electricity (you can't rely on renewables on a dark windless night), heating, medical care, food...if there were only seven people on this planet we might be able to revert to the simple life, but there are 7 billion.
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
But ingenuity is the only thing sustainable, I mean regressive movement will just lead to a economic collapse. If it wasn't for the Green revolution in the 1950's vegans and vegetarians wouldn't have a say in the matter since old ways of agriculture required so so so much land if we used the same methods prior to 1950 (and was worst prior to the 1600's) we would use the equivalent land mass of USA, Canada and China just to sustain us today, that's a shit load and most lands can't be used for agriculture the world would pretty much have no forest and everything would be purely agriculture
How come nobody is talking about the Soil Carbon - 1% increase in soil organic matter captures 100 tons of CO2 per hectare and we can do this on every farm land on earth at a rate of 0.5% per year.
Time for atmospheric carbon removal
Hydrogen storage at grid scale
It's doable!
You're an idiot with no evidence plant food can warm the planet
Removal of Carbon? From the atmosphere? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon
Nope, it is not doable. If it were, it would already have been done. The only functioning hydrogen fuelcell in service is with the German submarine fleet. Nuclear would be better and cheaper, but politically impossible there.
Nothing a nuclear winter can't fix...
Nothing a solar minimum and a mini ice age won't cure
Apollo ? Nah you are Ares in disguise
Nothing nuclear energy can't fix.
@@cbmech2563 Hope that's a joke. A solar minimum won't be nearly enough. As I'm sure you know, we're already heading towards it, and yet look what's happening to the temperature.
Besides, what happens when it ends?
@@theonionpirate1076 😱😂😂 nothing is going to happen because nothing is happening now
The number of views of this video is seriously depressing...Granted, I only came across it 4 months later than published. Maybe if it was titled "Polar ice-cap melting irreversible" it would've generated ten times the views but even that figure would be disheartening... considering that 2020-21 is fast proving true the worst predictions even amongst a global economic slow-down...
I wish more people really understand what he's saying and took global warming for the serious issue it is... Worried human!
The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex
Keep in mind those numbers still underestimated
ua-cam.com/video/oMozyspFuBM/v-deo.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
ua-cam.com/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/v-deo.html
There is something deeply bleak about having grown up listening to the way things have gone. Thankyou for these videos
Sorry 😞
This is one of the best channels out there on this delicate happening subject . Great Great Job 💙
Greenland still ended up at the end of this year's ice melt at just above the 10 year average. That was because it gained excess ice in the previous 2 years. The amount of snow that falls on Greenland in winter has a significant effect on the total ice mass at the end of summer. You have also not taken on board that the effect CO2 increase is logarithmic, not linear. Also you have not considered the saturation point, which some scientists think is already reached. By that I mean the point at which extra CO2 can have no further effect because it is already absorbing all the available IR radiation at the 13 to 18 micron wavelengths.
And when it gets warm enough for more water to be held in the atmosphere then we go to run away
Replevideo I’ve also heard that the effect of CO2 increase is logarithmic. You sound a bit more scientific than myself but I have had practical experiences in dealing with heat and solving related problems as an industrial electrician and while servicing steam sterilisers it was completely obvious that steam is a much better conductor of heat than dry air is. Therefore I conclude that the so called number 1 green house “water vapour” would actually help heat to escape the earth more so if the earth warmed.
I can’t help thinking that there might be some confusion of the definition of a green house gas, I thought that green house gases are the gasses that build up in a green house because of the design of the greenhouse.
@@Cooliemasteroz Greenhouse gases is a misnomer. It refers to atmospheric gases which are claimed to take part in the greenhouse effect, which scientists chose to call it to dupe the public. In fact it has no relationship to what happens in a real greenhouse, where heat builds up because the air is enclosed and can't escape. The atmosphere is open to the sky, so that cannot happen. So called greenhouse gases are those which absorb upwelling infra red radiation from the earth's surface. Water vapour is responsible for 95% of the effect, and CO2 about 3%. The rest is a collection of other gases with small effects such a methane. The logarithmic effect of CO2 is expressed by the claim that a doubling of CO2 causes 1° C of warming, so if 120 parts per million has caused 1° as claimed, you need to add another 240 ppm to get another 1°, then another 480 to get a second degree extra, and so on. However scientists do not agree on this, with various claims on this that the effect is smaller than than the claim because some of the warming is natural and not caused by CO2. Scientists do not all agree with each other, with a few at the genius level saying that the human element is insignificant, such as William Happer, the world's foremost expert in CO2 physics, who developed a CO2 laser gun for the American military, among many other scientific achievements during his working life. He is retired now.
While there is a perception that we can control the climate if only we reduced CO2, the reality is the climate is very complex and is only partially understood hence many predictions and forecasts are not accurate. That doesn't mean we can't predict if there is a large Volcano eruption there will be a few years of cooler temps. But predicting when the summer ice on the Arctic will have disappeared is a trickier question. At it is just the summer ice that predictions are being made on. And if the Arctic melts over summer completely it will cause some major problems. But on the positive side just take a look at the engineering feats in the Netherlands and places like Dubai.
Going from glacial to interglacial is like a pendulum but it is not regular and some interglacials can be shorter or longer. Life generally through interglacial times thrives ...better crops more food etc and during glacial times life generally perishes in extreme cold.
The main affected areas are the areas near the poles and life along the equator generally is much less affected.
The various tipping points for these events to take place are mixed but over the last 800,000 years, they have been more firmly connected to the various cycles/orbits of the earth and planets/tilts etc - Milankovich Cycles. Increased 20 century CO2 has possibly given a delayed transition to a glacial cycle although the timings still could be thousands of years from these cycles naturally starting.
It always seems to be forgotten that CO2 and temperature is not a linear scale and there is a point when increased CO2 has much less effect on temperature. I am not saying we shouldn't mitigate for CO2 as I think we should but targets like Zero Carbon by 2050 are knee jerk reactions to alarmist media. I am for reduction and less reliance on fossil fuels but most of all we have to think sustainability about things like overfishing, and waste management.
Last point.
Even when we break down the 20/21st century we can see there has been an Early Warming 1910 to 1940s which was not caused by CO2 as the main factor. It is still not clear what caused the warming but scientists generally think increased solar activity and reduced volcanic activity. But if you think that there were two world wars in that time you would have thought that would have made up for the reduced volcanic activity. The 50s to the early 70s is what is called a cool phase and many believed at the time this could be the trigger/tipping point for a coming glacial/ice-age. Scientists generally believe that this was caused by volcanic activity and increased pollution /smog. From 1976 to the present day is the current warm period and this is when most believe the increaed heat is from the extra CO2 generated by people, and I would go along with that.
10 cents worth of thoughts on this.
Almost fair enough excepting only you need to point to the specific items in IPCC SR 1.5 January 2019 that you disagree with or state like "Coral reefs matter little or not at all" and so on for each and every item in IPCC SR 1.5 With that WG2 instead of your sloganeering version it would then be fair enough. Go for it.
The planet is tired of us.
The only solution is to tax the Sun into submission. Taxing things fixes things, LOL. I'm going to cut down a tree and burn it.
I have better idea. Lets do nothing until its too late and then when we are about to die, launch nukes and cool planet with nuclear winter! Genius
@@arsenkurmangali2997 already too late and im sure that will happen
Thank you, to bad Trump isn’t subscribe to this channel...
He wouldn't understand it anyway.
David Beaulieu I agree,, it beyond his comprehension and all the other deniers, idiots , especially McConnell...
You have a very gentle and detailed way of explaining we are royally screwed since so far our dear leaders have done exactly nothing at all to steer us away from the future you describe. Videos like this should be headlining the evening news every single day.
Well sure he's gentle, but he's THOROUGH.
We’re cooked! One more term of trump will finish the job
989Bigboss sadly I think you’re right
Ouch! The Feedback hurts my ears. What ought our species to do? Thank you!
Really can't thank you enough for these videos.
The information you present is so clear and convincing, you deserve a vastly larger audience to help increase the sense of urgency. BBC should let you host a special daily climate change news update.
Yes. Something like that would be good. Let's all talk Auntie into it. At a minimum Mister Think should have a slot on Radio 6 (the smallest radio inside the others) at 1 am.
My step-granddaughter is doing some experiment in school with ice melting, so I came back to this to get the term "latent heat of fusion", which I could not remember. The wiki page for that concept is: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_fusion.
Do they have a large pool? see if a wall can be developed and get a dump truck full of ice and drop it in one side of the pool with orange die, and red die on the other half. Remove the walls if possible. Perhaps a small pool can demonstrate does warm migrate to cold?
An obvious cheap trick simply to get in a mention of your step-granddaughter. I would never stoop to this simply to mention either my larger granddaughter Natalie nor my new small granddaughter Ayla. You should be ashamed.
I don't think I could live without icebergs - even though I'm 2000 miles from the nearest ones.
Well, to paraphrase one of the internet's most ignorant quote -If you f#@*ed up your planet -just find a new one and live there! 🙄
This comment is for ua-cam.com/video/osmzTSYRJJE/v-deo.html
At 7:55 & 8:11 the timing depends mostly by far on the ice fraction in the zone between the 2 thick dashed horizontal lines labelled "permafrost boundaries" by Natalia Shakhova, Igor Semiletov & Evgeny Chuvilin. Since it's "permafrost" according to Shakhova et al then it contains ice because that's what permafrost is. Bone dry sand at -50 degrees isn't "permafrost", it's just cold sand. If the ice fraction in that zone shown has average 10% ice by weight then it will take 12.5x as long to thaw as it would if it had only 0.4% ice by weight. Using the 10% ice by weight example and the 7:55 start point with Arctic Ocean sea bed 5.5 degrees warmer than the pre-industrial (a realistic possibility for a significant area in the next few decades) then starting at the shallowest permafrost depth of 95 m depicted the warming heat flux will be 1.9 * 5.5 / 95 = 0.11 w/m**2 and this will thaw the ice in each 1 metre depth with a 10% by weight ice fraction in 28 years so it thaws the 112 m permafrost thickness to the greatly-reduced "permafrost boundaries" shown at 8:11 over 28 * 112 = ~3,100 years. And that is the relevant point. If it should turn out that ice fraction within "permafrost boundaries" shown by Shakhova et al is, for example, 0.4% ice by weight instead of 10% then it thaws the 112 m permafrost thickness over ~250 years instead of ~3,100 years. This is why I have stated in many comments "the timing depends mostly by far on the ice fraction".
Incredibly well put together and executed information. Thank you.
Thank you for your detailed, masterful presentations. Warming questions, please:
1. How will increased rainfall from hurricanes dumping tons of water on the land affect the fertility of food-growing regions?
2. Will new food-growing regions open up as tundra regions warm up?
New food growing regions will be compromised by oscillations between warm/cold during spring/fall which will cause killing frost to occur more often. The jet stream oscillation noted in this video due to polar warming has already caused problems in fruit growing regions of the upper midwest. It warms up too early in the spring which caused trees and crops to bloom too early and then a cold blast blows down from the north freezing the blooms and that's it for your peaches, cherries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, etc. This happened this year in N. Arkansas.
5:45 warm air won't do much to the Greenland ice sheets.
But warm rain will. And once we get an ice free Arctic we'll start to see greater evaporation leading to summer thunderstorms and major precipitation over the greater Arctic, including Greenland.
That's when the fun starts.
This was a very good summary of the causes and mechanisms of global warming. Congratulations.
If you want change. Get involved. If you think leaders aren't doing enough, become a leader. Be the change you think is needed. You can do it.
Excelent and beautifuly explained everytime. Thank you.
Soo, how did the temperature get down from the highs in the past?
How hot were the hottest temperatures historically?
Kind of forgot to talk about this.
A lot of times temperatures fell when Co2 levels were reduced
@@Dundoril reduced by what though? Evolution itself would come up with trees that grow faster, using more CO2 and self-regulating.
@@datacourier2944 " Evolution itself would come up with trees that grow faster, using more CO2 and self-regulating."
Well yes and no... Trees can aborb Co2 and under the right conditions bind it for millions of years...After all thats how fossil fuels were formed...But this process takesn millions of years... Chemical weathering is another process that can reduce CO2 over millions of years
At least one of the channels worth to visit. Thank you for persisting in trying to explain what’s happening with our environment. Never mind the bullocks.