Wake up and smell the climate change

Our planet's climate is changing and some fear disaster.
But we are still in control of our fate, at least for now
By Robin Mckie
THE OBSERVER , LONDON
Saturday, Jun 17, 2006, Page 9

Strange days have reached Ny-Alesund, Europe's most northerly research
station. Perched at the very edge of the continent, in Svalbard,
Norway, a mere 1,000km from the North Pole, the center's international
scientists have been experiencing weather that is becoming increasingly
unpredictable.
The archipelago was balmy and calm at the end of April, when it should
should still have been gripped by ice and screaming winds. In May,
Vigdis Tverberg of the Norwegian Polar Institute, reported that waters
in the Kongsfjorden -- the long strip of water that pokes eastwards
into mainland Svalbard at Ny-Alesund -- were now 2oC warmer than they
used to be a few years ago.

Two degrees may seem a modest rise, but the effects are profound, as
Tverberg stressed: "Normally, the temperature in the fjord would be
close to freezing. This winter the cooling of the water has probably
never been close enough to produce an ice cover."

Thus a major strip of water, on a latitude parallel to the northernmost
tip of Greenland, failed to produce a covering of ice this year. The
inference is clear, say researchers. Global warming, driven by
increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, is not only
increasing air temperatures, it is causing the oceans to warm
alarmingly.

Neither is Kongsfjorden unique. According to Tverberg's colleague,
Sebastian Gerland, all the other fjords on this normally ice-locked
coastline have remained open, thanks to the startling warming of their
waters. Polar ice is not so much dwindling, as scientists once
suggested might happen, it is disappearing before our eyes.

The implications are deeply worrying, as Graham Shimmield, director of
the Dunstaffnage Marine laboratory, in Scotland, points out. [. . .]

[ . . . ]

This entire article should be read very carefully:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit.../17/2003314093

Thank you, Roger.



Roger Coppock wrote:
Wake up and smell the climate change

Our planet's climate is changing and some fear disaster.
But we are still in control of our fate, at least for now
By Robin Mckie
THE OBSERVER , LONDON
Saturday, Jun 17, 2006, Page 9

Strange days have reached Ny-Alesund, Europe's most northerly research
station. Perched at the very edge of the continent, in Svalbard,
Norway, a mere 1,000km from the North Pole, the center's international
scientists have been experiencing weather that is becoming increasingly
unpredictable.
The archipelago was balmy and calm at the end of April, when it should
should still have been gripped by ice and screaming winds. In May,
Vigdis Tverberg of the Norwegian Polar Institute, reported that waters
in the Kongsfjorden -- the long strip of water that pokes eastwards
into mainland Svalbard at Ny-Alesund -- were now 2oC warmer than they
used to be a few years ago.

Two degrees may seem a modest rise, but the effects are profound, as
Tverberg stressed: "Normally, the temperature in the fjord would be
close to freezing. This winter the cooling of the water has probably
never been close enough to produce an ice cover."

Thus a major strip of water, on a latitude parallel to the northernmost
tip of Greenland, failed to produce a covering of ice this year. The
inference is clear, say researchers. Global warming, driven by
increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, is not only
increasing air temperatures, it is causing the oceans to warm
alarmingly.

Neither is Kongsfjorden unique. According to Tverberg's colleague,
Sebastian Gerland, all the other fjords on this normally ice-locked
coastline have remained open, thanks to the startling warming of their
waters. Polar ice is not so much dwindling, as scientists once
suggested might happen, it is disappearing before our eyes.

The implications are deeply worrying, as Graham Shimmield, director of
the Dunstaffnage Marine laboratory, in Scotland, points out. [. . .]

[ . . . ]

This entire article should be read very carefully:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit.../17/2003314093

In article . com,
says...

Thank you, Roger.



Roger Coppock wrote:
Wake up and smell the climate change

Our planet's climate is changing and some fear disaster.
But we are still in control of our fate, at least for now
By Robin Mckie
THE OBSERVER , LONDON
Saturday, Jun 17, 2006, Page 9

Strange days have reached Ny-Alesund, Europe's most northerly research
station. Perched at the very edge of the continent, in Svalbard,
Norway, a mere 1,000km from the North Pole, the center's international
scientists have been experiencing weather that is becoming increasingly
unpredictable.

Svalbard is a large island archipelago not connected to Europe.

This entire article should be read very carefully:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit.../17/2003314093

Sorry, there's a large error (not an uncommon one) in the story. He writes:

"It is a grim prospect. Yet there may be even more worrying, more serious
effects triggered by the disappearance of the polar ice caps.

Those vast sheets of bright, white ice make near-perfect mirrors that
shine back 80 percent of the sunlight that falls on them. Thus they help to
keep our planet cool. This measure of reflectivity is known as "albedo"
(from the Latin word for whiteness). A perfect reflector would have an
albedo of 1.0; the albedo for polar ice is around 0.8."

By contrast, the albedo for sea water is around 0.07.

"The difference between these two figures is stark. Ice has one of the
highest albedos of any substance on Earth, sea water has one of the lowest,
so we are replacing our planet's best reflector with one of the worst. In
this way, more and more solar energy is being absorbed as ice cover is
lost, causing the oceans to heat up even more -- which, of course, will
trigger even further losses of ice...."

This is simply not true. At high latitudes, the sun is low in the sky, even
at mid-summer. Thus, there is a much larger reflection of sunlight, upwards
of 30% at large zenith angles. As for sea-ice, while it's true that the albedo
of first year ice with fresh snow cover is high, as the air above warms, the
snow and sea-ice begin to melt, forming ponds on the surface. The albedo is
reduced to as low as 40% during the warmest part fo the summer melt season.
Eventually, the melt ponds reach the ocean below and the water drains into the
ocean. Combining these effects, the difference between the albedo of ocean and
sea-ice is much less than commonly believed from experience at lower latitudes.

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Swanson wrote:

Sorry, there's a large error (not an uncommon one) in the story. He writes:

"It is a grim prospect. Yet there may be even more worrying, more serious
effects triggered by the disappearance of the polar ice caps.

Those vast sheets of bright, white ice make near-perfect mirrors that
shine back 80 percent of the sunlight that falls on them. Thus they help to
keep our planet cool. This measure of reflectivity is known as "albedo"
(from the Latin word for whiteness). A perfect reflector would have an
albedo of 1.0; the albedo for polar ice is around 0.8."

By contrast, the albedo for sea water is around 0.07.

Perhaps whoever made the mistake is confusing albedo with angle of
incidence. Personally I doubt that the angle of incidence will make
much difference O/A, as the surface of both ice and water is never
perfectly smooth clear and even.

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

In article . com,
says...


Eric Swanson wrote:

Sorry, there's a large error (not an uncommon one) in the story. He writes:

"It is a grim prospect. Yet there may be even more worrying, more
serious
effects triggered by the disappearance of the polar ice caps.

Those vast sheets of bright, white ice make near-perfect mirrors that
shine back 80 percent of the sunlight that falls on them. Thus they help
to
keep our planet cool. This measure of reflectivity is known as "albedo"
(from the Latin word for whiteness). A perfect reflector would have an
albedo of 1.0; the albedo for polar ice is around 0.8."

By contrast, the albedo for sea water is around 0.07.

Perhaps whoever made the mistake is confusing albedo with angle of
incidence. Personally I doubt that the angle of incidence will make
much difference O/A, as the surface of both ice and water is never
perfectly smooth clear and even.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but your opinion is not supported by measurements.
Besides, there's Snell's Law, etc. Google search on "sun glint".

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

That depends upon how you look at it...

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=82&frame=64
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=50&frame=50

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Swanson wrote:
In article . com,
says...

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

That depends upon how you look at it...

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=82&frame=64
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=50&frame=50

But even at night the basin has some cyclones -which are I imagine, as
likely to raise the temperature by 5 or so degrees C over the average
there as in the Atlantic..

But then of course the temperature gradient top to bottom is not great
and IIRC, neither is the depth in the half nearest Europe -out of the
Norwegan Sea at least. (One hesitates to say east or west when
describing the Arctic.)

In article .com,
says...


Eric Swanson wrote:
In article . com,
says...

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

That depends upon how you look at it...


http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=82&frame=64

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=50&frame=50

But even at night the basin has some cyclones -which are I imagine, as
likely to raise the temperature by 5 or so degrees C over the average
there as in the Atlantic..

Sorry, guy, you lost me with that one. The pictures above are images of sun
glint as seen from the Space Shuttle. I thought we were refering to albedo..
Hint: The Space Shuttle orbit doesn't go far enough northwards to image the
sub-polar gyre of the North Atlantic.

But then of course the temperature gradient top to bottom is not great
and IIRC, neither is the depth in the half nearest Europe -out of the
Norwegan Sea at least. (One hesitates to say east or west when
describing the Arctic.)

What the hell are you "talking" about? Apparently not the ocean/sea-ice
albedo feedback in the Arctic.

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Swanson wrote:
In article .com,
says...


Eric Swanson wrote:

In article . com,
says...

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

That depends upon how you look at it...



http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=82&frame=64

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=50&frame=50

But even at night the basin has some cyclones -which are I imagine, as
likely to raise the temperature by 5 or so degrees C over the average
there as in the Atlantic..


Sorry, guy, you lost me with that one. The pictures above are images of sun
glint as seen from the Space Shuttle. I thought we were refering to albedo..
Hint: The Space Shuttle orbit doesn't go far enough northwards to image the
sub-polar gyre of the North Atlantic.

So I wasn't the only one confused (phew). The images
are of the Indian Ocean. Not the Arctic.

Scott

Scott L wrote:
Eric Swanson wrote:
In article .com,
says...


Eric Swanson wrote:

In article . com,
says...

The northern waters appear grey for a good reason.

That depends upon how you look at it...



http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=82&frame=64

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseo...ll=50&frame=50

But even at night the basin has some cyclones -which are I imagine, as
likely to raise the temperature by 5 or so degrees C over the average
there as in the Atlantic..


Sorry, guy, you lost me with that one. The pictures above are images of sun
glint as seen from the Space Shuttle. I thought we were refering to albedo..
Hint: The Space Shuttle orbit doesn't go far enough northwards to image the
sub-polar gyre of the North Atlantic.

So I wasn't the only one confused (phew). The images
are of the Indian Ocean. Not the Arctic.

Albedo -and in fact insolation is of no concern to me. I doubt that
there is all that much O/A difference year to year in the input-output.

Certainly not enough to cause the emotional disturbances in the OP
anyway.

I was merely wandering how much cyclonic activity affects temperatures
in the Arctic basin. It appears that these disturbances start in the
depths of an ocean. What causes their giration remains to be seen.

(I of course already know what, if not how.)

Another difference between me and the lost, is that I see cyclonic
activity as regenerative not destructive.

But then I see earthquakes and vocanic activity in that light too. It
is people building houses in dangerous places not the weather itself
that causes the problems and it doesn't help when the countries
involved are run by criminally incompetents.

In article .com,
says...


Scott L wrote:
Eric Swanson wrote:
says...

But even at night the basin has some cyclones -which are I imagine, as
likely to raise the temperature by 5 or so degrees C over the average
there as in the Atlantic..


Sorry, guy, you lost me with that one. The pictures above are images of
sun
glint as seen from the Space Shuttle. I thought we were refering to
albedo..
Hint: The Space Shuttle orbit doesn't go far enough northwards to image
the
sub-polar gyre of the North Atlantic.

So I wasn't the only one confused (phew). The images
are of the Indian Ocean. Not the Arctic.

Albedo -and in fact insolation is of no concern to me. I doubt that
there is all that much O/A difference year to year in the input-output.

Certainly not enough to cause the emotional disturbances in the OP
anyway.

I was merely wandering how much cyclonic activity affects temperatures
in the Arctic basin. It appears that these disturbances start in the
depths of an ocean. What causes their giration remains to be seen.

(I of course already know what, if not how.)

Another difference between me and the lost, is that I see cyclonic
activity as regenerative not destructive.

But then I see earthquakes and vocanic activity in that light too. It
is people building houses in dangerous places not the weather itself
that causes the problems and it doesn't help when the countries
involved are run by criminally incompetents.

In the physical sciences, one measures what one can't see. What measurements
do you offer to support your "vision" of motions in the Arctic Ocean, given
that there's a cap of sea-ice for most of the year? How you can see anything
while wearing that tinfoil helmet is beyond me. I suppose you just close
your eyes and use your "in-vision".

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------