Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Tuesday February 26 2019, @07:09PM   Printer-friendly
from the löylyä-lissää dept.

A recent report on climate simulations show that global warming could break up stratocumulus clouds[$], letting in more energy as High CO2 levels break up stratocumulus cloud decks, once the levels rise above 1,200 ppm. Stratocumulus provide no precipitation but do cover about 20% of the low-latitude oceans and are especially prevalent in the subtropics, cooling by providing shade. If they disappear then, according to calculations, the added sunlight hitting the ground or ocean would increase temperatures by over 8°C.

Now, new findings reported today in the journal Nature Geoscience make the case that the effects of cloud loss are dramatic enough to explain ancient warming episodes like the PETM — and to precipitate future disaster. Climate physicists at the California Institute of Technology performed a state-of-the-art simulation of stratocumulus clouds, the low-lying, blankety kind that have by far the largest cooling effect on the planet. The simulation revealed a tipping point: a level of warming at which stratocumulus clouds break up altogether. The disappearance occurs when the concentration of CO2 in the simulated atmosphere reaches 1,200 parts per million — a level that fossil fuel burning could push us past in about a century, under “business-as-usual” emissions scenarios. In the simulation, when the tipping point is breached, Earth’s temperature soars 8 degrees Celsius, in addition to the 4 degrees of warming or more caused by the CO2 directly.

Once clouds go away, the simulated climate “goes over a cliff,” said Kerry Emanuel, a climate scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A leading authority on atmospheric physics, Emanuel called the new findings “very plausible,” though, as he noted, scientists must now make an effort to independently replicate the work.

To imagine 12 degrees of warming, think of crocodiles swimming in the Arctic and of the scorched, mostly lifeless equatorial regions during the PETM. If carbon emissions aren’t curbed quickly enough and the tipping point is breached, “that would be truly devastating climate change,” said Caltech’s Tapio Schneider, who performed the new simulation with Colleen Kaul and Kyle Pressel.

Huber said the stratocumulus tipping point helps explain the volatility that’s evident in the paleoclimate record. He thinks it might be one of many unknown instabilities in Earth’s climate. “Schneider and co-authors have cracked open Pandora’s box of potential climate surprises,” he said, adding that, as the mechanisms behind vanishing clouds become clear, “all of a sudden this enormous sensitivity that is apparent from past climates isn’t something that’s just in the past. It becomes a vision of the future.”


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:00AM (12 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:00AM (#807421) Journal

    but humans have long excelled at the ultimate adaption -- that of adapting the environment to suit us rather than vice versa.

    LOL, ROFL. Oh, the irony.

    Why do we seem unable to stop global warming, then?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:19AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:19AM (#807426)

    Why do we seem unable to stop global warming, then?

    Because no one actually cares about it... If people who believed in the CO2 problem wanted to actually stop it there would be a movement towards near 100% nuclear power. I don't see that coming from anyone who claims to be afraid of CO2. It seems if they can't get their proposed increased spying and taxes as part of the solution they could care less.

    Actually, the only people to propose this actual solution are those who don't really put much stock in the climate models anyway. To them it is a "solution" to a non-problem.

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:48AM (6 children)

    by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:48AM (#807436) Journal

    I'm sitting here in my garage with an ambient temperature close to freezing wearing a double layer of fleece, shirt, tshirt, long johns, warm socks, and two knit caps -- I also have an infrared heater about a meter to my right and warm latte I just made. I wouldn't be typing this on my garage computer without those adjustments to the environment.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday February 27 2019, @03:42AM (5 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 27 2019, @03:42AM (#807452) Journal

      I wouldn't be typing this on my garage computer without those adjustments to the the local environment that I can have control over.

      Because many bird species build their nest and insulate it against bad weather and many animals dig themselves a burrow - i.e. demonstrate the same level of "control over the environment" as you do.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 27 2019, @01:29PM (3 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 27 2019, @01:29PM (#807582) Journal

        Because many bird species build their nest and insulate it against bad weather and many animals dig themselves a burrow

        And humans make an advanced technological society that allows them to pack 4 orders of magnitude more people in a space than a hunter gather society could manage. For example, Kwun Tong, a part of Hong Kong packs 57k people [www.gov.hk] per square km while hunter gather societies manage somewhere around 3 people [persquaremile.com] per square km.

        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday February 27 2019, @01:56PM (2 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 27 2019, @01:56PM (#807593) Journal

          And humans make an advanced technological society that allows them to pack 4 orders of magnitude more people in a space than a hunter gather society could manage.

          It is still local environ adjusting.

          Hang on.... You aren't actually saying that "humans manage to alter the environment at planetary scale", are you now, khallow?
          Because if you do, you are in a very dangerous territory my friend - it's only one step away from admitting both AGW and reversing it are in fact possible. You know, like in "Anthropogenic GW". Just think the devastating impact this admission may have to your psyche, then slooowly, sloooowly back away, there be dragons here.

          (large grin)

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Thursday February 28 2019, @03:10AM (1 child)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 28 2019, @03:10AM (#807955) Journal

            It is still local environ adjusting.

            The global trade and logistic chain that makes that possible is not, however.

            Hang on.... You aren't actually saying that "humans manage to alter the environment at planetary scale", are you now, khallow?

            Clearly I have never said anything remotely like that! For example

            [jimtheowl:] the current area of urbanization is 'less than' 1% of the Earth's surface

            [khallow:]The actual land area used for human activities is far greater than that. You have about a third devoted to agriculture and pasture land. You have somewhere around 5% used for the road system.

            Or here [soylentnews.org] where I deny multiple times (five cited) that global climate change is a thing. Such as:

            I agree that global warming is happening right now and that it's to a great degree caused by humans.

            Or the numerous times I rank [soylentnews.org] global habitat destruction as a bigger problem than global climate change.

            As to the Leap Manifesto, it completely ignores that there are seven billion people on this planet and not all of them have the standard of living or relatively low fertility that Canada enjoys. The Manifesto merely assumes that global warming is the most important problem out there, ignoring the more important problems such as overpopulation, poverty, corruption, and arable land and habitat destruction. Petroleum remains a tool for successfully fixing bigger problems than global warming. It would be good to remember this.

            Clearly a denial that humans have any sort of global impact at all. Clearly.

            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday February 28 2019, @03:46AM

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 28 2019, @03:46AM (#807963) Journal

              Updated. TA.

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:39PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 27 2019, @02:39PM (#807605)

        I don't see those birds making coffee-flavored milk beverages.

  • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday March 06 2019, @04:32AM (3 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Wednesday March 06 2019, @04:32AM (#810572) Journal

    We have had this discussion a number of times. We have several solutions out there for Climate Change, all that matters now is which decision we choose and when. Takyon posted some links a while back from an early adopter of the Climate Change stuff where rather than just talk doom and gloom he bothered trying to find ways to fix it. His suggestion was 500 billion over the next 80 years to disburse something like a gram of Sulfur per ton of CO2 to break down the built up CO2. It would require something like eight jets running continuously for the next 80 years and revert the climate back to before we started our long track of emissions. This is currently the cheapest solution, although obviously not the best. Every year the costs to mitigate climate change will become less as tech growth seems to be growing faster than the problems being presented. The only solution leftists are willing to go along with is getting rid of all the cattle, getting rid of the personal vehicles, getting rid of luxury goods, living on reduced power, not having kids (but promoting others to have kids), and then committing suicide. BP in all of their greed probably already has a solution, and is just waiting for the right time to force us to buy it.

    --
    Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday March 06 2019, @05:09AM (2 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 06 2019, @05:09AM (#810577) Journal

      His suggestion was 500 billion over the next 80 years to disburse something like a gram of Sulfur per ton of CO2 to break down the built up CO2.

      Exactly how creating acid rain and depleting the ozone layer in the process actually addresses the core problem: too much CO2?

      Are we looking to "solutions" just to allow us burning dinojuice a little longer? What when these patches come to bite our head off?

      The only solution leftists are willing to go along with is getting rid of all the cattle, getting rid of the personal vehicles, getting rid of luxury goods, living on reduced power, not having kids (but promoting others to have kids), and then committing suicide. BP in all of their greed probably already has a solution, and is just waiting for the right time to force us to buy it.

      You're disingenuous or delusional.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday March 06 2019, @03:12PM (1 child)

        by Sulla (5173) on Wednesday March 06 2019, @03:12PM (#810716) Journal

        Then you should read your own party's talking points. I graduated high-school back in 07 and they pushed everything in the paragraph you think is fake hard. If you don't walk or take the bus you are evil. If you want kids you are evil because we should just take immigrants instead. If you are playing video games you are evil for wasting electricity.

        >acid rain
        That's why I said it's not a good idea right now and needs more work. The guy's research claims that because the process is over 80 years the effects of acid rain would be negligible but I didn't read through all of his research on that. But at least he is trying instead of trying to shove faaxism down my throat.

        --
        Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday March 06 2019, @11:03PM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 06 2019, @11:03PM (#810914) Journal

          Then you should read your own party's talking points... If you want kids you are evil because we should just take immigrants instead.

          As an immigrant from Europe in Australia as I am, kindly enlighten me what party would that be?

          But at least he is trying instead of trying to shove faaxism down my throat.

          Yes and his efforts allow you to sleep well at night without doing anything.
          And this is important because clearly you are the whole reason this world exists and you should live your life free of any responsibility.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford