Global Warming

[J. T. Toad]

Originally Posted by VRM

You probably don't have this problem, but I would really rather not have my summers any more humid than they already are.

Steve

uh oh, don't hedge the bet

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,271232,00.html

but then again...

http://www.junkscience.com/

"... how the heck would they know? NASA's GISS modelE, their state-of-the-art virtual world, already overstates western US summer temps by that much"

[bomelia]

http://home.comcast.net/~pdnoerd/NoerdlingerBrower.pdf

I think the point here is that we all possess preconcieved notions...

The Artic melt would do little (some, but little). The Antartic is another story. Not sure about Greenland, but I got the impression the Antartic could raise levels by 4 meters (200 feet?????). But also, this process takes a LOT of time (see article). Hundreds of years. More.

Its just a little bit harder to fall prey to these politicos who flash fast facts if you have the facts already.

Anybody got any other "Global Warming" facts? Lots of great replies!! Thanks!

Mike

[Scott S]

VRM

You and Archimedes disagree.

I tried my experiment but used bourbon instead of water, after the 3rd highball I really don't care anymore...

Beancounter has the most correct anwser I have seen after 18 google pages but the problem is that we really don't know how thick the layer of sea ice is in total under the water ice is at the north pole.

There is some thought that the land is actually rising and the sea floor is getting deeper due to the extra water of the melt from the last ice age.

Scott S

[Scott S]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Got to thinking about it today. What do you think will happen to the sealevel if the the Arctic Polar ice cap melts?

Mike

Your initial question was about the arctic, the research I have seen says that the Antarctic is actually getting a bit colder.

Isn't 4 meters around 13 feet?

Scott S

[J. T. Toad]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Anybody got any other "Global Warming" facts? Lots of great replies!! Thanks!

Mike

seriously, there are no facts, only unproven theories and hypothesis. "Global Warming" is a much abused phrase to encompass all too many unexplained variables and political agendas.

For example, are you asking about Solar, man-made (which includes many types), etc.?

[VRM]

Scott,
Actually, Archimedes and I completely agree. Notice that the Archimedes Principle references weight, which is not really applicable here. I was referencing volume. Note that my numbers come to a 2.11% increase. This is based only on fresh water ice floating in fresh water. This is based on the ice cube challenge. If you have a large glass, then that 2.11% of gain from the cube will be spread around the entire surface area and you will likely not notice it.

All melted floating ice will add somewhere between 2.11 and 2.6% (depending on salinity) of its volume to the total surface area of all the oceans. It's really going to be just a drop in the bucket (pardon the pun ).

To get the total rise from the Arctic: Multiply the total volume of ice in Km3 by something between .0211 and .026 and divide by 335,258,000. That resulting number will be the volume of water each square KM of ocean will increase by.
Don't forget, though - that number is going straight up - it does not take into consideration any sort of spread due to geographical circumstances.

For the Antarctic - there is roughly 30,000,000 cubic Km of ice (according to a number of sources). If you divide that number by the total area you get a volume of 0.089Km3 per Km2 of ocean. That equals 89 meters of rise per square kilometer. Again, this is straight up, and does not take into account the spread of water as it occupies more surface area. The acutal number will be less because of this spread, and because there will be backfill of water into some areas occupied by the Western Ice Shelf (which is sitting on submerged land).

If the entire Antarctic ice melts in the next 100 years we have much bigger problems (like 500 degree days) than just rising water levels. Don't worry, it is not going to happen in Al Gores lifetime.

Steve

[Scott S]

Take one oz of water out of a 8 oz glass. freeze it into a cube and put it back in the glass where it will float, the ice cube melts and you still have 8 oz.

The problem with sea ice is it is a mixture of both so there probably would have to be some averaging.

Can you imagine a layer of ice at one time 8000 feet thick laying over the Great Lakes as some estimate?

The melt from the current ice age has put nearly 500 feet of increase in the oceans depth.

Scott S

[LoBelly]

I'm not sure if you're interested or not but maybe a little reading about Tuvalu might be thought provoking.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/st...582445,00.html

Television lately has also shown the odd article about Islands off Bouganville.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle759319.ece

These dont get much of run in the Australian Press and if you read a little more widely you'll quickly figure out why.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...733684706.html


LoBelly

[BeanCounter]

Hooray for John Howard. Tuvalu is dying not because the water is getting higher. It's dying because it's land is getting lower, due to erosion. Similar to what is happening in the Gulf near New Orleans. Sometimes **** just happens. They need to move, just like the idiots in NO.

Knowing the way things generally happen it's probably their big play to sneak across the Rio Grande and get amnesty.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Scott S

Take one oz of water out of a 8 oz glass. freeze it into a cube and put it back in the glass where it will float, the ice cube melts and you still have 8 oz.


Scott S

Scott,
Of course, but until that cube finishes melting you will have LESS water in the glass and a lower water line. Not enough to be seen by the naked eye, but it is still there.

Roughly 11% of that cube will be sticking out of the water due to the decrease in density of the ice as compared to water. That 11% will not count as part of the water line until it has melted. Most of it is offset by the increase in volume (9%) of the ice over water, but not all.

When you put that ice cube in the glass your water line will be a little bit lower until your ice cube melts.

Steve

[bomelia]

Uh, Scott, he is correct (damn that hurt!)

Right, 4 meters is 13 feet, but I thought VRM said 200 feet.

Due to some subliminal suggestion, I am off to get some Makers & Ice.

Mike

[VRM]

Thanks for the confirmation, Mike.

I did say 200 feet. Well, others were sayng 200 if all the ice in Antarctica melted. I looked up the total volume of ice and the surface area of oceans on the planet and did the math. I came up with 89 meters. I think it equates to around 290 feet or so. I wrote about it in post #26.

Check the math if you want, but I think I did it correctly. I also don't have access to topographical maps to figure out the increase in ocean surface area if the water level increases.

Where did you get 4 meters for the Antarctica melt from?

Yeah, I think a vodka and ice is in my very near future...

Steve

[Scott S]

Bo go back to your corner!

If the ocean was all liquid and then some of it became ice would the level change?

Another silly question, is there more or less water on the earth than there was before man became aware?

Scott S

[Scott S]

Olives don't float, thats is why I order my Martinis without them they take up space.

But Archimedes would disagree with that too wouldn't he?

Scott S

[bomelia]

The problem with saying it would rise that high lies in the assumption that the surface area of the ocean woul remain constant...it would not. It would get larger because of spilling over onto land. Read that article that I posted. I figured that was where you got your numbers in the first place.

Mike

[Ron61]

Just my to bits worth. I agree with Mike. The ocean isn't going to raise 200 feet straight up. It will spill over into lower lands and cover them by how much I don't know but that will lower the over all raise of the water. And there will be a lot larger part of the Earth's surface covered by water. Maybe living in the mountains has some advantages after all.

Ron

[VRM]

Mike and Ron,
C'mon guys - I've been saying that!

My numbers come to 89 meters if all the ice in the Antarctic melts. That is about 290 feet of water rise. But I have also stated in many of my posts that that is straight up, and that I have no way of calculating the change in surface area of the water. Yep, that 290 feet would spread out - and all the numbers that I have seen show somewhere between 170 and 200 feet when that spread is taken into consideration.

Mike, I read your article when you first posted it (it's a good one BTW), and it seemed to be saying exactly what I was saying, though my math was a bit easier.

I did re-read your article and I think I figured out where you got 4 meters from. On page 15 the article says that if 5% of the Western Ice Shelf in Antarctica melted it would add about 4 meters to the level of the oceans. That number is NOT for all of the ice in the Antarctic. Mine was.

As for my numbers - 5th grade science class for the water volume/ice cube stuff. I have a pretty good memory for trivia.
I looked up the surface area of the oceans on the internet, and I also looked up the total volume of ice in the Antarctic. The math was easy.

Steve

[Ron61]

Steve,

Your numbers are most likely pretty close but have they taken into account all of the underground caverns and places that are very low like the Dead Sea area and such? That is almost impossible to account for as they are still finding huge underground caverns that they didn't even know existed until in some instances weeks ago. and what happens when the cold sea water gets into a vent and hit hot lava?

Ron

[VRM]

Ron, There was one guy who did a lot of that and came to an actual number of about 200 feet. He took all of that into consideration, as well as the open space left by the grounded ice in Antarctica.

I found this on the web that shows the US with a 66 meter rise.



Looks like Mike could end up with oceanfront property!

Steve

[DocDirk]

I've been reading this post with interest, and I'm ignorant of most of the math and science involved. I did, however, hear an interview on the radio a few weeks ago with a scientist who claimed that with all parameters taken into account (which I don't understand) the net rise in sea level would be something under 3 feet. He had a credentials list of course, but then don't a ton of would-be experts? I'll try to find that information source and post it in the next couple of days.