Slashdot Mirror
Northern Sea Route Through Arctic Becomes a Reality
Hugh Pickens writes "Andrew Revkin writes in the NY Times that since 1553, when Sir Hugh Willoughby led an expedition north in search of a sea passage over Russia to the Far East, mariners have dreamed of a Northern Sea Route through Russia's Arctic ocean that could cut thousands of miles compared with alternate routes. A voyage between Hamburg and Yokohama is only 6,600 nm. via the Northern Sea Route — less than 60% of the 11,400 nm. Suez route. Now in part because of warming and the retreat and thinning of Arctic sea ice in summer, this northern sea route is becoming a reality with the 12,700-ton 'Beluga Fraternity,' designed for a mix of ice and open seas, poised to make what appears to be the first such trip. The German ship picked up equipment in Ulsan, South Korea, on July 23 and arrived in Vladivostok on the 25th with a final destination at the docks in Novyy Port, a Siberian outpost. After that, if conditions permit, it will head to Antwerp or Rotterdam, marking what company officials say would be the first time a vessel has crossed from Asia to Europe through the Arctic on a commercial passage."
A wonderful, magical route that can turn kilometers into nanometers?
Um wait nm? Are you in Tron or something?
As long as our global economy is stimulated, I don't see any issue with destroying our habitat...
Can we use this as a clear proof of a unique ice sheet retractation or was the news really about the boat design ?
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
A voyage between Hamburg and Yokohama is only 6,600 nm. via the Northern Sea Route â" less than 60% of the 11,400 nm. Suez route.
So it sounds like this new route will conserve fuel and cut out at least 40% of their CO2 emissions.
Imagine the benefits to the environment if we could just figure out a way to melt the ice caps completely. Our greenhouse emissions would plummet!
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
there's no such thing as global warming..
The Artic Archipeligo is Canada's. Ask permission first. Despite what the American government may think, there is no international waterway through the Artic Archipeligo.
If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
Canadians and Russians would certainly save a fortune on heating bills.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Imagine the benefits to the environment if we could just figure out a way to melt the ice caps completely. Our greenhouse emissions would plummet!
Of course they would. Melt the ice caps, flood the most populated areas of the planet, and bingo - mankind's greenhouse gas emissions drop dramatically!
I am officially gone from
So that they can put any polar bears stranded on isolated ice floes out of their misery.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Not to mention eliminating the fees to use the Suez Canal, and the ransoms paid to Somali Pirates.
What can't GW do? GW FTW.
"...Russia's Arctic ocean"
Excuse me, dipshits. That is not Russia's ocean. It's an international ocean belonging to all.
Fata viam invenient.
Beluga Fraternity? My Russian is so rusty I might just be typing the measurements of the playmate of the month, but wouldn't that portmanteau mean "White Brotherhood"? They've gotta mean something other that that, right?
I am not a crackpot.
Russia doesn't really import such energy but rather exports it. Russian natural gas alone heats big proportions of Europe.
I am the lawn!
So it's real, after all?
Just a century ago the very same thing would have hailed as yet another victory of mankind over mother nature. Industries would be falling each other claiming it happened because of human activity and it is a great thing too. Now apologists for the fossil fuel hawkers will be vigorously be denying it has anything to do with burning of fossil fuels. All that carbon assiduously sequestered by trillions of microscopic marine organisms and millions of tons of plants over million of years has been released in just over one hundred years. People with obvious vested interests deny anthropogenesis of this phenomenon, and I am surprised they still have a few molecules of credibility left.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
If I lived in a country like Russia (or Canada, Norway, Finland, etc, for that matter), I'd be an enthusiastic supporter of anything that might even possibly tip the balance of the climate towards Global Warming for exactly these sorts of reasons. I mean, if you owned the largest frozen mass of land anywhere, why even care about such a cause?
http://www.beanleafpress.com
Imagine the benefits to the environment if we could just figure out a way to melt the ice caps completely. Our greenhouse emissions would plummet!
Of course they would. Melt the ice caps, flood the most populated areas of the planet, and bingo - mankind's greenhouse gas emissions drop dramatically!
The arctic ice cap has ALREADY displaced the amount of water it currently contains. Melting it would have no additional effect on sea level. I, for one, welcome the removal of that troublesome ice sheet up north. For too long, the Suez and Panama Canals have stifled global competition. Just think of the fuel savings!
Bearded Dragon
The arctic ice cap has ALREADY displaced the amount of water it currently contains. Melting it would have no additional effect on sea level. I, for one, welcome the removal of that troublesome ice sheet up north. For too long, the Suez and Panama Canals have stifled global competition. Just think of the fuel savings!
Good thing we don't have to worry about all of that ice covering Greenland and the Antarctic displacing ocean water ... oh. Wait a minute.
The OP of the message I replied to made no reference to the ice sheets on land.
Next time, when you think you are about to be witty. Stop. Because you aren't.
Bearded Dragon
You bet what you have. You don't have the right to bet my children's future. You don't even have the right to bet your children's future. Why don't you bet what you do have? Buy Exxon Mobil call options now. With all your money. Put your money where your mouth is.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
The OP of the message I replied to made no reference to the ice sheets on land.
It also didn't exclude the ice caps on land. It just said "ice caps", which I would imagine includes both kinds.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Think of the Darien Gap. It has been navigated by vehicles, rather special purpose ones. If you read that it was now being served by a regular truck route, you might suspect things had changed a bit.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
The OP of the message I replied to made no reference to the ice sheets on land.
Next time, when you think you are about to be witty. Stop. Because you aren't.
Which part of "ice caps" confused you into thinking the OP was only talking about the Arctic?
Soviet's have regularly sailed through the Northern Sea Route in summer since, at least, the middle of the last century. There is some great prose written with such sailing as a backdrop, in fact (in Russian, not sure about translations).
The sailing was not easy and the airplanes were occasionally required to investigate movement of ice-fields. At the beginning and the end of the season, the ships were organized in convoys, that were headed by icebreakers. (USSR even had a few nuclear-powered ones, first one built in 1959). But in the middle of the summer a regular ship could make the trip on its own...
Maybe, there is less ice there now, but it is not like the trip has only just become possible.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You haven't been in the Bering sea, have you?
no further comments.
I talk to the programmers so the customers don't have to.
I wonder how many other positive aspects of global warming there are? I realize the warming is the scare, but has there been much examination into benefits of global warming?
Sorry, but this is not the famed Northwest Passage. If anything it is a NorthEAST passage.
Proverbs 21:19
Climate myths: It's all a conspiracy
Climate myths: Global warming is down to the Sun, not humans
Climate myths: Mars and Pluto are warming too
Why do these discredited myths get moderated up on Slashdot again and again? Seriously.
I think that the best way to promote wide-spread browser standards on the web is for us all to give Microsoft our support and money when they promise that they will work hard to standardize the web. Microsoft has a history of thinking selflessly. And after all, Windows is on 90% of the world's computers. So who better to make sure that the changes get put into effect? Of course you'll always have the non-conformist Linux nuts.
I also believe in passing laws so the US government can force tax money from your paycheck because they promise that they will do something about climate change. They've always been really good about delivering on their promises. And only the government can force people to do the right thing. Of course you'll always have those pesky idiots who think they have a right to do whatever they want with the money they earn.
There is really no other solution that has a chance of working. Now imagine if the US Government and Microsoft got together to solve all the worlds problems!
Climate myths: The cooling after 1940 shows CO2 does not cause warming
Climate myths: The lower atmosphere is cooling, not warming
Climate myths: Global warming stopped in 1998
I'm surprised you didn't mention Mars and Pluto.
I wonder why these discredited myths keep getting moderated up on Slashdot time and time again - it's almost as if there's a conspiracy to make skeptics look ill-informed.
How exciting that these adventurers are finally able to go through the fabled 'northern route'! This fulfils a dream that has remained vibrant within the minds of those who go down to the sea in ships! When the Dutch Sea Caption Barents discovered the Barents Sea, imgine how the world would have changed had the passage gone all the way through!
This will also allow better trade between Siberia and Europe and create a plethora of multi-cultural interaction which can only augment the good news over this joyous event!
It is said within those who actaully have studied geology, and who have done things with core samples that Earth only has had ice caps over twenty % of it's history. Also they say that massive geologic change is normal and unavoidable. Let's say that they are correct -- then what does this obsession with stopping the progress of Earth's natural processes by politically powerful busy-bodies who seek to 'win valuble prizes?'
You people who are paid to promote the global warming agenda have become an inquisition against the sane-heads who see through your propaganda-speel: how do you live with yourselves? Would you have supported a pope against Gallileo? Would you have been Nazi's doing what you precieved the majority wanted? Would you have been sychophants to an evil queen?
Your evil queen ideas on global warming have become tired rethoric that is as bogus as a flat earth theory. If ice melts then it melts. We live in an ever-changing world. Ah, but somethings don't change. There is still the constant and continuous propaganda trying to flood into the minds of those who are just looking for entertainment. You keep beating your propaganda drum. You keep up the lies. But lies are lies. If some bad thing is predicted it is a non-sequetor to say that we have to give over our rights and liberties to people who drum-beat propaganda.
The uses of psychology and operent conditioning techniques in media and advertising has created this class of people who think they are a leadership class. They have deluded themselves, by living with in a bubble-web of lies of their own creation, that they 'rule' and are thus 'empowered' to effect 'social change'. These deluded people think that they lead. And they beat this constant drum of "global warming is bad. Give them more power."
Everytime you propaganda posters put up these alarmist articles you give sane-heads yet one more example of your fuzzy philosophies. You relate premises to conclusions without any logic at all, but just with the ferver of a brainwashed apparatchick. Your arguement goes like this: "False Premise. Now give us more power."
Do you hear yourselves? You have become transparent.
I know a lot of people who read slash-dot probably don't care. But I am of the mind that if Gallileo were alive today and he were in prison I would want to free him. Your minds are in prison to the premise that global warming is bad. It is neither bad nor good. It is like the rain or the wind. What is bad is how some powerful forces want to socially remake our whole economy and give themselve a huge boon at the expense of a fooled public.
So I am beating the drum of liberty. Liberate your mind from these false prophets. Do they really care about anything more than being powerful and important.?
Open your minds, people. Liberty of thought must preceed the Liberty of nations. The chains of fallacy, though not made of metal, can bind in just as effective a way. The agenda-mongering of some is a dangerous game. It takes us off the focus on real issues. So instead of us working real issues we get lost into a fantasy world of trying to stop the natural march of geologic change. There must be better things on which to focus the heart-felt zeal. And I mean both the zeal of tho
Can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs, that's what I always say.
The OP of the message I replied to made no reference to the ice sheets on land.
Well, unless there's some magical force shield that can melt arctic ice over water but not over Greenland, the two go hand in hand. I'll give the GP credit for possessing a functioning brain.
Whatever it is, it isn't Joule...
compared to yours?
Remember, what we want is ENERGY.
CO2 is an unwanted by-product of one method of attaining it.
All this baloney about cow farts, tailpipes, and smokestacks is just a big smokescreen. I'm afraid you're going to find that Lex has already bought up all that soon-to-be beachfront property. We'll be vacationing in Otisburg before we know it. It's a small place......
Other than Beluga being an Arctic whale and a type of sturgeon, both with obvious connections to Russia and the Arctic? Or referring to Belarus and the White Russians.
Actually, a simple Google search reveals that it belongs to a shipping company named the Beluga Group, all of whose ships are named "Beluga _______. Odds are the name means nothing in particular.
It can have a slight effect. Much of the ice is fresh water which has a slightly lower density than sea water. So a quantity of fresh water melting into a salt ocean will raise it a (very little) bit.
http://geography.about.com/library/misc/ucghyben.htm
Canadians and Russians would certainly save a fortune on heating bills.
Not as much as you would believe. Ice and snow has really good isolating properties and when it's warmer (= mild winter) cold is created on the surface of buildings when moisture evaporates.
But basically, yes there is some savings. But the total cost is higher then the savings in heating. I live in Sweden (as in: vikings, reindeers, moose, ABBA, rotten fish and sausages and milk as food, pirate bay, nobel prize and blond giant people; not Switzerland: alps, hidden nazi and mob money, milk chocolate, cu-cu clocks, Yello (the band) and tiny hairy people with big nooses; I don't get why these two countries get confused all the time, the ony thing we have in common is a huge milk production and making really good cheese). Anyhow, after a mild winter Swedish media reports how much money was saved in heating. Every year after a mild winter those savings are crushed because of the cost for smaller crops, bug, slug and rodent infestations, new plant diseases, landslides, mold, rot and rust.
I imagine that the cost of global warming will be gigantic in those parts of Russia that have built everything on the concept that permafrost is indeed permanent.
Melting it would have no additional effect on sea level.
This is true. Sea levels would not change. However, consider the release of massive amounts of fresh (well extremely low salt content) water into the connected oceans. The massive cooling process could be enough to stop the North Atlantic Current and begin a cooling cycle for most of Europe.
<sarcasm> I for one welcome the removal of that troublesome ice sheet up north and that nasty continent Europe. For too long, Europe by existing has prevented America from having a Monopoly on the global economy. Just think of the fuel savings with 730 million people gone!</sarcasm>
But global warming isn't real!
I KUT J00 M4NG!!!
Mod parent up, it's definitely NOT a troll.
The Arctic Ocean is now largely clear of ice, heralding vast new business opportunities, President Sarah Palin announced today.
The famed North-West Passage is now permanently navigable, with huge shipping volumes between Arctic nations. "We're considering just building a highway straight across," said Mrs Palin, "though those long desert drives can be dangerous to health without air conditioning."
Tourists have been flocking to Alaska and northern Canada to get away from the boiling oceans and sulphurous atmosphere around Hawaii. The Nunavut Tourist Bureau has shipped 60,000 swimming polar bear shirts this month alone. "It's also clear," said Palin, "that the bears have no business claiming to be endangered when there's so many jobs in tourism for them."
Oil drilling in Alaska will also be much easier, and will of course further the conditions leading to this Arctic economic boom. "No it won't," said Palin. "What are you talking about?"
"I'll say one thing for them evilutionist climate change conspirators," giggled Palin, "their hard work to take away the ice and make it look like they were right has done wonders for us good and decent folk."
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Just think of the reduction in CO2 emission coming from cargo ships!
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
To think of all that effort the US went through during the Cold War to deny Russia any good year-round ice-free ports.
Now, thanks to our profligarate lifestyles, Russia is about to have hundreds of them. I hope they at least thank us...
Next time, when you think you're better than someone else and are about to post a derisory remark to that effect. Stop. Because you aren't.
That is a difference of 4,400 nanometers only! :-)
Without commenting on energy overall, but Canada is a net exporter of petroleum.
Canada has a small population with large natural resource deposits. With or without climate change, Canadians have everything they need for a lifestyle even more comfortable than they already have.
Their ignorance, apathy and sometimes outright cowardice prevent them from attaining this lifestyle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque
"The magnitude of torque depends on three quantities: First, the force applied; second, the length of the lever arm[4] connecting the axis to the point of force application; and third, the angle between the two. In symbols:
\boldsymbol \tau = \mathbf{r}\times \mathbf{F}\,\!
\tau = rF\sin \theta\,\!
where
Ï is the torque vector and Ï is the magnitude of the torque,"
Now tell me, is the SCALAR value Joules a vector..?
Up to the point where they lose all their permafrost... a few buildings... a LOT of their roads...
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
Supposedly some of the climate models that predict global warming also predict it would cause increased precipitation and glacial build-up in Greenland and Antarctica, resulting in *lower* sea levels.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
How on earth did your post get modded as Informative? You link to a site that says "The Sun's energy output has not increased since direct measurements began in 1978'. That is completely untrue, the sun's energy output varies daily, and the sun goes through 11 year cycles in which it's overall output increases or decreases. Try this article. Or this one. Or just google it yourself!. In fact, one of the articles you link to disputes the other! Maybe you should try reading a few other sources than New Scientist, as there are mountains of evidence that would suggest the science isn't as nearly as conclusive as the IPCC backers would like you to believe.
Oh, it'll save more than just fuel. Have you seen what they charge to allow a ship through there?
In 2008, a total of 21,415 vessels passed through the canal and the receipts from the canal totaled $5.381 billion. Average cost per-ship is roughly $250,000.00
I'm sorry... a quarter of a million dollars to let a ship float down a path of water that doesn't even have any water locks? Come ON! I somehow doubt that the upkeep of the canal costs 5.38 billion a friggin' year!
Planet Zebeth - Metroid with a twist
As does Canada. They still want us to pay for our natural gas to heat our houses though.
Most of our roads aren't actually built on permafrost, thanks.
as we go north.
Being warm-blooded, we don't need heat. In fact we get problems getting rid of it (sweating wastes valuable water and minerals).
And we can't farm desserts nor steep hillsides and the only way to get food out of a mountainside is to grow goats on it. And they're partial to water too...
Pests love CO2 too. For corn, the natural poison they produce in their leaves is reduced under high CO2 loads. The beetle eating their leaves loves this idea.
Cassava produces toxins under high CO2 loads. African staple diet is Cassava. People are already dying from the toxins there.
"It's been 1 hour, 3 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment"
Oh dear...
Hmmm, I wonder if a shipping company could generate enough carbon credits by using the northern passage vs. the Suez passage to effectively make the trip between Europe and Asia free? Wouldn't that be a great unintended consequence of cap and trade!
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
I think the concern about the arctic ice is not that it will raise sea levels (by itself it won't), but rather, that losing them will reduce the earth's albino, or reflectivity, which would accelerate the warming.
Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
Right. They "average" significantly higher than the expected sea level. So only PARTS of our highly expensive coastal real estate will end up underwater. That shouldn't be any problem at all. Not mention the fact that much of the densely populated and very low-lying nation of Bangladesh, for example, will end up submerged. And this:
Except that the great plains, the breadbasket of the US, is predicted to become significantly drier... to the point where agriculture would become essentially impossible over large areas currently being farmed. But that's OK, Greenland is going to become very productive!
This is hardly a settled question. The Canadians claim these waters as their territory, the US does not accept the claim. So I don't feel particularly compelled to accept your version of the matter.
And oh, by the way: it's "Arctic".
... but, per Wikipedia:
So it's hardly the case that the big, bad, US is beating up on Canada. Pretty much the only country that accepts Canada's claim is, well, Canada.
We've just seen governments worldwide deliver a trillion dollar windfall to their corporate masters. No attempt was made to hide the fact that this money was an explicit reward for mismanagement and stupidity. The logic - what there is of it - behind the giveaway depends utterly on the implicit assumption that a healthy economy requires cancerous growth. The decision-making process for this bailout proceeded with lightning speed over the space of a few months.
Meanwhile, scientists have spent the past three or four decades patiently building the case for climate change. Scientists have persisted in continuing this research even though there is no personal reward to speak of, and even given the spittle spraying them in the face from rabid industrialists and climate change deniers. The case for climate change has been made many times over. More evidence is piling up even with a budget of a few hundredths of one-percent of the corporate bailout. Our climate is a shared resource for the entire world with far more economic impact than 100 Goldman Sachs.
Consider two alternatives:
1) The industrialists and/or the fundamentalists are right. That is, either we could burn dioxin laced sulfurous coal in vast piles on every street corner and Mother Earth would thank us and beg for more - or, the rapture is fast approaching and the faithful will be sucked up to heaven leaving the damned to clean up the mess.
2) The tree huggers are right. The Earth is fragile and we're fast approaching (or already past) a tipping point that will usher in climate change of a scale that hasn't been seen for millions of years. In the mean time, we are permanently degrading our stores of natural resources. It will be hard to recover from an ice age when all the fossil fuel has been burned.
What to do? What to do? Given these two choices, what to do?
Well, look at it this way, if #1 is true then what's the harm in advocating, adopting and implementing prudent environmental policies? All that happens is that the children of the rich get better water and air and parkland and healthier and more plentiful food along with the rest of us. (Or perhaps that when the rapture comes, we hand over the keys to a planet that has been better tended.)
Whereas, if there's even a small likelihood of #2, a society would have to be insane to continue to permit unregulated industries to squander resources and to pollute and to cheat on paying the full lifecycle costs of their operations (http://dieoff.org/page95.htm). One doesn't have to believe that an airtight case has been made (yet) for manmade climate change - one just needs to recognize that no coherent case at all has been made against manmade climate change.
Environmentally conscious policies are simply common sense. Don't ask how good the case for manmade climate change has to be to justify taking environmental action, ask rather how good a case would have to be made against climate change to justify doing nothing.
But then the caps will re-freeze if we cut down on our emissions, and we'll have to go back to the normal, gas guzzling shipping routes..
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
"Global warming" is an observed fact, not something predicted by computer models. As is increased preciptation and thicker ice sheets in parts of Antarctica. As is, for that matter, reduced ice coverage in the Antarctic. As is, most recently, reduced total ice volume in the Antarctic. Essentially, warming drives more moisture to the Antarctic, and means that where conditions continue to support ice sheets, they will in many cases be thicker. It also means that the conditions for support of ice sheets get worse; particularly, the melting of the sea ice along Antarctica removes the barriers that are stopping the continental glaciers from sliding off into the ocean.
This is all observed now and happening.
At school we were taught that Russia's historical mission has been to reach the seas while that of the Western powers has been to keep Russia landlocked. This game has been played for centuries, most recently in the Yugoslav war between the NATO and Serbia/Russia.
Now if Russia's northern access to the seas were reliable, the strategic equation would change. Russia no longer would desperately need access to the oceans via the Baltic sea and the Mediterranean (which NATO could block at will anyway). In addition, Russia might be tempted to find ways to tax the lucrative traffic along their northern coastline, although that would break a slew of maritime laws that Russia has benefited from for a long time.
As pale as albinos are, I doubt that reducing the number of them will significantly impact climate change in any way as their numbers are simply too small.
And if you thought that was pedantic: albedo, which I realize is what you actually meant, is actually a specific form of reflectivity that also take diffusion into account.
It is a common misconception, because little is known about the equatorial ice caps.
In fact so little is known I couldn't even find a wikipedia entry about them.
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
Supply and demand. You don't want to pay? There's an easy fix: go around.
Russia may make money out of central heating, but Russians have to pay for theirs.
All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
that global trade is a by-product of the internet. Fools. Mega greed and profit at all costs (loss of USA jobs, illegal aliens, etc) is what the Internet has provided. Not global trade. People have been trading oils and textiles, gold and metals since day zero.
Close, but no cigar.
The underlying question is to what degree can we moderate global climate changes? That's a tough one.
To the extent that human activities contribute to the climate changes, we have some room for action. For instance, we know that our CO2 production is one of the driving forces, so we can decrease that. A Tom Sawyer strategy of getting everyone to whitewash their roofs, parking lots, and streets would bring surface reflectance closer to what it was before the industrial revolution (and this would be particularly beneficial in the urban hot spots that have been driving a lot of local climate abberations).
But the really tough nut is that any of these approaches are very long term, and no current human society (with the possible exception of China) knows how to implement plans that will take a hundred years or more to come to fruition. This has not always been the case: European cathedrals and other large monuments show that as a species we have had the capacity for this kind of thing. But have we lost it along the way?
Will
reduced ice coverage in the Antarctic
[---]
observed now and happening
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg
it's in my head
This should make it easier for the hole to be found.
Are people really this stupid getting modded insightful? We're doomed. If the OP meant to include ice on land then the entire premise of their argument is flawed because ice on land does NOT displace its volume in water. Because it's on land, not in water. Jesus fucking christ, America.
A voyage between Hamburg and Yokohama is only 6,600 nm. via the Northern Sea Route â" less than 60% of the 11,400 nm. Suez route. Now in part because of warming and the retreat and thinning of Arctic sea ice in summer, this northern sea route is becoming a reality
So climate change is allowing us to emit less carbon. Just think of the other magical ways the planet will fix itself if we emit even more carbon! I'm totally gonna burn a second tire when I get home tonight.
The "OP" is the one by physicsphairy. Doesn't specify land ice or sea ice. Hence both Ngarrang's replies are off the mark, and rubicelli is spot on.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
You could have asked Google before discounting his claim entirely. After about a 5 minutes' search, I found at least two resources of note. Here's a blurb you might find interesting:
Although I was not able to find any references that the Vikings made use of a northern route into Siberia, the general understanding is that a warm period occurred during this time that would have (potentially) opened up parts of the northern sea routes to curious travelers.
Naturally, this doesn't fit in well with the notion that never before has enough warming occurred to have accomplished this. It's telling that the parent is rated +5, insightful when he could have spent a couple of minutes (just as I did) in effort to disprove the original poster's claim.
I'm not suggesting whether the original poster is correct as I haven't found evidence to prove it, but near as I can tell from the resources available from Google, it appears he may very well be correct.
He who has no
The ocean is now open, Great job everyone! Thank you! We did it!
Actually if you boil the ice caps you'll release water vapor into the atmosphere which is a much more dangerous greenhouse gas than C02... of course you'll get the best of both since the boiling of that much water will take a lot of coal or trees or naturals gas being burned also creating some C02... but the water vapor created will really warm the planet up quickly.
Boiling Water Contributes to Greenhouse Effect - H2O vapor is ten times worse than CO2!
People keep claiming that melting sea-ice won't raise the sea level -this simply is not true. http://www.physorg.com/news5619.html (physorg.com)
>Imagine the benefits to the environment if we could just figure out a way to melt the ice caps completely. Our greenhouse emissions would plummet! How could we melt enough ice for a 20ft rise in sea levels? answers how with Nukes of course! Unfortunately boiling all that water will make the greenhouse effect worse since water vapor is 10 times worse than C02 as a greenhouse gas!!!
will reduce the earth's albino, or reflectivity, which would accelerate the warming
Pretty sure you meant 'albedo' ... when I read this I thought: white people are increasing the world's reflectivity?! Then there is some benefit to living in my mother's basement after all!
It is a common misconception, because little is known about the equatorial ice caps. In fact so little is known I couldn't even find a wikipedia entry about them.
But you have heard of the Antarctic, right? You know, the one sitting on top of a continent?
Global Warming is turning huge expanse of Taiga forests into swamps. SO not everything is rosy for Russia
(Wiping the soda-spit from his monitor...)
=)P Hehehehehehehe
The SS Manhattan performed a crossing of the northwest passage in 1969. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Manhattan_(1962)
le who start in the subject line and continue in the body.
The twat I was replying to is still an idiot, since he didn't understand the difference between the two types of product.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."