Slashdot Mirror


Greenland Is Getting Darker

sciencehabit (1205606) writes "Greenland's white snow is getting darker. Scientists have generally attributed that darkening to larger, slightly less white snow grains caused by warmer temperatures. But researchers have found a new source of darkening taking hold: impurities in the snow. The new darkening effect could easily add 2 centimeters to the projections of 20 cm sea level rise by 2100—and perhaps more if impurity levels grow with time."

13 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Greenland Is Getting Darker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    And Leon's Getting Larrrrrrrrrrrrger

  2. China anyone? by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Informative

    As long as China insists on NOT using their pollution controls (they built them on new plants per the treaty with japan, but japan forgot to require china to turn them on; besides as we have seen with their money, they really do not care about treaties; only winning a cold war ), this pollution will continue.

    And yes, the pollution really carries that far. 10-15% of the western America's pollution is from China.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:China anyone? by Old97 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. It's China not implementing pollution controls that is the problem, not who they are manufacturing for. They could continue to produce these products and still implement the controls they promised, but they haven't. China and a number of other countries compete on cost not just with cheap labor, but by not requiring their manufacturers to minimize pollution. It's bad for their citizens and bad for the world.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    2. Re:China anyone? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, and as long as WE keep buying their cheap crap, WE actually reward this behaviour.

      Remember, that thing called free market? Where the buyer decides what products flourish and what products perish based on his decision what he buys and what he doesn't? It's the only little bit of free market left that we have, and, well, it seems that we want China to pump out black smoke as long as it means we get to buy cheap crap.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:China anyone? by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Your sig coupled with how much more you know about what I think than me myself makes it kinda comical, you know?

      I honestly cannot remember me saying anything about the US lowering its emissions. Actually, if I was the US, I'd DEMAND global emission standards since that would mean China has to struggle to get its emissions at least close to where the US already is, boosting the US economy. But I guess I expect too much from politicians who are bought and sold by the same companies that profit from China NOT having to put up with rigid ecological standards.

      The pollution I blame on the US (and Europe, don't feel left out on the Asian peninsula!) is that WE let them get away with it. We buy their cheap, pollution producing crap. We buy it. And as long as we buy it, they will produce it. It is our pollution, whether you like it or not. It's not pollution we create here, allright, but still that pollution is done "in our name", for the sake of us getting cheap crap to buy.

      And if you stopped foaming from your mouth for just a moment and read my comment above again, you might notice that this leftist idiot here said exactly that from the start.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Re:Getting extremely sick of this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    yeah, I hate science too. They try to force evolution, vaccines and all kinds of crap on us, but it is clear to me that we two understands this much better than they do.

  4. Re: ...if impurity levels grow with time. by cjjjer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Scientists have generally attributed that darkening to larger, slightly less white snow grains caused by warmer temperatures.

    Actually I cannot believe that scientists are that stupid. Maybe they should visit here in Winnipeg Canada where we see this every year from the tonnes of sand they put on our streets in the winter. As warmer temps rise the snow banks go from white piles to brown/grey mud piles and as more snow melts the darker it gets and the faster it melts.

    No wonder people doubt climate change when scientists say things like this.

    The only thing that can reduce it is if the melt water floats/washes the impurities way.

    Actual in 90% of the time this is not the case, we get rain in the spring with the piles of mud and all it does is causes the snow pack to compress more (unless the snow pack is already compressed).

  5. Re:More climate lies by MacTO · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try looking up albedo, then performing some calculations to figure out how changes in the albedo changes changes the local temperature. Finally use that change in temperature to figure out how much ice will melt. While your results won't be as good as those produced by experienced research scientists, the basics are well within the grasp of someone with a high school education. Indeed, it is a common exercise for first year students in the physical sciences.

    Once you've done that, you'll be better equipped to assess whether or not this is a climate lie.

  6. I suspect by Gonoff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The chronically uninformed and uninformable* will find some way to deny this is happening.

    * - people who feel that their ignorance outweighs the knowledge of any scientist and so nobody with an IQ over 125 has anything to tell them.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  7. Re: ...if impurity levels grow with time. by GNious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cannot figure out if you're being serious or not ..

    Am fairly sure no-one is spreading sand across Greenland, in the same way they do on the streets of Winnipeg Canada [sic].

  8. Re: ...if impurity levels grow with time. by camelrider · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Particulates from coal-burning, wildfires, dust storms, volcanoes, Etc all contribute to the darkening of the snow. This is true thruout the northern temperate and arctic areas, not just Greenland.

  9. Re:Getting extremely sick of this. by danceswithtrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's as if the earth never has experienced higher temperatures before and survived.

    I don't think any scientist, or thoughtful person for that matter, questions whether the Earth will survive. Of course it will. Their real question is whether the changes will cause a great die off in humans and animals. Some animals will undoubtedly thrive in the new environment but humans, probably not so much.

  10. Re: ...if impurity levels grow with time. by radtea · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No wonder people doubt climate change when scientists say things like this..

    I'm just guessing here based on nothing but a few decades of involvement in the scientific community, but I'd say it's pretty likely that a) the scientists in question have thought of your objection already and b) they have quantified the relative contributions from increased grain size vs increased dark pollutants.

    What would be incredibly stupid is assuming that people who study this stuff professionally can be out-thought by a random Internet commenter who has just encountered the question for the first time.

    But just in case, let me ask you: what is the quantitative relationship between grain size and reflectivity of snow? Please respond with a graph or formula. You must have access to this information to judge the relative importance of grain size vs pollutant cover, and it would be a positive contribution to this discussion to share it.

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.