Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Propose Plan To Re-Freeze the Arctic (inhabitat.com)
Kristine Lofgren writes: In case you've been under a rock for the past 20 years, the Arctic is melting super fast. Certain *ahem* governments are dragging their feet doing anything about it, which means the planet could be in for a spectacular meltdown within the next 20 years. But a clever bunch of scientists have hatched a plan to re-freeze the Arctic using wind-powered pumps that will bring water to the surface, allowing it to freeze. This new layer of ice could last well into the summer, which is vital, because scientists think summer Arctic ice could be gone by 2030 -- and that causes a whole chain of terrible events that will only make our climate change problem much, much worse. The plan has a $500 billion price tag, but that's pocket change compared to the cost of dealing with an ice-free Arctic. The study has been published in The American Geophysical Union's journal Earth's Future. You can read more about the study via The Guardian.
As well as anyone else who happens to want to buy something that can be shipped along those new routes. I don't see the big deal about a myriad of symptoms that people are making hay about. Sure the situation has problems but crying about each and every change as if it is one is only annoying and pathetic. Develop ways to manage the situation that addresses real problems. Meanwhile, I will enjoy my mild winters and the summers aren't all that hotter.
NOAA climate fraud is becoming climate gate 2. This gives the deniers more fuel. Scientists have become activists and this cheapens science. So has research grants that need predetermined results to continue funding.
Environmental science has become a religion with customs, holy days and leaders in white coats that demand tithing in carbon credits.
There very well may be serious climate issues but when the professionals tasked with researching these challenges become activists the science becomes suspect.
The scam is calling it "climate change". Climate variability is normal. What we're seeing today is not outside of it either.
Why do you call it a "problem"? Do you think natural variability is well understood in this area? It isn't.
So you want to use wind energy to freeze portions of the ocean where it would not be freezing otherwise?
This is the stupidest idea I have heard after 2016 elections.
Wind power efficiency is really low. In addition to that that much energy WILL slow down the winds and will cause a different type of climate cataclysmic fuck up.
Further, if so much wind power is harnessed, then it is so much better to use this wind power to replace fossil fuel manufactured electricity.
Also, the number of birds killed by the wind power and the number of sea lives perished due to the changed natural ocean flows will be much greater than the biodiversity lost due to the climate change.
For the record, warmer earth means more habitable land on earth.
Finally, Earth is still in the ice age, according to the scientists. Climate change, meaning warming, is supposed to happen anyway.
Google it.
Easy on the kool-aid, chief.
Shut up, AGW denier. Have you no shame for DENYING your CHILDREN glaciers, ice bergs, and ice caps? Hawaii will be covered in water as will most of the east cost of the USA as will most of Australia. Ever seen Water World with Kevin Kostener? It is not all that much of a stretch. They land on Mount Everest which is a tropical paradise.
I'd love to kill the mod that voted you as a troll. An obvious climate denier.
Let me translate the several posts of bullshit you have given us:
..and thats the problem with the modern left. They only care about appearances.
CO2 targets arent important. Appearing to care is important.
"His name was James Damore."