Slashdot Mirror
Mathematical Formula Predicts Global Mass Extinction Event in 2100 (vice.com)
Kate Lunau, writing for Motherboard: A new paper in Science Advances finds that a mass extinction period mirroring ones from our planet's ancient past could be triggered when humanity adds a certain amount of carbon to the oceans, which are home to the majority of all plants and animals on our planet. The paper pegs that amount at 310 gigatons. According to lead author Daniel Rothman of MIT, based on projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, we're on course to hit that number by 2100. After that, we enter "unknown territory." [...] Previous mass extinctions have happened over the course of thousands or millions of years, but the period of change we're in right now has lasted centuries at best, making it hard to compare them. Although plenty of experts say Earth is already experiencing a sixth mass extinction, that remains "a scientific question," Rothman, who is professor of geophysics in the MIT Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, told me. Once our planet hits the threshold he identified in this paper, he explained, it will kickstart changes that will "amplify" everything that came before. These same changes, to reiterate, have been associated with all previous mass extinctions on Earth.
We're in the middle of a mass extinction event already, how is this one 83 years in the future going to be different?
I read the internet for the articles.
How much, exactly, are hominids to blame for this and what penalties should we apply to individual ones?
Exactly enough to make all the difference. We shouldn't penalize people or corporations for releasing CO2, we should charge them the amount of money that it costs to clean up their mess. If you put 30 tons of CO2 into the air, then you have to pay to have it removed. We have the technology to actually do this, it's not hypothetical.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Wrong. Price of renewables today is under 6 cents.
It's 2017 not 1967, sunshine. China manufactures entire solar farms that look like giant panda bears the size of Rhode Island. Nobody is waiting for you. Walmart literally built more solar PV in the US than was built before 2010. You can scream fake news until the cows come home, and then wonder why we are more competitive than you are. Because we build it in the West. We use it in the West. We have cheaper energy and we're eating your shorts. Capitalism 101.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Overpopulation has been dismissed in the same manner
Hogwash. Overpopulation was recognized as a problem by nearly everyone. The debate was about what to do about it, not whether the problem existed.
Today there is a broad consensus that the solution to overpopulation is peace, prosperity, and low infant mortality. Once you have those, birthrates drop to replacement levels (or below) in a generation.
The ocean is a buffered solution. It's average pH isn't going to wonder off into extremes as you suggest. ... but they can also have none if it has been used up). So, just because a water mass is cold it does not mean it has a lot of dissolved gases. This concept is a little tricky but just remember that the amount of dissolved gases in seawater depends more on the types of life forms (plants and animals) that are present and their relative proportions. ...
http://www.marinebio.net/marin...
"The amount of dissolved gases varies according to the types of life forms in the water. Most living species need oxygen to keep their cells alive (both plants and animals) and are constantly using it up. Replenishment of dissolved oxygen comes from the photosynthetic activity of plants (during daylight hours only) and from surface diffusion (to a lesser extent). If there are a large number of plants in a marine water mass then the oxygen levels can be quite high during the day. If there are few plants but a large number of animals in a marine water mass then the oxygen levels can be quite low. Oxygen is measured in parts per million (also called ppm) and levels can range from zero to over 20 ppm in temperate waters. It only reaches 20 when there are a lot of plants in the water, it is very sunny with lots of nutrients, and the wind is whipping up the surface into a froth. In any water mass there is a maximum amount of dissolved gas that can be found (after which the gas no longer dissolves but bubbles to the surface). This maximum amount increases with a decrease in temperature (thus cold water masses can hold more dissolved gases
pH is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a substance and is one of the stable measurements in seawater. Ocean water has an excellent buffering system with the interaction of carbon dioxide and water so that it is generally always at a pH of 7.5 to 8.5. Neutral water is a pH of 7 while acidic substances are less than 7 (down to 1, which is highly acidic) and alkaline substances are more than 7 (up to 14, which is highly alkaline). Anything either highly acid or alkaline would kill marine life but the oceans are very stable with regard to pH. If seawater was out of normal range (7.5-8.5) then something would be horribly wrong. "
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
Nuclear does not fit in the current green model, and AGW alarmists are joined to the hip with traditional greenies. This is why I do not believe them. I live in CA. Not only does Jerry Brown happily shutter existing nuclear plants, but he also celebrates shutting down hydroelectric damns all while ranting about the existential threat of global warming. Clearly if he REALLY thought that AGW was an existential threat he would be willing to take the very small risks associated with nuclear, and the even smaller risks associated with hydroelectric. I don't believe AGW is an existential threat because AGW alarmists don't believe it. Actions speak louder than words.