FARK.com: (7479174) "Study suggests we could refreeze Arctic. But should we?" I have a bad feeling about this

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		"Study suggests we could refreeze Arctic. But should we?" I have a bad feeling about this (blogs.windsorstar.com)		105
		More: Scary, Arctic, Environmental Defense Fund, environmental engineering, Environment Canada, Environmental Research Letters, Gulfstream

• • •

9237 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Dec 2012 at 10:20 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7479174

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

105 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

johnsoninca		2012-12-10 09:10:42 PM

I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

Lsherm		2012-12-10 09:29:30 PM

They kind of like the fact the problem is hard to solve because it gives you a lever to say we have to make these deep reforms in consumer culture, which I personally would like to see," said Keith.

Hey, a problem solved is a problem solved. And at the end of the day, if you can't push through changes in consumer culture that haven't ever succeeded in all of human history, then maybe alternative solutions aren't a bad direction to go in. It doesn't necessarily have to be re-freezing the arctic, as long as we come up with an alternative energy source that will continue to meet our ever-growing demand, or maybe a combination of the two.

It's years in the future regardless. But we've been re-routing water for millennia, so it's not that far a jump to re-routing solar radiation. It's been proposed for years, but we're always getting closer to actually being able to do it. The minute someone comes up with a super cheap manner of doing it, someone is going to say "hold my beer and watch this."

Amos Quito		2012-12-10 09:29:36 PM

johnsoninca: I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

That humans are arrogant, self absorbed and aggrandizing asshats?

/Just a guess

Amos Quito		2012-12-10 09:31:37 PM

Lsherm: They kind of like the fact the problem is hard to solve because it gives you a lever to say we have to make these deep reforms in consumer culture, which I personally would like to see," said Keith.

Hey, a problem solved is a problem solved. And at the end of the day, if you can't push through changes in consumer culture that haven't ever succeeded in all of human history, then maybe alternative solutions aren't a bad direction to go in. It doesn't necessarily have to be re-freezing the arctic, as long as we come up with an alternative energy source that will continue to meet our ever-growing demand, or maybe a combination of the two.

It's years in the future regardless. But we've been re-routing water for millennia, so it's not that far a jump to re-routing solar radiation. It's been proposed for years, but we're always getting closer to actually being able to do it. The minute someone comes up with a super cheap manner of doing it, someone is going to say "hold my beer and watch this."

That usually works out well.

Lsherm		2012-12-10 09:34:04 PM

Amos Quito: Lsherm: They kind of like the fact the problem is hard to solve because it gives you a lever to say we have to make these deep reforms in consumer culture, which I personally would like to see," said Keith.

Hey, a problem solved is a problem solved. And at the end of the day, if you can't push through changes in consumer culture that haven't ever succeeded in all of human history, then maybe alternative solutions aren't a bad direction to go in. It doesn't necessarily have to be re-freezing the arctic, as long as we come up with an alternative energy source that will continue to meet our ever-growing demand, or maybe a combination of the two.

It's years in the future regardless. But we've been re-routing water for millennia, so it's not that far a jump to re-routing solar radiation. It's been proposed for years, but we're always getting closer to actually being able to do it. The minute someone comes up with a super cheap manner of doing it, someone is going to say "hold my beer and watch this."

That usually works out well.

Usually not. However, I don't think the US will be jumping the gun on this one. I could see China or Russia doing it, though.

edmo		2012-12-10 09:38:02 PM

johnsoninca: I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

www.cs.cmu.edu

fusillade762		2012-12-10 09:48:16 PM

You always say that, Frost.

NewportBarGuy		2012-12-10 09:59:13 PM

Do we finally get to nuke someone again? It's been far too long.

GAT_00		2012-12-10 10:08:18 PM

Believe it or not, there's reason to believe we could simply make a very long tube that reaches into the stratosphere, which holds itself aloft by a kite mechanism. Up that tube you pump sulfur dioxide, which could offset much of the CO2 warming. It's relatively cheap, though it would have to be continuous, the SO2 would be broken down by I believe UV as well as normal atmospheric reactions. But it's doable with modern materials science. It's also thought not to have significant effects besides cooling, though that's obviously unproved.

FunkOut		2012-12-10 10:22:41 PM

All the slushee machines?

davidphogan		2012-12-10 10:25:04 PM

Am I the only one who thought of the end of the Bart the Mom Simpsons episode? Do we just hope the apes freeze?

jaytkay		2012-12-10 10:25:21 PM

Approves

SwiftFox		2012-12-10 10:26:04 PM

Problem is, next heavy frost all the citrus growers will sue. Anyone who gets a burst broken pipe in winter or skids on ice into an accident will sue. Who insures the project?

Farque Ewe		2012-12-10 10:26:10 PM

Man made climate change is false. It is a taxing scheme that will destroy jobs in the US while giving developing countries like China a pass.

vodka		2012-12-10 10:26:19 PM

whatcouldpossiblygowrong

They can't even accurately predict the weather a few hours from now yet they think they somehow understand what would happen if they manipulated the climate of the entire planet.

TheSwizz		2012-12-10 10:26:30 PM

Already solved.

rockforever		2012-12-10 10:28:06 PM

Giant ice cube from Futurama

/.jpg

robodog		2012-12-10 10:28:34 PM

GAT_00: Believe it or not, there's reason to believe we could simply make a very long tube that reaches into the stratosphere, which holds itself aloft by a kite mechanism. Up that tube you pump sulfur dioxide, which could offset much of the CO2 warming. It's relatively cheap, though it would have to be continuous, the SO2 would be broken down by I believe UV as well as normal atmospheric reactions. But it's doable with modern materials science. It's also thought not to have significant effects besides cooling, though that's obviously unproved.

H2SO4 would be the problem with that little plan, though if we could eliminate coal use it might not be a significant increase.

Kibbler		2012-12-10 10:28:45 PM

The question in cases like this is never, should we. The question is, will the Dick Cheneys of the world make a mega fortune doing it.

Agent Smiths Laugh		2012-12-10 10:29:34 PM

Hell yes or this happens:

kylecrick.com

robodog		2012-12-10 10:30:27 PM

Farque Ewe: Man made climate change is false. It is a taxing scheme that will destroy jobs in the US while giving developing countries like China a pass.

If it wasn't for all the idiots I encounter in my daily life I'd refuse to believe that such idiocy existed in the same species with me.

DesertDemonWY		2012-12-10 10:31:18 PM

refreeze, just like it does every year all by itself? seems redundant

GAT_00		2012-12-10 10:31:33 PM

robodog: GAT_00: Believe it or not, there's reason to believe we could simply make a very long tube that reaches into the stratosphere, which holds itself aloft by a kite mechanism. Up that tube you pump sulfur dioxide, which could offset much of the CO2 warming. It's relatively cheap, though it would have to be continuous, the SO2 would be broken down by I believe UV as well as normal atmospheric reactions. But it's doable with modern materials science. It's also thought not to have significant effects besides cooling, though that's obviously unproved.

H2SO4 would be the problem with that little plan, though if we could eliminate coal use it might not be a significant increase.

They wouldn't mix. Coal soot doesn't make it out of the trophosphere, whereas the sulfur dioxide is pumped into the stratosphere which strongly amplifies the effects.

FunkOut		2012-12-10 10:34:43 PM

VOLCANOES!

Summoner101		2012-12-10 10:35:02 PM

We're gonna blow up the ocean!

Bit'O'Gristle		2012-12-10 10:35:24 PM

Scientists have long theorized that injecting reflective particles of some kind into the high atmosphere could reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface and compensate for the greenhouse effect. High CO2 levels would continue to trap heat, but with less energy coming in to begin with, temperatures on the surface would go down.

Hmmm...what kind of particles are we talking about here....and how do you propose to keep them airborne? Pesky gravity and all. If you just keep doing it...(and i can't imagine you could do it on a scale to make a difference) wont the particles just float to the ground everywhere? Covering the seas and destroying the phytoplankton, thus killing off oxygen to the rest of the planet??

/facepalms

Arkanaut		2012-12-10 10:37:27 PM

johnsoninca: I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

"Now I will destroy the whole world."

thorthor		2012-12-10 10:38:27 PM

Farque Ewe: Man made climate change is false. It is a taxing scheme that will destroy jobs in the US while giving developing countries like China a pass.

Do you also believe the earth is 6000 yrs old...... and flat?

Valiente		2012-12-10 10:40:05 PM

johnsoninca: I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

Nuke it from orbit, to be sure?

illannoyin		2012-12-10 10:40:22 PM

Holy fark there are some stupid people on this planet.

/I know, welcome to erf and all that

nmemkha		2012-12-10 10:44:01 PM

I suspect if the other animals ever developed higher reasoning they would quickly unite to eradicate us.

BronyMedic		2012-12-10 10:45:54 PM

Just be careful what you release that's been under the ice.

images4.wikia.nocookie.net

Random Anonymous Blackmail		2012-12-10 10:46:46 PM

I don't know about the arctic, but it is pretty damn cold here in MN... I know global warming doesn't work that way Morbo.

Warthog		2012-12-10 10:54:27 PM

I was wondering how long it would take for this sort of article to hit the press. After wikileaks, they knew it was just a matter of time for the secret UN chemtrail program to be discovered. This enviro change nonsense is a false front to make the other darker parts of the program easier to cover up again.

axeeugene		2012-12-10 10:55:30 PM

fusillade762: You always say that, Frost.

Somebody wake up Hicks.

/LOOK INTO MY EYE!

NewportBarGuy		2012-12-10 10:59:00 PM

Farque Ewe: Man made climate change is false. It is a taxing scheme that will destroy jobs in the US while giving developing countries like China a pass.

Thank you, Senator F*ckbag. Please commence with your Drain-O enema. We're all waiting.

/Pop-quiz: How much potable water does China possess?

GoodHomer		2012-12-10 11:02:06 PM

I've met David Keith on a couple of occasions. He really is a mad scientist, but has a great perspective on the whole geo-engineering thing: it's one of those tools you want to keep in your pocket in case the warming ends up on the very high end of the projections, or higher, and you've exhausted every other tool at your disposal and none of them are working fast enough.

In that case, you study the geo-engineering now so you have a better idea of what the side effects might be if implemented.

RandomRandom		2012-12-10 11:02:40 PM

The most fascinating insight is how cheaply this could be done. It will only take one highly developed, very wealthy nation to start losing trillions of dollars in heavily developed coastline to rising waters.

Then that country, most likely US - is just going to do it.

Dust the atmosphere, damn the consequences.

/Given that sea levels are not only rising, but the rate of sea level increase is itself rising, I give it 20 years. Ready the high-altitude drone-dusters.

Oznog		2012-12-10 11:04:44 PM

robodog: GAT_00: Believe it or not, there's reason to believe we could simply make a very long tube that reaches into the stratosphere, which holds itself aloft by a kite mechanism. Up that tube you pump sulfur dioxide, which could offset much of the CO2 warming. It's relatively cheap, though it would have to be continuous, the SO2 would be broken down by I believe UV as well as normal atmospheric reactions. But it's doable with modern materials science. It's also thought not to have significant effects besides cooling, though that's obviously unproved.

H2SO4 would be the problem with that little plan, though if we could eliminate coal use it might not be a significant increase.

Acid snow, building up and up.... well, who cares. It could be DECADES before it kills us all!

Anthracite		2012-12-10 11:05:31 PM

okey the Thames froze over before 1600. It has been warming ever since. The Antarctic was tropical at one time as well. We are in the end of an ice age people.

We have not been on this planet recording ourselves to look over all the data. HOWEVER the stuff we have found shows this place was pretty toasty a few million years ago... So here we go again.

Midwest was a sea bed... Dichotomous Earth. Look it up.

jaytkay		2012-12-10 11:06:29 PM

RIP David Keith AKA Grasshopper!

giftedmadness		2012-12-10 11:09:30 PM

robodog: Farque Ewe: Man made climate change is false. It is a taxing scheme that will destroy jobs in the US while giving developing countries like China a pass.

If it wasn't for all the idiots I encounter in my daily life I'd refuse to believe that such idiocy existed in the same species with me.

0/10

JonnyBGoode		2012-12-10 11:11:34 PM

What could possibly go wrong?

www.collegecrunch.org

fatassbastard		2012-12-10 11:14:51 PM

Anthracite: We have not been on this planet recording ourselves to look over all the data. HOWEVER the stuff we have found shows this place was pretty toasty a few million years ago... So here we go again.

Midwest was a sea bed... Dichotomous Earth. Look it up.

Gosh, what a brilliant insight. You should tell NASA, NOAA & the USGS. I'll be they hadn't thought of that.

WelldeadLink		2012-12-10 11:17:53 PM

Is it a bad feeling along your spine? Some sort of chill?

DerpHerder		2012-12-10 11:18:17 PM

"We don't know who struck first, us or them. But we do know it was us that scorched the sky"

DesertDemonWY		2012-12-10 11:19:48 PM

RandomRandom: /Given that sea levels are not only rising, but the rate of sea level increase is itself rising, I give it 20 years. Ready the high-altitude drone-dusters.

No, it isn't.

Global:
sealevel.colorado.edu

"cherry-picked" Seattle tidal guage:
www.ecy.wa.gov

Fano		2012-12-10 11:19:53 PM

johnsoninca: I wonder what Kurt Vonnegut would say about this.

"So it goes"

Wolf_Blitzer		2012-12-10 11:25:57 PM

DesertDemonWY: RandomRandom: /Given that sea levels are not only rising, but the rate of sea level increase is itself rising, I give it 20 years. Ready the high-altitude drone-dusters.

No, it isn't.

Global:
[sealevel.colorado.edu image 534x372]

"cherry-picked" Seattle tidal guage:
[www.ecy.wa.gov image 677x403]

Am I missing the part where both graphs aren't showing rising sea levels?

Wakosane		2012-12-10 11:27:17 PM

I don't think were nearly smart enough to pull this off without screwing things up even more.

ex: man puts sparkly bits in atmosphere, temperature lowers. at first... yay. Sparkly bits block sunlight, preventing algae biomass in ocean from doing it's photosynthesis thing, oxygen content on blue marble goes down... boo.

Displayed 50 of 105 comments