4 ms·

That number is meaningless without context. USGS estimates the earth has about 24 quadrillion metric tons[1] of ice, so, unless I'm doing the math wrong, this

That number is meaningless without context. USGS estimates the earth has about 24 quadrillion metric tons[1] of ice, so, unless I'm doing the math wrong, this loss represents 0.1% over 30 years. [1] https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/ice-snow-and-glaciers-and-water-cycle?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/scie... s/One estimate of global water distribution/ [Edited to remove sarcastic editorial comment]

adaml_623 6y ago
That does depend on where you live. Water levels rising, etc
dwaltrip 6y ago
It seems you have provided some context, but not enough for the conclusion you are drawing.
tuatoru 6y ago
or 446 years if the melt rate is doubling every 30 years.
- chrisco255 6y ago
  But it's not going to. Because the Earth's climate shifts in cycles aligned with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, to name a few.
  - unchocked 6y ago
    Y'know - and I'm trying to make this pithy rather than low effort - you sound like a Ptolemaic astronomer going on about epicycles because you can't wrap your mind around heliocentrism. Anthropogenic emissions dominate climate change, and will for the remainder of the athropocene. The jury is in.
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      No they don't. CO2 has a logarithmic effect on temperature, which means we will get diminishing returns on warming as time goes on. And the oceanic cycles absolutely dominate climate change. You are the one lacking heliocentrism. You think the climate revolves around human activity.
      - sushshshsh 6y ago
        I for one lie in the "humans cause global warming but I am apathetic about trying to stop it from happening." Regardless of the cause, I think both of you would be doing well to think about how to produce food and energy and breathable air in a warming and ever industrializing world, and how much government intervention is needed (if any).
      - perl4ever 6y ago
        Well, I'm not sure what you mean by diminishing returns, because you can't mean it literally. At some point, you get Venus. I can't recall what leads to a lot more CO2 being released, but there's something. Not in the next hundred years, of course.
        chrisco255 6y ago
        Venus has 2400 times the atmospheric CO2 concentration of earth. It is 96% CO2. It also has an opaque atmosphere which prevents a lot of solar energy from radiating out on the dark side of the planet (as occurs on cloudless areas of earth at night). There isn't even that much carbon on planet earth. Perhaps the highest the earth has ever had was around 7000 parts per million. Mars atmosphere is also mostly CO2 but it's a frozen waste land. Of course, other factors are at play in deciding the temperature of Venus, Earth, and Mars besides CO2. The greenhouse effect as described involves CO2 as a gas blocking a narrow band of IR solar light from being re-emitted into outer space. This is a probabilistic process, as gas molecules are in constant motion as are photons. As you increase the concentration of CO2, the effect becomes saturated, since the gas is already stacked in three dimensions. So there is less IR energy to absorb that isn't already being captured. Clouds and atmospheric H2O have a much higher impact on climate. These are driven by oceanic patterns (which themselves are caused by geologic and solar forces).
- perl4ever 6y ago
  I had wondered, if the present warming rate goes on indefinitely, how long is it before we go back to the levels that produced 3 foot bugs and such in the carboniferous or whatever it was? Because I'd really worry about going past that. Massive change to human civilization and the ecosystem is one thing; Venus is another. I finally looked it up and a rough estimate appears to be 300 years. So I guess 446 years to melt all the ice sounds generally consistent.
  - tempsolution 6y ago
    "I had wondered, if the present warming rate goes on indefinitely" Why would it? There are plenty of mechanisms that prevent that. Don't worry too much. The earth doesn't care about a few degrees. Humans might though, at least 99% of the population won't be able to survive if the earth heats a few more degrees. The question is if anyone will care though. We advance pretty quickly in terms of technology. It's not a far stretch to imagine that humans simply convert into a philosophy of "earth as the first space colony". That would actually make a lot of sense too. If we can't manage to colonize earth when it goes to shit, we don't even need to try with other planets. This could become the catalyst for human space travel. There is a positive in everything :D.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

adaml_623 6y ago

That does depend on where you live. Water levels rising, etc

dwaltrip 6y ago

It seems you have provided some context, but not enough for the conclusion you are drawing.

tuatoru 6y ago

or 446 years if the melt rate is doubling every 30 years.

chrisco255 6y ago
But it's not going to. Because the Earth's climate shifts in cycles aligned with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, to name a few.
- unchocked 6y ago
  Y'know - and I'm trying to make this pithy rather than low effort - you sound like a Ptolemaic astronomer going on about epicycles because you can't wrap your mind around heliocentrism. Anthropogenic emissions dominate climate change, and will for the remainder of the athropocene. The jury is in.
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    No they don't. CO2 has a logarithmic effect on temperature, which means we will get diminishing returns on warming as time goes on. And the oceanic cycles absolutely dominate climate change. You are the one lacking heliocentrism. You think the climate revolves around human activity.
    - sushshshsh 6y ago
      I for one lie in the "humans cause global warming but I am apathetic about trying to stop it from happening." Regardless of the cause, I think both of you would be doing well to think about how to produce food and energy and breathable air in a warming and ever industrializing world, and how much government intervention is needed (if any).
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      Well, I'm not sure what you mean by diminishing returns, because you can't mean it literally. At some point, you get Venus. I can't recall what leads to a lot more CO2 being released, but there's something. Not in the next hundred years, of course.
      - chrisco255 6y ago
        Venus has 2400 times the atmospheric CO2 concentration of earth. It is 96% CO2. It also has an opaque atmosphere which prevents a lot of solar energy from radiating out on the dark side of the planet (as occurs on cloudless areas of earth at night). There isn't even that much carbon on planet earth. Perhaps the highest the earth has ever had was around 7000 parts per million. Mars atmosphere is also mostly CO2 but it's a frozen waste land. Of course, other factors are at play in deciding the temperature of Venus, Earth, and Mars besides CO2. The greenhouse effect as described involves CO2 as a gas blocking a narrow band of IR solar light from being re-emitted into outer space. This is a probabilistic process, as gas molecules are in constant motion as are photons. As you increase the concentration of CO2, the effect becomes saturated, since the gas is already stacked in three dimensions. So there is less IR energy to absorb that isn't already being captured. Clouds and atmospheric H2O have a much higher impact on climate. These are driven by oceanic patterns (which themselves are caused by geologic and solar forces).
perl4ever 6y ago
I had wondered, if the present warming rate goes on indefinitely, how long is it before we go back to the levels that produced 3 foot bugs and such in the carboniferous or whatever it was? Because I'd really worry about going past that. Massive change to human civilization and the ecosystem is one thing; Venus is another. I finally looked it up and a rough estimate appears to be 300 years. So I guess 446 years to melt all the ice sounds generally consistent.
- tempsolution 6y ago
  "I had wondered, if the present warming rate goes on indefinitely" Why would it? There are plenty of mechanisms that prevent that. Don't worry too much. The earth doesn't care about a few degrees. Humans might though, at least 99% of the population won't be able to survive if the earth heats a few more degrees. The question is if anyone will care though. We advance pretty quickly in terms of technology. It's not a far stretch to imagine that humans simply convert into a philosophy of "earth as the first space colony". That would actually make a lot of sense too. If we can't manage to colonize earth when it goes to shit, we don't even need to try with other planets. This could become the catalyst for human space travel. There is a positive in everything :D.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]