6 ms·

Is Europe headed towards a new Ice Age as ocean current nears collapse?

39 points by rolph 2y ago

fwsgonzo 2y ago
This video has been a good introduction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNNW8c_FaA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNNW8c_FaA I live on the coast of Norway so I am trying to keep up with the research. It is exactly as the article says: Even if there's "only" a 10% chance, or even 5%, that's a huge risk to take to stay. So I think it's important to pay attention to this henceforward.
- trompetenaccoun 2y ago
  >that's a huge risk to take to stay Are you advocating that people leave Norway based on a questionable idea regarding a hypothetical event that's not even remotely shown itself in actual measurements?
  - nakeru 2y ago
    I'm not sure calling the collapse of the AMOC a "questionable idea regarding a hypothetical event that's not even remotely shown itself in actual measurement" maps with reality. Scientists have been dumping data to models and for a few years this possiblity has gone from unlikely to "it could happen within the next 5 to 10 years".
    - Jensson 2y ago
      Look at Canada or Russia and you see what will happen. It will be too cold to grow most crops as well as today, but it wont be another ice age, humans will still survive in the area albeit you might need a bit more energy to heat your homes and food will be blander or rely on imports (food diversity coming from imports wouldn't be very different from today though...). Climate change ensures no ice age will happen again for millions of years, the ice age happened since earth was extremely low on Co2 it wont happen at the rates we have now.
defrost 2y ago
Fun article, and it's true that there's uncertainity about the future of the AMOC and consequences that might flow. The real meat is the undercurrent and framing .. from a PR standpoint this is advanced late stage fossil fuel advocacy from the Saudi Oil Machine; head to the end and the message is Yes! Climate Change (AGW) is Real and a threat .. but don't stop consuming fossil fuels!! ( brought to us by Robin M. Mills, CEO of Qamar Energy and author of 'The Myth of the Oil Crisis' and https://www.thenationalnews.com/about-us/ https://www.thenationalnews.com/about-us/ ) The advocacy here is for pumping sulfur into the stratosphere and burying CO2. What's sidestepped is the band aid temporary nature (with side effects) of continuously emmitting sulfur and the fundementally not even break even state of CO2 sequestration .. the largest carbon removal project on the planet emits a good magnitude (and more) CO2 than it buries as it's literally an excuse to keep extracting a lot of gas while using a tiny amount for some back pressure in the field.
- bboygravity 2y ago
  CO2 storage is also dangerous and very deadly when it goes wrong. Plenty of examples of natural CO2 storages (in or under lakes for example) that wipe out anything that breathes (including vehicles) in a certain radius.
- theshrike79 2y ago
  All CO2 storage projects are just snake oil. Most use multiple times more in marketing than they do on the actual tech.
- stareatgoats 2y ago
  > there's uncertainity about the future of the AMOC In the long view, there is no uncertainty, we know that the AMOC will fluctuate and likely fail completely at some point, we just don't know exactly when. Just as the Sahara will likely bloom again, and the locations of all current coastal cities will some day be underwater, we just don't know when. This is not an argument for accelerating these changes, and continuing to emit CO2, sulfur, and other poisonous pollutants into the atmosphere, however. It is an argument for realizing that the planet is and will always be in climate flux, whether affected by human activity or not, and that our long term strategy needs to be adaptation and cooperation, not to engineer the climate to stay as it was in 1700 and selfishly laying claim to temporarily blessed locations.
NotGMan 2y ago
[flagged]
- CodeWriter23 2y ago
  You just don’t understand the powerful impact of a gas…that occupies…0.04% of our atmosphere.
  - lukealization 2y ago
    And botulinum toxin only needs to exist in microscopic quantities to cause injury and death—would you eat a jar contaminated with it?
  - gspr 2y ago
    Are you saying that things whose concentrations are expressed in what in your daily life is a small number are unimportant? Would be great if you could be completely explicit about this, so that people can reply to something concrete. Thanks.
  - booi 2y ago
    I'm very disappointed to see climate change deniers on this forum. The effect of carbon dioxide on global warming has been proven a million times over. Small percentages can significantly affect heat capture from the sun. A quick overview[1]. Even at 0.1% CO2, you'll feel it (light-headedness, dizzy). Around 3-5% you'll be dead. CO2 is rising at a rate 100x faster than pretty much ever. But you're right, its only 0.04% i'm sure we'll be fine [2] [1] https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-global-warming/ https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-glob... [2] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carbon-dioxide-levels-surging-faster-than-ever-noaa-scientists/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carbon-dioxide-levels-surging-f...
  - fredrikholm 2y ago
    "You just don't understand the powerful impact of arsenic when it constitutes 0.04% of your total body weight."
  - croes 2y ago
pjmlp 2y ago
The problem is that with covid, ongoing wars close home, and economics, goverments let all compromises fell down, additionally the way the fridays for future and other movements decided to protest with their infrastructure blocking actions, the regular population is starting to lose interest on their message, thus nothing really effective happens, as means to fix everything.
silexia 2y ago
No real science is discussed in this article, just hypotheticals. Read Michael Crichton if you want science fantasy that is actually entertaining.
- ggm 2y ago
  I enjoyed "state of fear" but it's important to read the takedown on his bad science. Great airport adventure thriller. Terrible footnotes. The man was a cooker. He bought a lot of bad chart interpretation to the table and the idea of a Mafioso green movement using as yet uninvented ground shakers and carbon fibre lightning conductors is pure james bond. What is it with pot boilers and poison? Dan Brown had anaphylactic nut liquor, Crichton has blue ring octopi.
- FrankyHollywood 2y ago
  There is a lot of research done right now, funded by the EU. But uncertainties are huge, and the tipping point for the Amoc could be between 2050 and 8065 [0]. It's a complex problem, and almost impossible to model correctly, but that doesn't make it science fiction. [0] https://www.climate-tipping-points.eu/post/why-we-cant-predict-the-timing-of-climate-tipping-points https://www.climate-tipping-points.eu/post/why-we-cant-predi...
nottorp 2y ago
Meanwhile, by next summer I need to have my european home (northern romania, at about the same latitude as austria and the south of germany) fully covered by air conditioning. I absolutely didn't need it until, say, last year. And since last year repeated this year, I'm not waiting any more. I would get it installed now but everyone is out of stock :) And yes, this article is subtly selling something.
- andersa 2y ago
  Yep, the time where we don't need AC in Europe is long over. But the laws haven't caught up with this development yet (i.e. no mandatory AC in apartment buildings yet, or worse, some landlords actually seem to think they can forbid you from having it) which is very frustrating.
- theshrike79 2y ago
  I got an AC heat pump installed 3 years ago, because the literal walls in my apartment were too hot to lean on after the constant sun + extremely well done insulation + massive walls. Before that I can remember only a handful of nights in the last 20 years I had trouble sleeping because it was too hot.
  - nottorp 2y ago
    Just to nitpick a bit, all AC units are heat pumps :)
    - benfortuna 2y ago
      Evaporative AC?
      - Izkata 2y ago
        Those are generally called coolers, not air conditioners, because they add moisture to the air instead of removing it. They're also not even remotely as strong, and barely do anything in high humidity.
andersa 2y ago
That would be amazing. Fuck the hot summers we currently get. My AC is wasting so much money...
wewxjfq 2y ago
Last time I checked climate models the cooling wouldn't even offset global warming and just send Europe back to the 1990s in terms of temperatures.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kkfx 2y ago
I suggest a simple take, it's essentially evident that the climate change, and we know from history that's always happen. How it will change it's very uncertain. As a result we need to been able to adapt, which design allow us to adapt? A spread life, small semi-autonomous buildings, something quick to be built, with all raw materials easy to source locally, transformable at small scale locally, with the littlest dependency of fixed on-land large infra. Oh, actually is the sole part of the Green Deal who seems to work. New single-family homes, sheds, well insulated, designed to use the Sun as much as possible, with THE VERY SAME DESIGN in all climate. Thinks seriously: do you know any working smart-city? Neom, Arkadag, Innopolis, the original Fordlandia? Do you know large projects that do works well? Conversely do you have seen or built a modern home, a modern shed, and hey, that's worked? Do you realize how "identical" are modern small buildings from the poles, the tropic, deserts etc? How easy to adapt they are? Now decide for yourself which part of the Green New Deal can realistically be done and which can't.
jmclnx 2y ago
We have far more CO2 in the atmosphere now then back then. Maybe Europe may be a bit cooler than NE US, but Ice-age, no.

39 points by rolph 2y ago

This video has been a good introduction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNNW8c_FaA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHNNW8c_FaA I live on the coast of Norway so I am trying to keep up with the research. It is exactly as the article says: Even if there's "only" a 10% chance, or even 5%, that's a huge risk to take to stay. So I think it's important to pay attention to this henceforward.

trompetenaccoun 2y ago
>that's a huge risk to take to stay Are you advocating that people leave Norway based on a questionable idea regarding a hypothetical event that's not even remotely shown itself in actual measurements?
- nakeru 2y ago
  I'm not sure calling the collapse of the AMOC a "questionable idea regarding a hypothetical event that's not even remotely shown itself in actual measurement" maps with reality. Scientists have been dumping data to models and for a few years this possiblity has gone from unlikely to "it could happen within the next 5 to 10 years".
  - Jensson 2y ago
    Look at Canada or Russia and you see what will happen. It will be too cold to grow most crops as well as today, but it wont be another ice age, humans will still survive in the area albeit you might need a bit more energy to heat your homes and food will be blander or rely on imports (food diversity coming from imports wouldn't be very different from today though...). Climate change ensures no ice age will happen again for millions of years, the ice age happened since earth was extremely low on Co2 it wont happen at the rates we have now.

defrost 2y ago

Fun article, and it's true that there's uncertainity about the future of the AMOC and consequences that might flow. The real meat is the undercurrent and framing .. from a PR standpoint this is advanced late stage fossil fuel advocacy from the Saudi Oil Machine; head to the end and the message is Yes! Climate Change (AGW) is Real and a threat .. but don't stop consuming fossil fuels!! ( brought to us by Robin M. Mills, CEO of Qamar Energy and author of 'The Myth of the Oil Crisis' and https://www.thenationalnews.com/about-us/ https://www.thenationalnews.com/about-us/ ) The advocacy here is for pumping sulfur into the stratosphere and burying CO2. What's sidestepped is the band aid temporary nature (with side effects) of continuously emmitting sulfur and the fundementally not even break even state of CO2 sequestration .. the largest carbon removal project on the planet emits a good magnitude (and more) CO2 than it buries as it's literally an excuse to keep extracting a lot of gas while using a tiny amount for some back pressure in the field.

bboygravity 2y ago
CO2 storage is also dangerous and very deadly when it goes wrong. Plenty of examples of natural CO2 storages (in or under lakes for example) that wipe out anything that breathes (including vehicles) in a certain radius.
theshrike79 2y ago
All CO2 storage projects are just snake oil. Most use multiple times more in marketing than they do on the actual tech.
stareatgoats 2y ago
> there's uncertainity about the future of the AMOC In the long view, there is no uncertainty, we know that the AMOC will fluctuate and likely fail completely at some point, we just don't know exactly when. Just as the Sahara will likely bloom again, and the locations of all current coastal cities will some day be underwater, we just don't know when. This is not an argument for accelerating these changes, and continuing to emit CO2, sulfur, and other poisonous pollutants into the atmosphere, however. It is an argument for realizing that the planet is and will always be in climate flux, whether affected by human activity or not, and that our long term strategy needs to be adaptation and cooperation, not to engineer the climate to stay as it was in 1700 and selfishly laying claim to temporarily blessed locations.

NotGMan 2y ago

[flagged]

CodeWriter23 2y ago
You just don’t understand the powerful impact of a gas…that occupies…0.04% of our atmosphere.
- lukealization 2y ago
  And botulinum toxin only needs to exist in microscopic quantities to cause injury and death—would you eat a jar contaminated with it?
- gspr 2y ago
  Are you saying that things whose concentrations are expressed in what in your daily life is a small number are unimportant? Would be great if you could be completely explicit about this, so that people can reply to something concrete. Thanks.
- booi 2y ago
  I'm very disappointed to see climate change deniers on this forum. The effect of carbon dioxide on global warming has been proven a million times over. Small percentages can significantly affect heat capture from the sun. A quick overview[1]. Even at 0.1% CO2, you'll feel it (light-headedness, dizzy). Around 3-5% you'll be dead. CO2 is rising at a rate 100x faster than pretty much ever. But you're right, its only 0.04% i'm sure we'll be fine [2] [1] https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-global-warming/ https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-glob... [2] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carbon-dioxide-levels-surging-faster-than-ever-noaa-scientists/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carbon-dioxide-levels-surging-f...
- fredrikholm 2y ago
  "You just don't understand the powerful impact of arsenic when it constitutes 0.04% of your total body weight."
- croes 2y ago

pjmlp 2y ago

The problem is that with covid, ongoing wars close home, and economics, goverments let all compromises fell down, additionally the way the fridays for future and other movements decided to protest with their infrastructure blocking actions, the regular population is starting to lose interest on their message, thus nothing really effective happens, as means to fix everything.

silexia 2y ago

No real science is discussed in this article, just hypotheticals. Read Michael Crichton if you want science fantasy that is actually entertaining.

ggm 2y ago
I enjoyed "state of fear" but it's important to read the takedown on his bad science. Great airport adventure thriller. Terrible footnotes. The man was a cooker. He bought a lot of bad chart interpretation to the table and the idea of a Mafioso green movement using as yet uninvented ground shakers and carbon fibre lightning conductors is pure james bond. What is it with pot boilers and poison? Dan Brown had anaphylactic nut liquor, Crichton has blue ring octopi.
FrankyHollywood 2y ago
There is a lot of research done right now, funded by the EU. But uncertainties are huge, and the tipping point for the Amoc could be between 2050 and 8065 [0]. It's a complex problem, and almost impossible to model correctly, but that doesn't make it science fiction. [0] https://www.climate-tipping-points.eu/post/why-we-cant-predict-the-timing-of-climate-tipping-points https://www.climate-tipping-points.eu/post/why-we-cant-predi...

nottorp 2y ago

Meanwhile, by next summer I need to have my european home (northern romania, at about the same latitude as austria and the south of germany) fully covered by air conditioning. I absolutely didn't need it until, say, last year. And since last year repeated this year, I'm not waiting any more. I would get it installed now but everyone is out of stock :) And yes, this article is subtly selling something.

andersa 2y ago
Yep, the time where we don't need AC in Europe is long over. But the laws haven't caught up with this development yet (i.e. no mandatory AC in apartment buildings yet, or worse, some landlords actually seem to think they can forbid you from having it) which is very frustrating.
theshrike79 2y ago
I got an AC heat pump installed 3 years ago, because the literal walls in my apartment were too hot to lean on after the constant sun + extremely well done insulation + massive walls. Before that I can remember only a handful of nights in the last 20 years I had trouble sleeping because it was too hot.
- nottorp 2y ago
  Just to nitpick a bit, all AC units are heat pumps :)
  - benfortuna 2y ago
    Evaporative AC?
    - Izkata 2y ago
      Those are generally called coolers, not air conditioners, because they add moisture to the air instead of removing it. They're also not even remotely as strong, and barely do anything in high humidity.

andersa 2y ago

That would be amazing. Fuck the hot summers we currently get. My AC is wasting so much money...

wewxjfq 2y ago

Last time I checked climate models the cooling wouldn't even offset global warming and just send Europe back to the 1990s in terms of temperatures.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

kkfx 2y ago

I suggest a simple take, it's essentially evident that the climate change, and we know from history that's always happen. How it will change it's very uncertain. As a result we need to been able to adapt, which design allow us to adapt? A spread life, small semi-autonomous buildings, something quick to be built, with all raw materials easy to source locally, transformable at small scale locally, with the littlest dependency of fixed on-land large infra. Oh, actually is the sole part of the Green Deal who seems to work. New single-family homes, sheds, well insulated, designed to use the Sun as much as possible, with THE VERY SAME DESIGN in all climate. Thinks seriously: do you know any working smart-city? Neom, Arkadag, Innopolis, the original Fordlandia? Do you know large projects that do works well? Conversely do you have seen or built a modern home, a modern shed, and hey, that's worked? Do you realize how "identical" are modern small buildings from the poles, the tropic, deserts etc? How easy to adapt they are? Now decide for yourself which part of the Green New Deal can realistically be done and which can't.

jmclnx 2y ago

We have far more CO2 in the atmosphere now then back then. Maybe Europe may be a bit cooler than NE US, but Ice-age, no.