Thanks Peter. I seem to unsuspectingly opened an unusually rich Pandora's box of misery, doom and despair this week judging by the comments I read before yours, so it's a welcome moment of respite to read your message :-) All the best. Dave
A very important fact often missed is the phytoplankton in the ocean are responsible for at least 50% of our oxygen, with estimates between 50% to 80%. Warming water and decreased dissolved oxygen result in thicker layers below the surface, resulting in cooling water not cooling the surface where phytoplankton live. As the surface warms, the phytoplankton die. This is probably the biggest catastrophe of all, if ocean surface temperatures continue to rise an dissolved oxygen continues to decline. I have talked to oceanographers who agree with my take on this.
Great video Dave, as always. For those who went to Blue Carbon's website, the last photo is taken at Elkhorn Slough, California, a 7 mile long slough and estuary in Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and one of the larger wetlands in the USA. It is a 'must visit' area and has been part of Blue Carbon's efforts for some years.
Well it is their summer, and i think trump is planning on putting a golf course in. We are such a dumb species, im truly baffled by humanity and emberrassed to exist to be honest. I was unfortunate enough to realize over 43 years ago at around 8yrs old, that humanity was just plain unsane. That is a hard thing for an 8yr old to handle, with no one to talk to about it really either...😒🔫
Where does the melting Tundra fit in, it's coastal but doesn't hold biodiversity as we typically think about it, but has mass amount of CO2 and is literally eroding into the ocean. APTN has some footage if anyone is interested
Thanks for pointing out all of the other rapidly increasing manmade impact on our ecosystems. Not only with carbon that we make calculate via direct measurement but the obvious increased stress as we over mine, fish, develop, etc. People tell us more more more population and at current lifestyles is the only way humans can survive. Seems a little illogical.
Sorry the adult talk is slanted severely to the left. C02 has been way higher in the past. So the ocean has been acidified in the past and plenty of if land has been underwater and temperature higher. All this happened before the industrial revolution. We really need him to give the whole story in relevance to the total timeline if life in earth.
Age and depth of seagrass sediment can effect how stores are vulnerable. Stores deeper than 1 m are not vulnerable to decomposition of the seagrass is lost
The coldest temperature recorded anywhere on the earth, antarctic, jan 2018 , at minus 97C. With co2 leves of 400ppm. I Dont recall anything reported on the media about that..?. but what IS reported is a new high, of 18.3C on the northern tip of the peninsular, 1840 miles from the south pole. ( the same distance the Trondheim in Norway is from the north pole) However, the 1982 high temperature at a similar location , was actually 19.8C - 1.5C warmer, with co2 levels at that time of 320ppm. If we are going to be honest, then all these figures should be discussed openly.
@grindupBaker have you checked what i wrote, it is all there online for you to see , if you can be bothered. Insulting people, doesnt do your case much good im afraid. All i said was these numbers should be openly discussed., Not an unreasonable position to take, i would suggest. www.dailysabah.com/science/2018/06/28/coldest-temperature-on-earth-recorded-in-antarctica
@@garethlamb4963 oooh yes, cant have any blasphemy against the othordox , appproved view. Must think the same , must think the same, no divergences of thought allowed. it goes against the doctrine. Lol
lol, at first look I thought this is satire and wanted to compliment you on it, but then I just noticed you actually do not understand the diffrence between climate and weather ... :/
@@scribblescrabble3185 believe whatever you wish. It wont change weather nor climate. Long term prediction of weather is not possible beyond a few days, yet you can predict climate? 105 of the 108 climate predictions models no not appear to correlate with measured temperature. Knock yourself out . Even IPCC acknowledged this. " The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible..."
440 parts per million is a trace amount. If one is concerned about carbon in the air, look up what concentrations are in your car, house, and what it has been in geologic history. You'll either be horrified, or you'll realize that carbon is required for life on planet earth, and your fear will be relieved.
@grindupBaker Vulgarity and insults are the tools of the ignorant. Maybe you should review your comments and reflect on whether you should be commenting on anything that includes the word "wit." Then look up the things I said in my 1st comment, and recognize why you shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about.
@Joshua Martin Yes keep listening to the "experts" who have predicted the end of the earth, snow, the inundation of coastal areas, and the drowning of islands for decades, and have been 100% wrong in every case. Believe government scientists who change data to get funding. Because that shows critical thinking and independent thought. Because China and India are building more coal fired power plants, but these "scientists" say you need to give up freedom, security, and money to save the world, but the Chinese and India don't. You my friend are brilliant. And no, when i was in elementary school, they taught us that there was going to be another ice age. Which goes to show two things; 1) your assumptions have made an ass of you, and 2) climate scientists don't know what they are talking about.
Grow algae in facilities using the sewage from city waste as fertilizer and micro iron( dead blood cells) aka a continuously controlled algae bloom that you can harvest to sequester or use as soil amendment. Plant mangroves for coastal erosion prevention and carbon sequestration.
@@shuaige3360 Why? Every city already has waste treatment plants that can be adapted for this most algae double in number every 7 days faster with the right nutrients the algae itself is an energy source that can run the system alone with the oil from it but the methane from the sewage or bio digesting the algae could power it as well. Your argument amounts to I don't want to do it will cost too much because I did not think about it.
@@Barskor1 Simple replies: 1) because waste treatment plants are already in use... to treat water in the most efficient way we know. 2) if It was a silver bullet, and if it was making very much sense in the financial term, do not worry, It will already been done... if it is not done, It is that their are many problems that you do not realize, because you and I are not expert on the subject.
@@shuaige3360 1 growing algae also treats water as it reduces nitrogen and phosphorus among other things. 2) You don't acknowledge entrenched ways of doing things even when better options are available happens all the time and this is no exception. 3)BS cite some or they don't exist.
@@Barskor1 Yes, you are 100% right, you alone figure It all how to solve at the same time the water treatment problem, the global warming problem, and let say maybe even the food production issue, all at once, with a simple idea, without any problems! Congratulation, you will get the nobel price of everything and the equivalent of the medal of honor from every single countries. Kisses :P
My whole life right now is devoted to transitioning to zero waste as an individual and getting my legislators to back H.R. 763 The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act of 2019 at the Federal level-and S.B. 54 / A.B. 1080 The California Circular Economy and Plastic Pollution Reduction Act on the state level.
For anyone paying attention, we've screwed Greta's generation, big time. And by the way, "Just Have a Think" is the best video maker that I can find. It's just excellent!
I can’t help but laugh that Greta is brought up as a credible source on anything- especially when she basically goes around on private jets and sea barges Gonna use MovieBob as a example too? Seriously AOC and Greta’s family have caused a lot of pollution which effects specifically organisms- noise pollution and especially around the sea Fun fact: the sea is a desert
C4-plants? not so much. C3-plants maybe, but droughts, heatwaves and other extrem weather phenomena will nullify or even reverse that advantage. Read up on RuBisCO
Note: as a citizen of the USA, I and many others are waiting for an actual "leader" in the White House. At the moment we have a total chump. Not to forget the control of the Senate - which also needs to revert to a party with more than a collective IQ of 2.
Of concern to me is what Midwestern farm states need to do to prevent the dead zone from occurring in the Gulf of Mexico. Thanks for the great video Dave, this drives home the point of urgency to save those seagrass areas and tidal estuaries down off the coast of Louisiana. Plus we are loosing so much topsoil and fertilizer, it could be of benefit in many ways to change land use policies here.
that goes hand and hand with population and everyone wanting a first world lifestyle. look at china's incredible growth. they want a first world lifestyle and now they have it but at a cost. they lose billions of tons of topsoil every year. land use is only a problem because of mass farming, mass farming is a problem because of population. everything happening can be traced back to, too many people consuming.
@@dbrown2430 My hope is that we can produce enough with permaculture crops and store carbon at.the same time. A first world lifestyle need not come with the loss of a stable Gaia. I'm not sure population is the main culprit just yet, but no sense in testing the limits! The earth still has enough for every man's needs, but bioharmony must become the new way.
@@chuckkottke the world has enough if the population isnt ridiculously consumerist, which it is. We are out farming our habital land, you should watch that video on what 11 billion people means, as they use more land and water for farming animals. Its not sustainable
@@dbrown2430 I am always shocked by our modern consumeristic culture here in the US. One trip down the highway of neverending shopping, it amazes me that there is even a drop of oil left given our rate of insanely mindless consumption! But it doesn't appeal to me;. Is it really all that good for us, even psychologically? What is real wealth is enjoying the simple pleasures in life, changing mindsets, getting real again. Yes, I agree! Way too much livestock, not enough permaculture crops, a lack of complete cycle view; much has to change. I did a thought experiment to view humanity another way, asking what would we look like if we formed the human flag on Earth, standing in formation. The human flag worked out to roughly 50 miles on a side. My friend Peter (a member of Earth First) said, "now picture that mass of humanity as a giant caterpillar, munching on a leaf. That leaf is Earth.". I laughed, but he has a point, I have to admit. Still we can achieve universal prosperity for what matters most, and slow then reverse population growth, for sooner or later we will exceed carrying capacity; better safe than sorry, I agree!
The estuaries off the coast of Louisiana are being submerged by sea level rise. The other threat is that Louisiana right now is in a major drought which means that any rivers that are exiting into the Gulf of Mexico could be a record low level allowing sea water to migrate up the rivers. If there's any agriculture alongside the edge of those Rivers they will be lost due to poisoning by saltwater period of the Mississippi is a record low in saltwater is coming up and threatening the water supply for several cities
I think James Lovelock also talked about exhausting of the carbon from the oceans that will occur as: 1) the oceans warm, lowering the capacity for carbon, and 2) as the conveyor belts bring up cold water with carbon absorbed a century or more before....I may have the latter wrong as an attribution, but I recall his mentioning something about these in his talk to the Royal Society in 2006, which I believe is still online somewhere.
Hey Dave. We did our live on the permafrost issues (etc) last night. Maybe you can catch a livestream with jennifer Hynes and myself some evening. You and Jen are on the same wavelength. Jen is brilliant.
Hi Sandie. Great to hear from you. I'll definitely take a look at the Permafrost broadcast, and I'd be happy to take part in a live chat if you think it would be worthwhile :-) All the best. Dave
A lot of those areas are also the location of places like March's Point in Washington state. Its right next door to Padilla Bay National Estuary Preserve. Thank you Edna Braezeale for your vision.
There was an idea being circulated decades ago, to fertilize areas of the open ocean with iron salts and thereby promote the growth of algae and phytoplankton. I haven't heard anything about this idea recently. I'm not endorsing this idea; I'm just curious as to why it's fallen by the wayside.
@@jonovens7974 the ignorance of so many has sapped away the little energy i had left, and crushed what meager faith in humanity i was holding on to. The universe doesnt make mistakes, that concept is a human perspective... humanity has proved it deserves and requires extinction. That just seems to me to be the self evident truth.
Agreed, we screwed ourselves bieng ignorant, short sighted and greedy, lazy, nimrods. Plenty of "warnings" along the way, but honestly any degree of common sense could see our way of existence is distubing self centered idiocy. Good riddance, im fine with extinction really.
The thing that boggles my mind is how people bang on about climate change but do nothing to reduce their own personal impact on the planet. IE nothing to reduce their electricity, gas and petrol usage, even though it would also save them money. The average 4 person household (2 adults and 2 kids) produces 24 tonnes of CO2 per year from electricity and gas usage. That's with the advantage of all of them benefiting from the advantages of all being on the same heating and a lower outside wall to volume ratio. My usage was 2.5 tonnes per year before Covid AND that included petrol usage. To put this in perspective I pay £21 a month combined gas and electricity.
Permaculture principle 11. Use edges and value the marginal. In permaculture, edges are generally the places where two ecosystems meet; this is the definition provided by the Permaculture Association[1], which elaborates on this principle as follows: The place where two eco-systems or habitats meet (e.g. woodland and meadow) is generally more productive and richer in the variety of species[2] present than either habitat on its own. In ecology this is called ‘ecotone’. This is central to the idea of using edges as a design method. The logic is simple. If the most productive bit of woodland is the edge, then design it to have a bigger edge. This logic is indeed simple, because the edge between two ecosystems is where species from one ecosystem encounter species from the other. The permaculture designer, in planning for ‘more edge’ in a given system, works to increase ‘overlap’ between ecosystems, thereby creating more biodiversity simply because more than one ecosystem is required for such overlap to occur - the more ecosystems that meet (i.e. more edges), the better.
Thanks for your calm, concise and thoughtful presentations Dave. Unfortunately until Trump, Bozonaro and other heads of 'government' get with the program, us picking away at the edges of the problems is frustratingly ineffective. Keep up the great work, though...!
Well yeah, what can you do when your nation isn’t the one causing the problems such as China, India and so on and he best people want to do is push to control cow farts
@@silent_stalker3687 Pretty simple, just put an embargo on China. Oh wait, no, without their sacrifice you can't make trillions $ ! Every nation that pursue Infinite Growth by usury is an accomplice to this mess. The "best" people just want to avoid guilt.
French Toad ‘The best’ The people who... pushed recycling plants around and so created more pollution than they were removing ‘Avoid guilt’ Have you seen Blizzard? Also look up at the Lobbyist and pro-regulation corporates who raise the price of your goods, making China’s much cheaper, who’s supporting China? Everyone because their goods are cheap Say you have the choice between 1.25$ fish can vs 7.50$ fish can What would you buy? Now let the regulations and the minimum wage rise and... you now have the choice of 1.25$ or 11:15$ fish can The cheaper would go to China Now who’s suffering at the cost of regulations? Small business Why? Because Amazon would suffer at 15$, but can manage 11.50$ wage however their competition will not be so lucky and may not even survive a month What does Amazon do? Ship a lot from China and through China Why not ship stuff out of Africa and so on? Oh right Tariffs Some African nations have up to 70% tariff cost and of course a debt would China would probably grease the rare minerals China really loves which means more smelting and more waste dumping Small business wouldn’t like to go to China and pay the shipping fee and tariffs Amazon would love that and could do that in mass especially when they have less competition to deal with so it’s only from them Also what fuels infinite growth? Politicians largely use votes- others use propaganda and force such as African warlords and dictators which have actually been going to China to help restrict the internet
Brian Keller ‘Rather than shift the blame to other states’ Genocides are bad and hitler is bad for enforcing it ‘Don’t shift blame to other states’ Again China is one of the biggest producer of all pollutants chemical lakes, dumping and so on. Hell read the Paris agreement: ‘we agree to continue emission until a time when it peaks and then decrease it’ Aka do nothing And then you have the top polluters all of which dump into the sea and have little in place to protect property and people living there. ‘China is cutting back’ What’s that slogan going around? China lied and people died. China lies and crunches numbers, Hell once they shut down all factories so they could have a good few pictures to promote a city
Brian Keller Oh ‘orange man bad’ got it, how about this have a policy that does something than nothing or hands the fuck off Also 0.00001% pollution You: ‘that’s too much, it’s no reason why we should cut it down further!!!!’ Last I checked it’s illegal to dump anything on anyone’s land and the ocean, not so in China And last I checked China wanted some of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Mongolia and Pakistan land along with India pushing troops around its territory near China Besides there’s the human rights abuse that China just hand waves away... something your Paris agreement buddies sure seem to ignore whenever it’s a problem; make of that as you will.
Our invensible leader Scot Morrison is still carring on about his feasability study for a new COAL FIRED POWER STATION. It realy makes one want to give up,, what a wast of time and resources. Please give him a mention on one of your episodes its such a shame even mensenioning a subject like this at this point of our struggle against GW. Thans for your great videos and all your efforrts please keep it up well done.
Here's a suggestion for a future episode. With the Corona virus still going strong in China you may want to consider an episode that focuses on the possibility (probability?) of a previously unknown virus coming back to affect us due to melting glaciers. I read about this a couple of years ago and hadn't really thought about it until this Corona Virus thing happened. Not sure about the probability of such a thing happening but I believe it's above zero.
You can attend as many conferences as you want it will not change the fact who the leader of the free world is and you will never convince corporations in this day and age to go along. Your glass half full take on it is not helping your audience one bit.
My glass has been effectively empty for the last decade - but trying to convince people for the last 4 decades and getting nowhere is the reason. Now, well ill live another 10 years at most, so F*&k you all - because you've (humans) know about the problem for 60 odd years now. I'm afraid you can't rebel against extinction.
Nothing is going to stop what is happening dont normal people get it? Even if we shut down every car plane truck bus factory power plant electrical grid on the planet, there is a lag in co2 amplification. We will hit critical mass and the feedback loops will be unstoppable. They have already started, it would take decades to slow this, we dont have that kind of time.
Just to carry on a good book also worth reading is Air Con by Ian Wishheart . This has some fascinating facts and figures that a lot of people don’t consider and it defiantly opened my eyes 👀 the whole problem may not just be carbon . Methane and water vapour there are other suggestions as well in this book and we may be barking up the wrong tree. Which could be worrying all things have to be looked at. And we must do everything .
I have a question... The US gets a lot of flak about CO2 emissions, despite keeping our total emissions basically unchanged in the past 30 years. I wanted to know what gives, so I did some googlageness and found that our emissions per capita are the highest in the world. Now, I live a pretty frugal life. I don't drive a car, I don't have many possessions, and I don't eat much. I'm skinny and poor... and most people my age are skinny and poor. I'm in my early 30's. My generation isn't privileged. In fact, despite working more hours than any generation before us, we're totally shafted. So I truly cannot think of a way that we could be causing more CO2 emission per capita than other countries. So my question is - what is the actual cause of the US's supposedly crazy-high per capita emissions of CO2?
Vehicle sales in the US since 2014 have been at or near record highs. Not only that but light truck and SUV sales have dominated the market. Americans love their giant SUV's. 17 million vehicles, many of which are multi ton trucks sold per year. That would be one cause.
Its not always about vehicles you know. Its about total emissions coal fired electric plants, chemical plants, manufacturing plants, large swaths of land used for factory farming. While transportation in the states is up at the top for our emissions, neck and neck with it is electricity production. It dont take a genius to figure out where its coming from. I would like a link that shows the USA as the top producer of co2 emissions in the world, because last i saw it was china. The thing people fail to realize is co2, pollution, radiation ect dont stay in one place. What happens in china dont stay there it travels on the winds circling the globe. So the first thing people better remember is we all live in the same atmosphere, and share the same air.
I'm optimistic because with optimism there is a chance we can get it right. I support Bernie because an anti corruption candidate can be a great asset if we are to make real progress. The convention will be in Milwaukee this year, a great place to cheer on climate science and legislative agendas in progressive candidates.
Big money was never going to let him be the leader. He is finished now. May 2020. Why do people still believe that our corrupt system of capitalization is going to save us. lol
@@aland5478 Sad to see Bernie Sanders leave the race after backroom deals sealed his fate. I never put faith in capitalism, as it is a form of plantation slavery, but if workers owned those businesses as no outside money could buy the plantation, adding fair guidance by honest governance, and at least for things that belong in the market there can be a good situation for all. I put faith in reform, for the moral arc of the universe is long, but not that long. Time will come soon when this whole system will be forced to change.
@@aland5478 Why do people put faith in capitalization? I think just simply faith in the familiar, and fear of the unfamiliar. As better ways are expressed, change begins to happen, spurred on by problems with the current system.
The problem with pessimism - or more to the point, fatalism, because a lot of fatalists who actually have personal issues they need to work out disguise themselves as pessimists - is that you get exactly the results you were looking for.
CO2 is the result of a warming planet not the cause. So it has to be something else, like the sun or the fact the planet has been steadily warming for thousands of years with occasional mini cooling periods (climate change).
@@javebury We can definitely say it was warmer some time ago. Some of some Sir David Kings ancestors lived much further North than us and it was lush green. Sadly it's been cooling for a 150 million years.
Debunked. Look into this claim further. Small amounts of warming from perhaps an orbital perturbation --> a bit of warming--> release of CO2--> huge warming. That's why the apparent "lag" occurs.
Are there any efforts to terraform the ocean? If water temperature is too high to support seagrass in one area it's fair to say other areas previously too cold may be conducive. Also, GM Seagrasses may be developed to be more temperature tolerant. As world population increases or habitable land decreases oceans may prove the only viable area for large scale reforestation assuming acidification can be overcome.
Look up what heat waves and cold waves are and then look up the current waves. I thought the sky was suppose to be wine red and so was the sea- especially as books back then described it #RedTheSea Sarcasm aside
Jasper Thebeau Yes the northern hemisphere goes through seasonal changes like everywhere else when the earth tilts. Hence why there are areas where you can have 30+ days of sun and night up there such as Alaska, some areas manage to have 70+ days of constant sun without it setting
Thank you. I appreciate that. Just me at the moment but I get great support from comments like yours and from the channels patreon patrons. I still work full time but hopefully that will reduce this year.
Another great video sir. It seems more and more like we have already opened pandora's box. Our governments have failed us. The only way we're even going to have a chance is with a grassroots effort. We the people need to force our leaders to start doing something now before it is completely to late.
Phytoplankton supply's most of the Earth Oxygen. PHYTOPLANKTON needs CO² to thrive.. The Sun is the driver of Climate Change thru Particle Forcing.. The melting of the polar ice is due to the underground Volcanic activity. The Earth warms up by water molecules in the air. The IPCC models don't include Solar Forcing,but they will in the year 2022..
My understanding is that oceans exhale CO2 when they warm and absorb it when they cool. With the large amount of carbon being absorbed from the bushfires here in Australia by the ocean, is it safe to assume that the planets atmosphere is now cooling?
@@justingage5524 There are several mechanisms: 1. Warming or cooling leads to different distribution of CO2 ocean/air, so warmer oceans tend to release more CO2, thats correct. 2. But increasing the CO2 of the oceans doesnt lead to cooling - why should it? It only does when, as in 1), the uptake of CO2 by the oceans is ATMOSPHERIC CO2, decreasing the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere. 3. So what the bushfires did was: a) Rapidly putting CO2 in the atmosphere that was previously drawn from the atmosphere by the bush plants. Over some years, to decades. Some of the released CO2 goes into the oceans, yes, some into the atmosphere. So it has a temporary increase, albeit a very small one, in CO2 concentrations. Until new bush grrows and draws that realeased CO2 back into wood. Ofc, if net plant mass is lost on a global level, continuously, then CO2 concentrations rise. This has been measured and contributes for some percent of the total global CO2 increase. b) Temporarily in a short time frame, weeks to months to year at max, bushfires like volcanoes put aerosols in the air (until theyre washed out). These aerosols, aka dust, block some incoming solar irradiation. This has a small cooling effect.
@@hooplehead1019 thanks. I know co2 doesn't cool the ocean but a cooling ocean draws in CO2. The speaker in this video stated that the ocean was absorbing co2 from the bushfires. If it's drawing in co2 does that mean it's cooling?
@@justingage5524 Ah, now I understand you, sorry I was slow. :) No, apart from ocean temperature, what also determines if it absorbs or releases CO2 is the concentration of CO2 of the atmosphere vs the ocean. Right now, because every second tons of CO2 are added to the atmosphere the atmosphere temporarily has a higher concentration of CO2 than the oceans (cause we dont pump CO2 in the oceans, we burn fossil fuels in the air). So although the oceans are warming - they also take up CO2 to get to a distribution equilibrium. Like when you open your window after getting up in the morning and warm and cold air and oxygen and CO2 distribute to finally reach an equilibrium (I assume you close the window before it reaches that in winter...). Only in that example, its the same medium, air. And air and water, and thus different distribution values, in the case of ocean and atmosphere. (I dont know the values, you can sure find a paper to look them up.) This is a common point of misunderstanding, because in the past, without rapid CO2 concentration increases of the atmosphere by burning of fossil fuels, warming oceans indeed have RELEASED CO2. And thus amplified warming, for example in the end of the last glacials. So, many people rightfully wonder what is different now or even incorrectly assume the oceans are releasing CO2 right now. Today, we measure that the oceans currently are warming - and at the same time we measure they are taking up CO2. Because of the increasing concentration in the atmosphere. Scientists predict there will be, as always, an equlibrium when oceans will have warmed and the concentration of CO2 in the oceans will be high enough that they indeed wont take up any more CO2 from the atmosphere and even release it. For example if the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere decreases: when we take out more CO2 from the atmosphere than we emit. For this scenario they already have incorporated this effect when for example calculating the number of trees needed for X amount of atmospheric CO2 reduction - the number obviously is much larger than when neglecting this effect. Because the oceanic CO2 "substitutes" the removed CO2 in the air to again reach an equilibrium. Same as now, but vice versa.
Let's have another confrence......lets talk about it....lets form a committee......lets gets some funds....lets give each other roles and budgets and flights to buffets that go overtime for days n days n days.....who's hungry?.....lets have another confrence....
@peter Water vapor is heavier and more abundant than CO2 in the atmosphere. So what? Most of the geologic record has several times the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. The present levels are nowhere near unprecedented and/or catastrophic. We are making a slight rebound from one of the all time low atmospheric CO2 levels on the geologic record.
@peter Your argument is a joke. The amount of heat reflected back to earth due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is logarithmic, not linear as you are suggesting. This means that there are diminishing returns. If you double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (100% increase), you only increase the amount of radiation reflected back to earth by 50 percent. That is why it took 20 times the present level of atmospheric CO2 to cause the only mass extinction linked with CO2 as a primary cause. We are talking 8,000 ppm during the end Permian extinction compared to our present 400 ppm.
Yes, by all means look at reputable sources. The geologic record is a reputable source. I highly recommend anyone interested in this topic look at it and the history of atmospheric content of our planet over the entire duration instead of just the last 20,000 years. If you do so, you will find the first mass extinction event 444 million years ago in the end Ordovician period which was caused by global cooling due to newly exposed silica sucking the CO2 out of the atmosphere. We are much closer to that extinction event than the Permian extinction event which was partially caused by too much atmospheric carbon dioxide.
There has always been a delicate balance between the Oceans, Sea's and Fresh Water related to the trees and fullage. Right now we do not have enough Plantlife to keep that balance. Way Too Much Land Has Been Developed For Housing Projects and the Concrete Jungles throughout the World is one of the cheif causes of this imbalance. We either learn to live in harmony with Nature or Face The Consequences.
There will be a webinar for the floating mirror SRM next week. It was announced on the channel "jamen shively". Prof. Guy McPherson and Dr. Ye Tao will be there. You should join because you have been thinking about these things for a long time. You will have great perspectives.
I am interested in seeing that show.....I have followed Jamen and he is about the most positive voice I have heard in our genre. Just do not know if these "solutions " are solutions. I am all in to learn.
@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse check out the video introduction. It's not a way to back to busines as usual but it will offer the planet some relief. We can even do marine permaculture under the mirrors.
What happened to the tetrapods when the natural C02 was ten times higher in the past ocean acidification? and how acidic were the oceans then, they must have been acid. What happened to the environments you stating about at the last interglacial when it was hotter than it is now?
Well, a lot of species went simply extinct in previous rapid climatic changes. But ofc after some hundreads of thousands of years, other species flourished again. So this is not the point. The point is not about absolute temperatures (until we get to extreme values), its about the fact that rapid changes specifically are COSTLY for a stationary infrastructure and us humans, that we have reached a very populated world.
We have one of the most stable climates in the world in terms of disastrous weather and temperature variation. You'd think the world is ending when half an inch of snow falls with how everything grinds to a halt.
I now have a regular outlet where I share these videos. It's not an environment based website, so the video is not being shown to the already aware and/or converted.
Hi Andy. That's great news. You have been a constant source of support (and occasional correction) over the months, and I really appreciate it. All the best. Dave
How many of these people commenting with radical solutions actually grow their own vegetables and have some chooks to provide their own eggs and some meat, as well as reducing their kitchen waste. A small yard can easily provide a lot of food and reduce your foot print. I could go on.
AOC the energy czar has stated that everyone must commute by train powered by farts. The seats are very uncomfortable as everyone must contribute or the train goes nowhere. Compliance is mandatory no private vehicles are allowed because they cannot run on one person's fart.
Not all blue carbon ecosystems sequester carbon because of carbon trapped by these systems are consumed to produce additional CO2 and net calcareous production also offsets by producing co2. However, if the alternative ecosystem is, a greater carbon source or lesser carbon sink then the presence of these blue carbon ecosystems will mitigate, based on this service, bot withstanding loss of C stocks.
Warming is here to stay. If we shut down all fossil fuel production at midnight it would take centuries to absorb all the extra Co2. Embracing inexpensive reliable energy, economic growth and adapting to any new realities is what will keep us safe.
mixing atoms and molecules? did you fail to pay attention in science class? Atomic bonds and structure are a completely different category than molecular bonds/structure....
@@adrian4276 This is called poetic license, it was meant as humor, not a lesson in physics or chemistry. I actually know a lot about molecular bonds, after all the years I spent whacking moles at Star Leisure in Bray, Ireland.
@@Chimel31 sorry, i saw the "mixing atoms and molecules thing" and pounced. I see many many sheep before a pulpit in the comments and that made me slap hehe
In the entire geologic record, there has never been a mass extinction event that is primarily attributable to atmospheric CO2 levels at or below 6,000 ppm. We are only at about 400 ppm. The 200 ppm often cited is an all time low on the geologic record. We have a long way to go for atmospheric CO2 to be a problem. These alarmists like to ignore billions of years while focusing on only the last 20,000 years.
No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling...
Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet.
@Markus Antonious "No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling..." I get them from the geologic record. Feel free to look at it yourself. Perhaps you do not understand the principle of causation. You should look into that as well. CO2 has been in the atmosphere for all of the extinction events, that does not make it a causal factor. The only major extinction event which had atmospheric CO2 content as a major causal factor is the End Permian extinction caused by a super-volcano erupting in Siberia which released massive amounts of sulfur dioxide, methane, and CO2 into the atmosphere. Volcanic ash blotted out the sun for a few years, killing many plants. Then the atmospheric CO2 rose to approximately 8,000 ppm or 20 times our present day level, which caused temperatures to soar, and this finished off many species already struggling to cope with the other strains caused by the volcanic eruption. The average CO2 content per the geologic record is 1,200 ppm, or 3 times the present value. During the approximately 50 million years of the Jurassic period, atmospheric carbon content was around 2,000 ppm, which is what you are claiming is extinction causing levels. No extinction event occurred at this time. In fact, life thrived. So, go ahead and tell me about your mass extinction event caused by CO2 levels of 2,000 ppm. When did it occur? Nice trolling.
@Nelafix "Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet." There are lots of organisms dying off. This is caused more by other things humans are doing than by increased atmospheric CO2 levels. We are clearing forests and rainforests to make more farmland, while plowing up the soil to leave it exposed to the sun the vast majority of the year which kills off the bacteria and fungi necessary to keep the soil healthy, then we are dumping herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers onto this land, much of which are water soluble and end up in the water that many plants and animals consume. We are covering millions of square miles with asphalt, concrete, and structures making the environment inhospitable to most organisms. We are dragging huge nets through the oceans killing pretty much anything that gets ensnared. But no, let's not pay any attention to all of this activity. Let's blame CO2 in the atmosphere.
What we're doing about climate change needed to be done 30 yrs ago , but we're not actually doing it . And it's a shame few are willing to say it's game over , so we can plan on a dignified exit and not waste what's left of our lives working towards our demise .
50...and yes we are still digging our grave deeper, personally i think its already far too deep to ever get out. But hey thats just me, i have tried to wake people up for 43+ yrs to no avail so i give up, we deserve extinction and the universe ALWAYS gives what is deserved.
@@donfields1234 If we could blame one man and make him pay , his name would be Rupert Murdoch . But unfortunately it's the poor and the innocent that will suffer the most and will die first .
No. CO2 combines with water to form a very weak Carbonic Acid (H2CO3). This is a huge oversimplification of the processes involved. Carbonic Acid dissolves limestone to dissolve and become carbonates and bicarbonates (The stuff of Stalagmites and Stalactites). The actual acidification of the oceans is reckoned to be -0.1 below the pre-industrial era. Given that the pH scale was not invented until 1909 and not fully standardized until 1924, I'm rather skeptical about any pre-industrial readings. It's important to remember that pH is measured at the surface only. It is also temperature-dependent.
No Ash. The extra energy absorbed from a warmer atmosphere (or just directly from sunlight) heats up the water. The CO2 reacts with H20 to make carbonic acid which has the effect of slightly reducing the alkalinity of the water. But as more carbonic acid is formed there is less C available for shell fish to make the Calcium Carbonate for their shells. Jump back to my video #20 on Ocean Acidification for a fuller explanation. All the best. Dave
Just Have a Think Thanks. In Australia, they are blaming the fires on climate change. I’m trying to work out how carbon can cause drought in Australia. The EL Nino causes drought in Australia, warm water rising from the depths to the surface changes the wind direction we are told. So where does carbon fit into this picture?
@@ashsmitty2244 CO2, like any IR-active gas (green house gases, short GHGs), has an influence on the radiative balance of planet earth with space, by practically blocking specific wavelengths. More CO2 and other GHGs in the atmosphere mean, that earths surface and surface atmosphere needs to get warmer to radiate the energy it recieves from the sun into space using other pathways. The El Niño describes a situation, where the surface waters of the East Pacific off the coast of Peru gets warmer and the West Pacific colder. Surface wind direction will predominantly point from cold to warm, which is a positiv feedback, because the winds will push the sun warmed surface waters in wind direction, to the already warm region. How a warmer atmosphere effects El Niño or the Indian Ocean Dipole (effects weather mostly in west australia) I do not fully understand and it is still a current research topic. What I understand, it goes like this: A warmer atmosphere (thanks to the GHG-effect of CO2) warms the top layer of the ocean surface, which makes the water layers in the ocean more stable. Warm water on top of cold water doesn't mix as readily as water that is closer in temperatures, because of the density diffrence. It is more stratified and less strongly coupled. Which means, that the interactions of surface waters and subsurface waters is lessend. The subsurface waters being cooler and having, thanks to the sheer mass, a huge thermal capacity, usually have a dampening effect on El Niño and similiar phenomena. So, if the dampening effect of the subsurface waters get smaller, the interactions between the atmosphere and the surface waters grow relatively, dominating even. Which means, that feedback loop discribed above can act out more strongly, leading to stronger and maybe even more frequent El Niños. I hope I explained it well enough. That's just my understanding of it, and it is limited
SADLY CORRECT www.good.is/antarctica-and-los-angeles-were-pretty-much-the-same-temperatures-today-thats-not-good-news tRump should build a golf course there for his next vacation in November
Science is full of contradictions, that's what makes it so fun. Antarctica we are told millions of years ago was tropical. No snow. And CO2 levels at times past there were almost twice the level of today. Yet the earth survived. Scientists for the most part tell us that in the recent past (several thousand years) the continent has been covered by ice. Yet maps dating back to the 1500's seem to imply that Antarctica was tropical. Maps accurately outline the land mass in agreement with current remote sensing of the land mass under the ice. How did people then know the shape of the continent if the place was covered with ice? So we have a conundrum. Fascinating. I wouldn't give up on the earth yet.
@@jonnyde so annoying when an article like this uses only farenheit... About a problem of global significance, but no, lets use the units 3/4 of the world won't understand
@@eric7397 Millions of years ago!!! yeah we did not exist then . The earth will be fine until the day the sun swallows it or a massive object blows it apart. The problem isnt the earth dying, the problem is all life on the earth dying. People forget man is a new species here, the dinosaurs walked the earth for 200 million years before us look what happened to them. We have brought about rapid change that nothing can adapt to in time, the dinosaurs died because of rapid change, yes there was a cataclysm but that triggered a global effect that changed the environment rapidly. We dont have time to adapt sadly.
@@proudhon100 the misrepresentation is deliberate, using emotional appeal instead of factual information. I don't buy the points being made. Just like coral bleaching and disappearing polar bears.
@@inquirer1599 The base of the food chain going is an emotional issue. When you personally can't eat, you will get emotional. Seawater is becoming more acidic, so quit thinking you are being scientific.
@@proudhon100 A reduction from 8.2 to 8.1 compared with the pre-industrial era? Given that we didn't measure pH until 1909 using a system not fully standardised until 1924, I'm rather skeptical about those 'pre-industrial' figures.
you cant people have zero effect on what the politicians do, they will say"we hear your concerns" then promptly walk away or change the subject. The only way to threaten a politician is to mass vote them gone.
Have you looked into the acceleration in weakening of our magnetic field, and acceleration in the movement of the magnetic poles? The long term past solar outputs in the non visible spectrum also seem to be critical in understanding the chaotic weather patterns that are also accelerating? These also seem to be left out of the complex equations necessary to understand the Earth's weather.
Yes I have a few years ago now when I first noticed they were moving faster than we had seen before or even recorded. It is standard during Low Sunspot periods to have increased Volcanic and Tectonic activity, possibly due to altered magnetic levels. Extreme localised weather and Pandemics. The Umbrella effect is a good explanation for the heavy localised weather whatever it might be. Four foot of hail in Mexico was quickly ignored by the media, but it was a sign of the times. Many have studied the link but they are not allowed to speak. Oddly many are still pushing the Global warming scam whilst it's been cooling nigh on everywhere since 2016 even though the trace gas CO2 is rising. The cooling trend in some areas should be alarming but according to Sir David King a few years ago we should have already moved to the Arctic by now to get away from the heat.
@@landerclifton3003 Yes it's super complicated. Many spend years in the field but would never say they have fathomed it all out. We now have computers looking into it but they can't give an accurate weeks weather forecast yet. I was stood at the Met Offices reception desk some years ago and on the wall behind was a live video display of the current local weather. It showed wall to wall sunshine but outside it had been raining heavily for an hour. On pointing this out the receptionist turned it off.
@@garysheppard4028 and you probably think CO 2 is a pollutant. It is a very tiny contributor, less than methane and far less than water vapor as a socalled greenhouse gas. The sun is King. BTW, growers pump up their greenhouses to 1000ppm CO2 and plants love it. We puny humans are at the mercy of the climate, not the other way around. Good luck
@@garysheppard4028 the orgs you refer to are not trustworthy. The have a vested interest in furthering their agendas. If it's the UN, they are suspect. We need double blind research funding.
The ocean is alkaline and is not becoming acid. That basic fact means that anyone using the term ocean acidification shows a complete lack of basic knowledge.
Without destroying any land based ecosystems could we use a solar powered pump to make marine seagrass ecosystems on land above sea level near the Sahara, Texas Gulf Coast, Chile and Australia. Make ocean water marshes in Deserts with seagrass that has been genetically modified to take up more carbon.
@grindupBaker Well I wish I had the money as well but I am on the lower middle end of Americas socioeconomic caste system. I give a little money to environmental causes and I give time and a little money to progressive politicians. This could probably be done the easiest and fastest using our military and scientists in collaboration with the military and scientists of the other countries I mentioned.
As far as I know, only in a fairly secondary manner with CO2 causing atmospheric heating, much of which is absorbed by the oceans, which scientists think might have a bearing on ENSO activity. But it's very complex and they are not fully confident on this aspect.
Just Have a Think Thanks for the time to reply. In Australia, they are blaming the fires on climate change. I’m trying to understand how carbon can cause drought in Australia. It is said, EL Nino causes drought in Australia, warm water rising from the depths to the surface changes the wind direction we are told. So where does carbon fit into this picture? And if it doesn’t, how can it be considered the one at fault for the drought?
Don't take this as 'we should do nothing', but do you have any idea how much power = heat is required to make a mirror, and if you want to produce enough to 'cool' the planet (while we are going to continue heating it up for 40 years at least) .....well.
@@jonovens7974 we can't stop with industrial activity anyway. A 20% reduction will lead to a 1C increase in the global average temp because of the aerosol masking effect. We should put the industrial activity to use to end animal agriculture and ways to cool down the planet.
HANG ON ! If oceans absorb, "90% of excess heat", (2mins 10 secs), then surely it must be radiated, back into atmosphere, and then to space beyond that. So how can it not be misleading in the first place, to say the oceans absorb such. "excess", heat, as though it doesn't go anywhere ?
The oceans are alkaline. There is not enough atmospheric Co2 to turn them into an "acid". The atmosphere cannot warm until the underlying surface warms first. The lower atmosphere is transparent to direct solar radiation, preventing it from being significantly warmed by sunlight alone. The surface atmosphere thus gets its warmth from direct contact with the oceans, from infrared radiation off the ocean surface and, by latent heat of evaporation. Consequently, the temperature of the lower atmosphere is largely determined by the temperature of the ocean. Land cannot store heat for long unlike oceans The oceans are not warmed by the overlying lower atmosphere but by sunlight and infrared radiation from so called greenhouse gases water vapour being the main constituent. Sunlight penetrates the ocean to a depth of 100- 160 metre and it is typical for the ocean temperature in Hawaii to be 26°C at the surface, and 15°C at a depth of 150 meters. The infrared radiation penetrates but a few millimetres into the ocean. This means that the greenhouse radiation has no effect on the water just a few centimetres deep which receives none of the direct effects of the infrared thermal energy from the atmosphere. It is in the top few millimetres in which evaporation takes places. So whatever infrared energy may reach the ocean as a result of the greenhouse effect is soon dissipated. Further heat cannot flow from a cold body to a warmer body. Consequently, it is not Co2 anthropogenic or otherwise which is causing the oceans to warm. (
As always, wonderful work.
Another excellent and informative video thanks.
Thanks Peter. I seem to unsuspectingly opened an unusually rich Pandora's box of misery, doom and despair this week judging by the comments I read before yours, so it's a welcome moment of respite to read your message :-) All the best. Dave
@@JustHaveaThink Don't let the paid trolls or idiots win
A very important fact often missed is the phytoplankton in the ocean are responsible for at least 50% of our oxygen, with estimates between 50% to 80%. Warming water and decreased dissolved oxygen result in thicker layers below the surface, resulting in cooling water not cooling the surface where phytoplankton live. As the surface warms, the phytoplankton die. This is probably the biggest catastrophe of all, if ocean surface temperatures continue to rise an dissolved oxygen continues to decline. I have talked to oceanographers who agree with my take on this.
Also, the IPCC is usually very conservative in its estimates
Great video Dave, as always. For those who went to Blue Carbon's website, the last photo is taken at Elkhorn Slough, California, a 7 mile long slough and estuary in Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and one of the larger wetlands in the USA. It is a 'must visit' area and has been part of Blue Carbon's efforts for some years.
Well it is their summer, and i think trump is planning on putting a golf course in. We are such a dumb species, im truly baffled by humanity and emberrassed to exist to be honest. I was unfortunate enough to realize over 43 years ago at around 8yrs old, that humanity was just plain unsane. That is a hard thing for an 8yr old to handle, with no one to talk to about it really either...😒🔫
Where does the melting Tundra fit in, it's coastal but doesn't hold biodiversity as we typically think about it, but has mass amount of CO2 and is literally eroding into the ocean. APTN has some footage if anyone is interested
Quite simply, thank you for your cool and thoughtful analyses! We need more of this kind of discourse. You deliver!
This channel is an immense public service
I am learning a lot from watching your program!
They also protect inland areas from storm surge
You deserve more subscribers!
Thanks for pointing out all of the other rapidly increasing manmade impact on our ecosystems. Not only with carbon that we make calculate via direct measurement but the obvious increased stress as we over mine, fish, develop, etc. People tell us more more more population and at current lifestyles is the only way humans can survive. Seems a little illogical.
Thanks Eric. All sorts of consequences and feedbacks are coming from all sorts of angles, that's for sure. All the best. Dave
@@philipocarroll eric got to go to save us all, i am sry eric.
As always, a very informative talk. Could you give me a link to find the list of US states you made reference to? Thanks!
With pleasure. Here it is
www.usclimatealliance.org
Great overview, David. Thanks.
You are so Awesome! I love your videos! Thank you for your continued work :)
It’s unfortunate that all these genuine ecological concerns must now be couched in terms of carbon in order to get the attention they deserve.
Good point sir.
Dave: Thank you for not using filler words. That's very unusual on RUclips. Someone who actually talks like an adult.
Cheers Ronald. I appreciate your support. I'll do my best to continue presenting in the same way. All the best. Dave
Sorry the adult talk is slanted severely to the left. C02 has been way higher in the past. So the ocean has been acidified in the past and plenty of if land has been underwater and temperature higher. All this happened before the industrial revolution.
We really need him to give the whole story in relevance to the total timeline if life in earth.
@@kelvinwilling241 Whatever, we've heard it all before.
Age and depth of seagrass sediment can effect how stores are vulnerable. Stores deeper than 1 m are not vulnerable to decomposition of the seagrass is lost
The coldest temperature recorded anywhere on the earth, antarctic, jan 2018 , at minus 97C. With co2 leves of 400ppm. I Dont recall anything reported on the media about that..?. but what IS reported is a new high, of 18.3C on the northern tip of the peninsular, 1840 miles from the south pole. ( the same distance the Trondheim in Norway is from the north pole)
However, the 1982 high temperature at a similar location , was actually 19.8C - 1.5C warmer, with co2 levels at that time of 320ppm. If we are going to be honest, then all these figures should be discussed openly.
@grindupBaker have you checked what i wrote, it is all there online for you to see , if you can be bothered.
Insulting people, doesnt do your case much good im afraid. All i said was these numbers should be openly discussed., Not an unreasonable position to take, i would suggest.
www.dailysabah.com/science/2018/06/28/coldest-temperature-on-earth-recorded-in-antarctica
@grindupBaker why do you bother with cherry picking deniers I won't even waste my time with them anymore lol
@@garethlamb4963 oooh yes, cant have any blasphemy against the othordox , appproved view. Must think the same , must think the same, no divergences of thought allowed. it goes against the doctrine. Lol
lol, at first look I thought this is satire and wanted to compliment you on it, but then I just noticed you actually do not understand the diffrence between climate and weather ... :/
@@scribblescrabble3185 believe whatever you wish. It wont change weather nor climate. Long term prediction of weather is not possible beyond a few days, yet you can predict climate? 105 of the 108 climate predictions models no not appear to correlate with measured temperature. Knock yourself out . Even IPCC acknowledged this. " The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible..."
I grew up next to largest Salt marsh in Maine. It's near & dear to me. Working to protect it…
440 parts per million is a trace amount. If one is concerned about carbon in the air, look up what concentrations are in your car, house, and what it has been in geologic history. You'll either be horrified, or you'll realize that carbon is required for life on planet earth, and your fear will be relieved.
@grindupBaker pig excreta is actually quite fluid. Surely you remember, from when you were born.
@grindupBaker
Vulgarity and insults are the tools of the ignorant. Maybe you should review your comments and reflect on whether you should be commenting on anything that includes the word "wit."
Then look up the things I said in my 1st comment, and recognize why you shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about.
@Joshua Martin wake up to yourself.
@Joshua Martin
Yes keep listening to the "experts" who have predicted the end of the earth, snow, the inundation of coastal areas, and the drowning of islands for decades, and have been 100% wrong in every case.
Believe government scientists who change data to get funding.
Because that shows critical thinking and independent thought.
Because China and India are building more coal fired power plants, but these "scientists" say you need to give up freedom, security, and money to save the world, but the Chinese and India don't.
You my friend are brilliant.
And no, when i was in elementary school, they taught us that there was going to be another ice age. Which goes to show two things; 1) your assumptions have made an ass of you, and 2) climate scientists don't know what they are talking about.
Grow algae in facilities using the sewage from city waste as fertilizer and micro iron( dead blood cells) aka a continuously controlled algae bloom that you can harvest to sequester or use as soil amendment. Plant mangroves for coastal erosion prevention and carbon sequestration.
except that the scale of which should be done... with the cost and energy use... make It not a very good solution.
@@shuaige3360 Why? Every city already has waste treatment plants that can be adapted for this most algae double in number every 7 days faster with the right nutrients the algae itself is an energy source that can run the system alone with the oil from it but the methane from the sewage or bio digesting the algae could power it as well.
Your argument amounts to I don't want to do it will cost too much because I did not think about it.
@@Barskor1 Simple replies:
1) because waste treatment plants are already in use... to treat water in the most efficient way we know.
2) if It was a silver bullet, and if it was making very much sense in the financial term, do not worry, It will already been done... if it is not done, It is that their are many problems that you do not realize, because you and I are not expert on the subject.
@@shuaige3360 1 growing algae also treats water as it reduces nitrogen and phosphorus among other things.
2) You don't acknowledge entrenched ways of doing things even when better options are available happens all the time and this is no exception.
3)BS cite some or they don't exist.
@@Barskor1 Yes, you are 100% right, you alone figure It all how to solve at the same time the water treatment problem, the global warming problem, and let say maybe even the food production issue, all at once, with a simple idea, without any problems!
Congratulation, you will get the nobel price of everything and the equivalent of the medal of honor from every single countries.
Kisses :P
My whole life right now is devoted to transitioning to zero waste as an individual and getting my legislators to back H.R. 763 The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act of 2019 at the Federal level-and S.B. 54 / A.B. 1080 The California Circular Economy and Plastic Pollution Reduction Act on the state level.
It's great you are both concerned and dedicated: pollution is a major problem. CO² is NOT.
Start by getting rid of your cellphone, there's a useful puppet!
Sad about seagrass meadows. As I understand it dugong depend on them.
Yes sir. Correct. Dugong are like sea cattle that graze on seagrass.
Global climate needs Hemp for a strong healthy humic layer allowing trees and permaculture forest to be establish in deserts globally
For anyone paying attention, we've screwed Greta's generation, big time. And by the way, "Just Have a Think" is the best video maker that I can find. It's just excellent!
Climate Deception Network -We agree. Dave has done a magnificent job in educating. Bravo!
I can’t help but laugh that Greta is brought up as a credible source on anything- especially when she basically goes around on private jets and sea barges
Gonna use MovieBob as a example too?
Seriously AOC and Greta’s family have caused a lot of pollution which effects specifically organisms- noise pollution and especially around the sea
Fun fact: the sea is a desert
@@silent_stalker3687 I thought Greta would have took the best child actor award this year.
spex357
She would... but you know how Hollywood is and they don’t want to get in trouble so no award for Greta’s acting
@@silent_stalker3687 It was crap acting anyway, over played the drama, anyone would think she was on Hollyoaks.
Thank you for your work. I appreciate how precisely "Just have a Think" is a good name for your channel.
If carbon is bad then why do plants need carban levels of 800 ppm and above for optimum growth?
C4-plants? not so much. C3-plants maybe, but droughts, heatwaves and other extrem weather phenomena will nullify or even reverse that advantage.
Read up on RuBisCO
yeah good thing we are plants..oh wait.
Note: as a citizen of the USA, I and many others are waiting for an actual "leader" in the White House. At the moment we have a total chump. Not to forget the control of the Senate - which
also needs to revert to a party with more than a collective IQ of 2.
Note: as a citizen of the USA, not all of us "worship the golden cow."
Please forgive us.
The Democrats did nothing to mitigate climate change. Nothing.
#TeamTrump 2020, 2024 ....
proudhon100 Democrats, republicans , they both work for the same people and it ain’t you and me . The seek to divide us and it’s working.
@Liberal Neo
It *is* a joke, you idiot.
I suggest that you start looking at Tony Heller's videos.
Of concern to me is what Midwestern farm states need to do to prevent the dead zone from occurring in the Gulf of Mexico. Thanks for the great video Dave, this drives home the point of urgency to save those seagrass areas and tidal estuaries down off the coast of Louisiana. Plus we are loosing so much topsoil and fertilizer, it could be of benefit in many ways to change land use policies here.
that goes hand and hand with population and everyone wanting a first world lifestyle. look at china's incredible growth. they want a first world lifestyle and now they have it but at a cost. they lose billions of tons of topsoil every year. land use is only a problem because of mass farming, mass farming is a problem because of population. everything happening can be traced back to, too many people consuming.
@@dbrown2430 My hope is that we can produce enough with permaculture crops and store carbon at.the same time. A first world lifestyle need not come with the loss of a stable Gaia. I'm not sure population is the main culprit just yet, but no sense in testing the limits! The earth still has enough for every man's needs, but bioharmony must become the new way.
@@chuckkottke the world has enough if the population isnt ridiculously consumerist, which it is. We are out farming our habital land, you should watch that video on what 11 billion people means, as they use more land and water for farming animals. Its not sustainable
@@dbrown2430 I am always shocked by our modern consumeristic culture here in the US. One trip down the highway of neverending shopping, it amazes me that there is even a drop of oil left given our rate of insanely mindless consumption! But it doesn't appeal to me;. Is it really all that good for us, even psychologically? What is real wealth is enjoying the simple pleasures in life, changing mindsets, getting real again.
Yes, I agree! Way too much livestock, not enough permaculture crops, a lack of complete cycle view; much has to change.
I did a thought experiment to view humanity another way, asking what would we look like if we formed the human flag on Earth, standing in formation. The human flag worked out to roughly 50 miles on a side. My friend Peter (a member of Earth First) said, "now picture that mass of humanity as a giant caterpillar, munching on a leaf. That leaf is Earth.". I laughed, but he has a point, I have to admit. Still we can achieve universal prosperity for what matters most, and slow then reverse population growth, for sooner or later we will exceed carrying capacity; better safe than sorry, I agree!
The estuaries off the coast of Louisiana are being submerged by sea level rise. The other threat is that Louisiana right now is in a major drought which means that any rivers that are exiting into the Gulf of Mexico could be a record low level allowing sea water to migrate up the rivers. If there's any agriculture alongside the edge of those Rivers they will be lost due to poisoning by saltwater period of the Mississippi is a record low in saltwater is coming up and threatening the water supply for several cities
Well done David.
I think James Lovelock also talked about exhausting of the carbon from the oceans that will occur as: 1) the oceans warm, lowering the capacity for carbon, and 2) as the conveyor belts bring up cold water with carbon absorbed a century or more before....I may have the latter wrong as an attribution, but I recall his mentioning something about these in his talk to the Royal Society in 2006, which I believe is still online somewhere.
Hey Dave. We did our live on the permafrost issues (etc) last night. Maybe you can catch a livestream with jennifer Hynes and myself some evening. You and Jen are on the same wavelength. Jen is brilliant.
Hi Sandie. Great to hear from you. I'll definitely take a look at the Permafrost broadcast, and I'd be happy to take part in a live chat if you think it would be worthwhile :-) All the best. Dave
Love your work! Thank you!
A lot of those areas are also the location of places like March's Point in Washington state. Its right next door to Padilla Bay National Estuary Preserve. Thank you Edna Braezeale for your vision.
There was an idea being circulated decades ago, to fertilize areas of the open ocean with iron salts and thereby promote the growth of algae and phytoplankton. I haven't heard anything about this idea recently. I'm not endorsing this idea; I'm just curious as to why it's fallen by the wayside.
We’re screwed
My thought exactly :-(
@@Jens.Krabbe welcome to the party. - It's so much fun, especially when you run into a muppet that denies the whole thing.
@@jonovens7974 the ignorance of so many has sapped away the little energy i had left, and crushed what meager faith in humanity i was holding on to. The universe doesnt make mistakes, that concept is a human perspective... humanity has proved it deserves and requires extinction. That just seems to me to be the self evident truth.
Agreed, we screwed ourselves bieng ignorant, short sighted and greedy, lazy, nimrods. Plenty of "warnings" along the way, but honestly any degree of common sense could see our way of existence is distubing self centered idiocy. Good riddance, im fine with extinction really.
We are, by charlatans preaching this nonsense.
Thank you for the informative video
Well Dave, I am increasing my patron contribution because there is no better, more professional information about global warming anywhere on earth.
The thing that boggles my mind is how people bang on about climate change but do nothing to reduce their own personal impact on the planet. IE nothing to reduce their electricity, gas and petrol usage, even though it would also save them money. The average 4 person household (2 adults and 2 kids) produces 24 tonnes of CO2 per year from electricity and gas usage. That's with the advantage of all of them benefiting from the advantages of all being on the same heating and a lower outside wall to volume ratio. My usage was 2.5 tonnes per year before Covid AND that included petrol usage. To put this in perspective I pay £21 a month combined gas and electricity.
Very informative video on an important topic!
Lies For MONEY Its YOUR fault ..... Pay us Corp Gov The EARTH HAS BEEN KILLED BY NUCLEAR ALREADY...... LOOK AT THE CANCER EPIDEMIC
FixItStupid ... who is asking for money?
Permaculture principle 11. Use edges and value the marginal.
In permaculture, edges are generally the places where two ecosystems meet; this is the definition provided by the Permaculture Association[1], which elaborates on this principle as follows:
The place where two eco-systems or habitats meet (e.g. woodland and meadow) is generally more productive and richer in the variety of species[2] present than either habitat on its own. In ecology this is called ‘ecotone’. This is central to the idea of using edges as a design method. The logic is simple. If the most productive bit of woodland is the edge, then design it to have a bigger edge.
This logic is indeed simple, because the edge between two ecosystems is where species from one ecosystem encounter species from the other. The permaculture designer, in planning for ‘more edge’ in a given system, works to increase ‘overlap’ between ecosystems, thereby creating more biodiversity simply because more than one ecosystem is required for such overlap to occur - the more ecosystems that meet (i.e. more edges), the better.
Thanks for your calm, concise and thoughtful presentations Dave. Unfortunately until Trump, Bozonaro and other heads of 'government' get with the program, us picking away at the edges of the problems is frustratingly ineffective. Keep up the great work, though...!
Well yeah, what can you do when your nation isn’t the one causing the problems such as China, India and so on and he best people want to do is push to control cow farts
@@silent_stalker3687 Pretty simple, just put an embargo on China. Oh wait, no, without their sacrifice you can't make trillions $ ! Every nation that pursue Infinite Growth by usury is an accomplice to this mess. The "best" people just want to avoid guilt.
French Toad
‘The best’
The people who... pushed recycling plants around and so created more pollution than they were removing
‘Avoid guilt’
Have you seen Blizzard?
Also look up at the Lobbyist and pro-regulation corporates who raise the price of your goods, making China’s much cheaper, who’s supporting China? Everyone because their goods are cheap
Say you have the choice between 1.25$ fish can vs 7.50$ fish can
What would you buy?
Now let the regulations and the minimum wage rise and... you now have the choice of 1.25$ or 11:15$ fish can
The cheaper would go to China
Now who’s suffering at the cost of regulations? Small business
Why? Because Amazon would suffer at 15$, but can manage 11.50$ wage however their competition will not be so lucky and may not even survive a month
What does Amazon do?
Ship a lot from China and through China
Why not ship stuff out of Africa and so on?
Oh right Tariffs
Some African nations have up to 70% tariff cost and of course a debt would China would probably grease the rare minerals China really loves which means more smelting and more waste dumping
Small business wouldn’t like to go to China and pay the shipping fee and tariffs
Amazon would love that and could do that in mass especially when they have less competition to deal with so it’s only from them
Also what fuels infinite growth?
Politicians largely use votes- others use propaganda and force such as African warlords and dictators which have actually been going to China to help restrict the internet
Brian Keller
‘Rather than shift the blame to other states’
Genocides are bad and hitler is bad for enforcing it
‘Don’t shift blame to other states’
Again China is one of the biggest producer of all pollutants chemical lakes, dumping and so on.
Hell read the Paris agreement: ‘we agree to continue emission until a time when it peaks and then decrease it’
Aka do nothing
And then you have the top polluters all of which dump into the sea and have little in place to protect property and people living there.
‘China is cutting back’
What’s that slogan going around? China lied and people died.
China lies and crunches numbers, Hell once they shut down all factories so they could have a good few pictures to promote a city
Brian Keller
Oh ‘orange man bad’ got it, how about this have a policy that does something than nothing or hands the fuck off
Also 0.00001% pollution
You: ‘that’s too much, it’s no reason why we should cut it down further!!!!’
Last I checked it’s illegal to dump anything on anyone’s land and the ocean, not so in China
And last I checked China wanted some of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Mongolia and Pakistan land along with India pushing troops around its territory near China
Besides there’s the human rights abuse that China just hand waves away... something your Paris agreement buddies sure seem to ignore whenever it’s a problem; make of that as you will.
Our invensible leader Scot Morrison is still carring on about his feasability study for a new COAL FIRED POWER STATION. It realy makes one want to give up,, what a wast of time and resources. Please give him a mention on one of your episodes its such a shame even mensenioning a subject like this at this point of our struggle against GW. Thans for your great videos and all your efforrts please keep it up well done.
He got a brief mention in my recent video about the Australian bush fires. I tend to agree with your view.
He got a brief mention in my recent video about the Australian bush fires. I tend to agree with your view.
@@JustHaveaThink thank you for replying to my comment and I did catch your bushfire comment love your channel and thanks again
Here's a suggestion for a future episode. With the Corona virus still going strong in China you may want to consider an episode that focuses on the possibility (probability?) of a previously unknown virus coming back to affect us due to melting glaciers. I read about this a couple of years ago and hadn't really thought about it until this Corona Virus thing happened. Not sure about the probability of such a thing happening but I believe it's above zero.
You can attend as many conferences as you want it will not change the fact who the leader of the free world is and you will never convince corporations in this day and age to go along. Your glass half full take on it is not helping your audience one bit.
My glass has been effectively empty for the last decade - but trying to convince people for the last 4 decades and getting nowhere is the reason. Now, well ill live another 10 years at most, so F*&k you all - because you've (humans) know about the problem for 60 odd years now. I'm afraid you can't rebel against extinction.
Nothing is going to stop what is happening dont normal people get it? Even if we shut down every car plane truck bus factory power plant electrical grid on the planet, there is a lag in co2 amplification. We will hit critical mass and the feedback loops will be unstoppable. They have already started, it would take decades to slow this, we dont have that kind of time.
Then dont watch fuckhead, go piss on yourself somewhere else, WE WILL ALL BE GLAD TO SEE YOU LEAVE DIPSHIT
Just to carry on a good book also worth reading is Air Con by Ian Wishheart . This has some fascinating facts and figures that a lot of people don’t consider and it defiantly opened my eyes 👀 the whole problem may not just be carbon . Methane and water vapour there are other suggestions as well in this book and we may be barking up the wrong tree. Which could be worrying all things have to be looked at. And we must do everything .
I have a question... The US gets a lot of flak about CO2 emissions, despite keeping our total emissions basically unchanged in the past 30 years. I wanted to know what gives, so I did some googlageness and found that our emissions per capita are the highest in the world. Now, I live a pretty frugal life. I don't drive a car, I don't have many possessions, and I don't eat much. I'm skinny and poor... and most people my age are skinny and poor. I'm in my early 30's. My generation isn't privileged. In fact, despite working more hours than any generation before us, we're totally shafted. So I truly cannot think of a way that we could be causing more CO2 emission per capita than other countries. So my question is - what is the actual cause of the US's supposedly crazy-high per capita emissions of CO2?
Vehicle sales in the US since 2014 have been at or near record highs. Not only that but light truck and SUV sales have dominated the market. Americans love their giant SUV's. 17 million vehicles, many of which are multi ton trucks sold per year. That would be one cause.
@grindupBaker what country are you from?
My guess would be Zionist capitalism
@@NonDelusional74611 if nobody can give a coherent reason, I'm going to go with what my gut tells me, which is that the numbers are a lie.
Its not always about vehicles you know. Its about total emissions coal fired electric plants, chemical plants, manufacturing plants, large swaths of land used for factory farming. While transportation in the states is up at the top for our emissions, neck and neck with it is electricity production. It dont take a genius to figure out where its coming from. I would like a link that shows the USA as the top producer of co2 emissions in the world, because last i saw it was china. The thing people fail to realize is co2, pollution, radiation ect dont stay in one place. What happens in china dont stay there it travels on the winds circling the globe. So the first thing people better remember is we all live in the same atmosphere, and share the same air.
I'm optimistic because with optimism there is a chance we can get it right. I support Bernie because an anti corruption candidate can be a great asset if we are to make real progress. The convention will be in Milwaukee this year, a great place to cheer on climate science and legislative agendas in progressive candidates.
Big money was never going to let him be the leader. He is finished now. May 2020. Why do people still believe that our corrupt system of capitalization is going to save us.
lol
@@aland5478 Sad to see Bernie Sanders leave the race after backroom deals sealed his fate. I never put faith in capitalism, as it is a form of plantation slavery, but if workers owned those businesses as no outside money could buy the plantation, adding fair guidance by honest governance, and at least for things that belong in the market there can be a good situation for all. I put faith in reform, for the moral arc of the universe is long, but not that long. Time will come soon when this whole system will be forced to change.
@@aland5478 Why do people put faith in capitalization? I think just simply faith in the familiar, and fear of the unfamiliar. As better ways are expressed, change begins to happen, spurred on by problems with the current system.
The problem with pessimism - or more to the point, fatalism, because a lot of fatalists who actually have personal issues they need to work out disguise themselves as pessimists - is that you get exactly the results you were looking for.
Temperature lags CO2 not the other way around, by as much as 800 years.
And it has for at least 700 million years. Search the record as much as you like and you can't find any evidence of CO2 causing warming anywhere.
CO2 is the result of a warming planet not the cause. So it has to be something else, like the sun or the fact the planet has been steadily warming for thousands of years with occasional mini cooling periods (climate change).
@@javebury We can definitely say it was warmer some time ago. Some of some Sir David Kings ancestors lived much further North than us and it was lush green. Sadly it's been cooling for a 150 million years.
Debunked. Look into this claim further. Small amounts of warming from perhaps an orbital perturbation --> a bit of warming--> release of CO2--> huge warming. That's why the apparent "lag" occurs.
@@garysheppard4028 The graph shows no release of CO2--> huge warming anywhere.
Even the ipcc days there is no increase in extreme weather.
Have anyone else noticed that the sea grass is seemingly growing near or on the continental plates. I wonder if there is a correlation.
Are there any efforts to terraform the ocean? If water temperature is too high to support seagrass in one area it's fair to say other areas previously too cold may be conducive. Also, GM Seagrasses may be developed to be more temperature tolerant. As world population increases or habitable land decreases oceans may prove the only viable area for large scale reforestation assuming acidification can be overcome.
Love the symbolism. Perfect shirt!
FYI, Antartica is warmer then washington DC this week around 64F, I thought it was suppose to be cold down there?
Look up what heat waves and cold waves are and then look up the current waves.
I thought the sky was suppose to be wine red and so was the sea- especially as books back then described it
#RedTheSea
Sarcasm aside
Well....it's summer in Antarctica and winter in DC. But yes, we may have to move there soon. ruclips.net/video/aWlBiih1p9Y/видео.html
Jasper Thebeau
Yes the northern hemisphere goes through seasonal changes like everywhere else when the earth tilts.
Hence why there are areas where you can have 30+ days of sun and night up there such as Alaska, some areas manage to have 70+ days of constant sun without it setting
You do such a great job with these videos. They must take a lot of time. . I hope you're getting some good help.
Thank you. I appreciate that. Just me at the moment but I get great support from comments like yours and from the channels patreon patrons. I still work full time but hopefully that will reduce this year.
Another great video sir. It seems more and more like we have already opened pandora's box. Our governments have failed us. The only way we're even going to have a chance is with a grassroots effort. We the people need to force our leaders to start doing something now before it is completely to late.
Phytoplankton supply's most of the Earth Oxygen. PHYTOPLANKTON needs CO² to thrive..
The Sun is the driver of Climate Change thru Particle Forcing..
The melting of the polar ice is due to the underground Volcanic activity.
The Earth warms up by water molecules in the air.
The IPCC models don't include Solar Forcing,but they will in the year 2022..
My understanding is that oceans exhale CO2 when they warm and absorb it when they cool. With the large amount of carbon being absorbed from the bushfires here in Australia by the ocean, is it safe to assume that the planets atmosphere is now cooling?
@grindupBaker is it now? Care to elaborate with some facts or is that just your opinion?
@@justingage5524 There are several mechanisms:
1. Warming or cooling leads to different distribution of CO2 ocean/air, so warmer oceans tend to release more CO2, thats correct.
2. But increasing the CO2 of the oceans doesnt lead to cooling - why should it? It only does when, as in 1), the uptake of CO2 by the oceans is ATMOSPHERIC CO2, decreasing the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere.
3. So what the bushfires did was: a) Rapidly putting CO2 in the atmosphere that was previously drawn from the atmosphere by the bush plants. Over some years, to decades. Some of the released CO2 goes into the oceans, yes, some into the atmosphere. So it has a temporary increase, albeit a very small one, in CO2 concentrations. Until new bush grrows and draws that realeased CO2 back into wood. Ofc, if net plant mass is lost on a global level, continuously, then CO2 concentrations rise. This has been measured and contributes for some percent of the total global CO2 increase. b) Temporarily in a short time frame, weeks to months to year at max, bushfires like volcanoes put aerosols in the air (until theyre washed out). These aerosols, aka dust, block some incoming solar irradiation. This has a small cooling effect.
@@hooplehead1019 thanks. I know co2 doesn't cool the ocean but a cooling ocean draws in CO2. The speaker in this video stated that the ocean was absorbing co2 from the bushfires. If it's drawing in co2 does that mean it's cooling?
@@justingage5524 Ah, now I understand you, sorry I was slow. :) No, apart from ocean temperature, what also determines if it absorbs or releases CO2 is the concentration of CO2 of the atmosphere vs the ocean. Right now, because every second tons of CO2 are added to the atmosphere the atmosphere temporarily has a higher concentration of CO2 than the oceans (cause we dont pump CO2 in the oceans, we burn fossil fuels in the air). So although the oceans are warming - they also take up CO2 to get to a distribution equilibrium. Like when you open your window after getting up in the morning and warm and cold air and oxygen and CO2 distribute to finally reach an equilibrium (I assume you close the window before it reaches that in winter...). Only in that example, its the same medium, air. And air and water, and thus different distribution values, in the case of ocean and atmosphere. (I dont know the values, you can sure find a paper to look them up.)
This is a common point of misunderstanding, because in the past, without rapid CO2 concentration increases of the atmosphere by burning of fossil fuels, warming oceans indeed have RELEASED CO2. And thus amplified warming, for example in the end of the last glacials. So, many people rightfully wonder what is different now or even incorrectly assume the oceans are releasing CO2 right now.
Today, we measure that the oceans currently are warming - and at the same time we measure they are taking up CO2. Because of the increasing concentration in the atmosphere.
Scientists predict there will be, as always, an equlibrium when oceans will have warmed and the concentration of CO2 in the oceans will be high enough that they indeed wont take up any more CO2 from the atmosphere and even release it.
For example if the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere decreases: when we take out more CO2 from the atmosphere than we emit. For this scenario they already have incorporated this effect when for example calculating the number of trees needed for X amount of atmospheric CO2 reduction - the number obviously is much larger than when neglecting this effect. Because the oceanic CO2 "substitutes" the removed CO2 in the air to again reach an equilibrium. Same as now, but vice versa.
Let's have another confrence......lets talk about it....lets form a committee......lets gets some funds....lets give each other roles and budgets and flights to buffets that go overtime for days n days n days.....who's hungry?.....lets have another confrence....
Sadly this is true
This is nothing more than an economic shakedown.
OMG!!! The CO2 content of the atmosphere rose from 0.02% of the atmosphere to 0.04% of the atmosphere in just 200 years. It's the end of the world!!!
@peter Water vapor is heavier and more abundant than CO2 in the atmosphere. So what? Most of the geologic record has several times the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. The present levels are nowhere near unprecedented and/or catastrophic. We are making a slight rebound from one of the all time low atmospheric CO2 levels on the geologic record.
@peter Your argument is a joke. The amount of heat reflected back to earth due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is logarithmic, not linear as you are suggesting. This means that there are diminishing returns. If you double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (100% increase), you only increase the amount of radiation reflected back to earth by 50 percent. That is why it took 20 times the present level of atmospheric CO2 to cause the only mass extinction linked with CO2 as a primary cause. We are talking 8,000 ppm during the end Permian extinction compared to our present 400 ppm.
@peter Btw, I am already swimming in liberal tears. Perhaps that is from where their claimed sea level rising is coming.
Yes, by all means look at reputable sources. The geologic record is a reputable source. I highly recommend anyone interested in this topic look at it and the history of atmospheric content of our planet over the entire duration instead of just the last 20,000 years. If you do so, you will find the first mass extinction event 444 million years ago in the end Ordovician period which was caused by global cooling due to newly exposed silica sucking the CO2 out of the atmosphere. We are much closer to that extinction event than the Permian extinction event which was partially caused by too much atmospheric carbon dioxide.
@grindupBaker Yeah, I'm your daddy.
There has always been a delicate balance between the Oceans, Sea's and Fresh Water related to the trees and fullage. Right now we do not have enough Plantlife to keep that balance. Way Too Much Land Has Been Developed For Housing Projects and the Concrete Jungles throughout the World is one of the cheif causes of this imbalance.
We either learn to live in harmony with Nature or Face The Consequences.
There will be a webinar for the floating mirror SRM next week. It was announced on the channel "jamen shively".
Prof. Guy McPherson and Dr. Ye Tao will be there. You should join because you have been thinking about these things for a long time. You will have great perspectives.
I am interested in seeing that show.....I have followed Jamen and he is about the most positive voice I have heard in our genre. Just do not know if these "solutions " are solutions. I am all in to learn.
@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse check out the video introduction. It's not a way to back to busines as usual but it will offer the planet some relief. We can even do marine permaculture under the mirrors.
@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse you should join.
Imgay Asheck I just might if they will have me💚
@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse they definitely will :)
What happened to the tetrapods when the natural C02 was ten times higher in the past ocean acidification? and how acidic were the oceans then, they must have been acid.
What happened to the environments you stating about at the last interglacial when it was hotter than it is now?
Well, a lot of species went simply extinct in previous rapid climatic changes. But ofc after some hundreads of thousands of years, other species flourished again. So this is not the point. The point is not about absolute temperatures (until we get to extreme values), its about the fact that rapid changes specifically are COSTLY for a stationary infrastructure and us humans, that we have reached a very populated world.
Is blue carbon an ingredient toproduce bue carbon steel? Semper Fi.
No.
ruclips.net/video/Mx3qOMU9kGg/видео.html
Satisfyingly satisfying bluing of steel.
@@massimookissed1023 You have been trolled....lol...
There are only 2 types of weather in the UK
Too hot
Too warm
Too cold
Too rainy
Too dry
Etc.
We have one of the most stable climates in the world in terms of disastrous weather and temperature variation. You'd think the world is ending when half an inch of snow falls with how everything grinds to a halt.
Hehe
@@Redsauce101 - we have had the wrong kind of snow, wrong kind of leaves - I tend to think it's wrong kind of management
I now have a regular outlet where I share these videos. It's not an environment based website, so the video is not being shown to the already aware and/or converted.
Stop spreading fear and lies!
Hi Andy. That's great news. You have been a constant source of support (and occasional correction) over the months, and I really appreciate it. All the best. Dave
How many of these people commenting with radical solutions actually grow their own vegetables and have some chooks to provide their own eggs and some meat, as well as reducing their kitchen waste. A small yard can easily provide a lot of food and reduce your foot print. I could go on.
AOC the energy czar has stated that everyone must commute by train powered by farts. The seats are very uncomfortable as everyone must contribute or the train goes nowhere. Compliance is mandatory no private vehicles are allowed because they cannot run on one person's fart.
What book/textbook/course should I have to learn about the climate system? Where should I start?
Study the sun like the Chinese have for centuries.
At the risk of plugging my own channel, jump.back to program number 1 from March 2018. I summarise the main issues there.
Not all blue carbon ecosystems sequester carbon because of carbon trapped by these systems are consumed to produce additional CO2 and net calcareous production also offsets by producing co2. However, if the alternative ecosystem is, a greater carbon source or lesser carbon sink then the presence of these blue carbon ecosystems will mitigate, based on this service, bot withstanding loss of C stocks.
Warming is here to stay. If we shut down all fossil fuel production at midnight it would take centuries to absorb all the extra Co2. Embracing inexpensive reliable energy, economic growth and adapting to any new realities is what will keep us safe.
Great demonstration of how you get blue carbon when you mix 6 atoms of carbon with 5 molecules of water. I.e. cellulose. I.e. your blue cotton shirt.
mixing atoms and molecules? did you fail to pay attention in science class? Atomic bonds and structure are a completely different category than molecular bonds/structure....
@@adrian4276 This is called poetic license, it was meant as humor, not a lesson in physics or chemistry. I actually know a lot about molecular bonds, after all the years I spent whacking moles at Star Leisure in Bray, Ireland.
@@Chimel31 sorry, i saw the "mixing atoms and molecules thing" and pounced. I see many many sheep before a pulpit in the comments and that made me slap hehe
Scott Morrison plans to fix this with his Magical Unicorn ..
How can I find out if my state here where I live can be represented?
Great Video!
think the spring 2020 numbers might be a little off.
sure it wont take us long to get the levels back up
In the entire geologic record, there has never been a mass extinction event that is primarily attributable to atmospheric CO2 levels at or below 6,000 ppm. We are only at about 400 ppm. The 200 ppm often cited is an all time low on the geologic record. We have a long way to go for atmospheric CO2 to be a problem. These alarmists like to ignore billions of years while focusing on only the last 20,000 years.
No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling...
Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet.
@Markus Antonious "No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling..." I get them from the geologic record. Feel free to look at it yourself. Perhaps you do not understand the principle of causation. You should look into that as well. CO2 has been in the atmosphere for all of the extinction events, that does not make it a causal factor. The only major extinction event which had atmospheric CO2 content as a major causal factor is the End Permian extinction caused by a super-volcano erupting in Siberia which released massive amounts of sulfur dioxide, methane, and CO2 into the atmosphere. Volcanic ash blotted out the sun for a few years, killing many plants. Then the atmospheric CO2 rose to approximately 8,000 ppm or 20 times our present day level, which caused temperatures to soar, and this finished off many species already struggling to cope with the other strains caused by the volcanic eruption. The average CO2 content per the geologic record is 1,200 ppm, or 3 times the present value. During the approximately 50 million years of the Jurassic period, atmospheric carbon content was around 2,000 ppm, which is what you are claiming is extinction causing levels. No extinction event occurred at this time. In fact, life thrived. So, go ahead and tell me about your mass extinction event caused by CO2 levels of 2,000 ppm. When did it occur? Nice trolling.
@Nelafix "Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet." There are lots of organisms dying off. This is caused more by other things humans are doing than by increased atmospheric CO2 levels. We are clearing forests and rainforests to make more farmland, while plowing up the soil to leave it exposed to the sun the vast majority of the year which kills off the bacteria and fungi necessary to keep the soil healthy, then we are dumping herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers onto this land, much of which are water soluble and end up in the water that many plants and animals consume. We are covering millions of square miles with asphalt, concrete, and structures making the environment inhospitable to most organisms. We are dragging huge nets through the oceans killing pretty much anything that gets ensnared. But no, let's not pay any attention to all of this activity. Let's blame CO2 in the atmosphere.
What we're doing about climate change needed to be done 30 yrs ago , but we're not actually doing it . And it's a shame few are willing to say it's game over , so we can plan on a dignified exit and not waste what's left of our lives working towards our demise .
50...and yes we are still digging our grave deeper, personally i think its already far too deep to ever get out. But hey thats just me, i have tried to wake people up for 43+ yrs to no avail so i give up, we deserve extinction and the universe ALWAYS gives what is deserved.
@@donfields1234 If we could blame one man and make him pay , his name would be Rupert Murdoch . But unfortunately it's the poor and the innocent that will suffer the most and will die first .
I enjoy your manner of presentation in these videos. However, it seems several of the reference links are not working. Specifically links 1, 3 and 4.
Hi Mark. Thanks for letting me know. I'll double check them. Apologies for that. All the best. Dave
Hi Mark. The links are working now.
No room for prevarication? Then stop prevaricating.
I like this channel, its like being calmly explained how we are being slowly killed. Lol
Does CO2 stored in the water heat it up more?
No. CO2 combines with water to form a very weak Carbonic Acid (H2CO3). This is a huge oversimplification of the processes involved. Carbonic Acid dissolves limestone to dissolve and become carbonates and bicarbonates (The stuff of Stalagmites and Stalactites).
The actual acidification of the oceans is reckoned to be -0.1 below the pre-industrial era. Given that the pH scale was not invented until 1909 and not fully standardized until 1924, I'm rather skeptical about any pre-industrial readings.
It's important to remember that pH is measured at the surface only. It is also temperature-dependent.
Philip Jones Thank you.
No Ash. The extra energy absorbed from a warmer atmosphere (or just directly from sunlight) heats up the water. The CO2 reacts with H20 to make carbonic acid which has the effect of slightly reducing the alkalinity of the water. But as more carbonic acid is formed there is less C available for shell fish to make the Calcium Carbonate for their shells. Jump back to my video #20 on Ocean Acidification for a fuller explanation. All the best. Dave
Just Have a Think Thanks. In Australia, they are blaming the fires on climate change. I’m trying to work out how carbon can cause drought in Australia.
The EL Nino causes drought in Australia, warm water rising from the depths to the surface changes the wind direction we are told.
So where does carbon fit into this picture?
@@ashsmitty2244 CO2, like any IR-active gas (green house gases, short GHGs), has an influence on the radiative balance of planet earth with space, by practically blocking specific wavelengths. More CO2 and other GHGs in the atmosphere mean, that earths surface and surface atmosphere needs to get warmer to radiate the energy it recieves from the sun into space using other pathways.
The El Niño describes a situation, where the surface waters of the East Pacific off the coast of Peru gets warmer and the West Pacific colder. Surface wind direction will predominantly point from cold to warm, which is a positiv feedback, because the winds will push the sun warmed surface waters in wind direction, to the already warm region.
How a warmer atmosphere effects El Niño or the Indian Ocean Dipole (effects weather mostly in west australia) I do not fully understand and it is still a current research topic. What I understand, it goes like this: A warmer atmosphere (thanks to the GHG-effect of CO2) warms the top layer of the ocean surface, which makes the water layers in the ocean more stable. Warm water on top of cold water doesn't mix as readily as water that is closer in temperatures, because of the density diffrence. It is more stratified and less strongly coupled. Which means, that the interactions of surface waters and subsurface waters is lessend. The subsurface waters being cooler and having, thanks to the sheer mass, a huge thermal capacity, usually have a dampening effect on El Niño and similiar phenomena. So, if the dampening effect of the subsurface waters get smaller, the interactions between the atmosphere and the surface waters grow relatively, dominating even. Which means, that feedback loop discribed above can act out more strongly, leading to stronger and maybe even more frequent El Niños.
I hope I explained it well enough. That's just my understanding of it, and it is limited
Not long. It is 65 degrees in Antarctica 🇦🇶 right now. Do the math, game is over. Pray and know Guy is right.
SADLY CORRECT www.good.is/antarctica-and-los-angeles-were-pretty-much-the-same-temperatures-today-thats-not-good-news
tRump should build a golf course there for his next vacation in November
Every death cult says the same thing. You'll see in 10, 20, 30, 100 years.
Science is full of contradictions, that's what makes it so fun. Antarctica we are told millions of years ago was tropical. No snow. And CO2 levels at times past there were almost twice the level of today. Yet the earth survived. Scientists for the most part tell us that in the recent past (several thousand years) the continent has been covered by ice. Yet maps dating back to the 1500's seem to imply that Antarctica was tropical. Maps accurately outline the land mass in agreement with current remote sensing of the land mass under the ice. How did people then know the shape of the continent if the place was covered with ice? So we have a conundrum. Fascinating. I wouldn't give up on the earth yet.
@@jonnyde so annoying when an article like this uses only farenheit... About a problem of global significance, but no, lets use the units 3/4 of the world won't understand
@@eric7397 Millions of years ago!!! yeah we did not exist then . The earth will be fine until the day the sun swallows it or a massive object blows it apart. The problem isnt the earth dying, the problem is all life on the earth dying. People forget man is a new species here, the dinosaurs walked the earth for 200 million years before us look what happened to them. We have brought about rapid change that nothing can adapt to in time, the dinosaurs died because of rapid change, yes there was a cataclysm but that triggered a global effect that changed the environment rapidly. We dont have time to adapt sadly.
Misrepresented ocean "acidification' when in fact the ocean does not go acidic but is less alkaline.
Key point: You can quibble while living organisms at the base of the food chain fail to form calcium carbonate shells.
@@proudhon100 the misrepresentation is deliberate, using emotional appeal instead of factual information. I don't buy the points being made. Just like coral bleaching and disappearing polar bears.
@@inquirer1599 The base of the food chain going is an emotional issue. When you personally can't eat, you will get emotional. Seawater is becoming more acidic, so quit thinking you are being scientific.
@@inquirer1599 lol. What would you prefer to call it, dealkalization?
You obviously missed high school chemistry. Am I right?
@@proudhon100 A reduction from 8.2 to 8.1 compared with the pre-industrial era? Given that we didn't measure pH until 1909 using a system not fully standardised until 1924, I'm rather skeptical about those 'pre-industrial' figures.
Note to self: Plant Seagrass
Can anyone recommend the most effective and strategic way to create political change in irresponsible nations?
Global strike. If everyone were to stop fueling their car for a week, the governments would be on their knees with trillions of debt, and listen.
The world has many problems but co2 is actually a blessing. It greens the planet very fast and increases crop yields.
you cant people have zero effect on what the politicians do, they will say"we hear your concerns" then promptly walk away or change the subject. The only way to threaten a politician is to mass vote them gone.
Have you looked into the acceleration in weakening of our magnetic field, and acceleration in the movement of the magnetic poles? The long term past solar outputs in the non visible spectrum also seem to be critical in understanding the chaotic weather patterns that are also accelerating? These also seem to be left out of the complex equations necessary to understand the Earth's weather.
Yes I have a few years ago now when I first noticed they were moving faster than we had seen before or even recorded. It is standard during Low Sunspot periods to have increased Volcanic and Tectonic activity, possibly due to altered magnetic levels. Extreme localised weather and Pandemics. The Umbrella effect is a good explanation for the heavy localised weather whatever it might be. Four foot of hail in Mexico was quickly ignored by the media, but it was a sign of the times. Many have studied the link but they are not allowed to speak.
Oddly many are still pushing the Global warming scam whilst it's been cooling nigh on everywhere since 2016 even though the trace gas CO2 is rising. The cooling trend in some areas should be alarming but according to Sir David King a few years ago we should have already moved to the Arctic by now to get away from the heat.
spex357 thanks for your reply. The endless complexity of the Earth's weather and electrical circuits would appear almost beyond comprehension.
@@landerclifton3003 Yes it's super complicated. Many spend years in the field but would never say they have fathomed it all out. We now have computers looking into it but they can't give an accurate weeks weather forecast yet.
I was stood at the Met Offices reception desk some years ago and on the wall behind was a live video display of the current local weather. It showed wall to wall sunshine but outside it had been raining heavily for an hour. On pointing this out the receptionist turned it off.
@@spex357
Climate models are not for predicting weather changes.
Another common mistake made by those who listen to politics instead of science.
@@decimusrex92 they are used for many predictions/ guesses.
I think the Santorini blast or even the Krakatoa eruption were a greater existential threat than AGM, which is a mirage.
Level of ignorance 11/10
@@garysheppard4028 and you probably think CO 2 is a pollutant. It is a very tiny contributor, less than methane and far less than water vapor as a socalled greenhouse gas. The sun is King.
BTW, growers pump up their greenhouses to 1000ppm CO2 and plants love it. We puny humans are at the mercy of the climate, not the other way around. Good luck
@grindupBaker for everyone else, AGM is Anthropogenic Global Warming
@@inquirer1599 Local man knows more than the peak research organisations of every developed nation on earth.
News at 11....
@@garysheppard4028 the orgs you refer to are not trustworthy. The have a vested interest in furthering their agendas. If it's the UN, they are suspect. We need double blind research funding.
Iron seeding
It was done in a sloppy way first off
Time to give it another go in a more controlled way
The ocean is alkaline and is not becoming acid. That basic fact means that anyone using the term ocean acidification shows a complete lack of basic knowledge.
Remember 350ppm? Blew right past that one!
Without destroying any land based ecosystems could we use a solar powered pump to make marine seagrass ecosystems on land above sea level near the Sahara, Texas Gulf Coast, Chile and Australia. Make ocean water marshes in Deserts with seagrass that has been genetically modified to take up more carbon.
@grindupBaker Well I wish I had the money as well but I am on the lower middle end of Americas socioeconomic caste system. I give a little money to environmental causes and I give time and a little money to progressive politicians. This could probably be done the easiest and fastest using our military and scientists in collaboration with the military and scientists of the other countries I mentioned.
@@joeparreira3285 lol. I got shit and I do shit for any shit
@grindupBaker Are you worried about the permafrost in the Northwest Territories?
How does carbon create El Ninos an La Nina’s?
As far as I know, only in a fairly secondary manner with CO2 causing atmospheric heating, much of which is absorbed by the oceans, which scientists think might have a bearing on ENSO activity. But it's very complex and they are not fully confident on this aspect.
Just Have a Think Thanks for the time to reply. In Australia, they are blaming the fires on climate change. I’m trying to understand how carbon can cause drought in Australia.
It is said, EL Nino causes drought in Australia, warm water rising from the depths to the surface changes the wind direction we are told.
So where does carbon fit into this picture? And if it doesn’t, how can it be considered the one at fault for the drought?
Decolonize your minds,be a humble species,accept your death and be honest with each other.Live small and local,come back to Earth.
We need to cool the planet and oceans. Floating mirrors seems to be the best way. You can ever do marine permaculture under them.
Don't take this as 'we should do nothing', but do you have any idea how much power = heat is required to make a mirror, and if you want to produce enough to 'cool' the planet (while we are going to continue heating it up for 40 years at least) .....well.
@@jonovens7974 we can't stop with industrial activity anyway. A 20% reduction will lead to a 1C increase in the global average temp because of the aerosol masking effect. We should put the industrial activity to use to end animal agriculture and ways to cool down the planet.
The planet has been cooling since 2016 without any floaters.
@@spex357 Moron.
If you’re Australian you can contact ..................... nobody to contact in Oz.
What's so interesting off to your right?
HANG ON !
If oceans absorb, "90% of excess heat", (2mins 10 secs), then surely it must be radiated, back into atmosphere, and then to space beyond that.
So how can it not be misleading in the first place, to say the oceans absorb such. "excess", heat, as though it doesn't go anywhere ?
As that changed since covid or it didn't even make any difference??? 🤔
The oceans are alkaline. There is not enough atmospheric Co2 to turn them into an "acid". The atmosphere cannot warm until the underlying surface warms first. The lower atmosphere is transparent to direct solar radiation, preventing it from being significantly warmed by sunlight alone. The surface atmosphere thus gets its warmth from direct contact with the oceans, from infrared radiation off the ocean surface and, by latent heat of evaporation. Consequently, the temperature of the lower atmosphere is largely determined by the temperature of the ocean. Land cannot store heat for long unlike oceans
The oceans are not warmed by the overlying lower atmosphere but by sunlight and infrared radiation from so called greenhouse gases water vapour being the main constituent. Sunlight penetrates the ocean to a depth of 100- 160 metre and it is typical for the ocean temperature in Hawaii to be 26°C at the surface, and 15°C at a depth of 150 meters. The infrared radiation penetrates but a few millimetres into the ocean. This means that the greenhouse radiation has no effect on the water just a few centimetres deep which receives none of the direct effects of the infrared thermal energy from the atmosphere. It is in the top few millimetres in which evaporation takes places. So whatever infrared energy may reach the ocean as a result of the greenhouse effect is soon dissipated. Further heat cannot flow from a cold body to a warmer body. Consequently, it is not Co2 anthropogenic or otherwise which is causing the oceans to warm.
(