Nice talk, good explanation. Heavy on the positive outlook, situation is much grimmer. And just look at COP26, another chance lost. No decisive change at all just kicking the can down the road again.
your not wrong no one is taking this seriously enough gen z is so fuck and my God I don't even want to think the shit storm coming for the generation after gen z 😢😢😢😢
@@woodelfdragon8603 agree, however, at this moment my concerns are about the possibility of Nuclear War, after listening to Professor John Meirshimer from the University of Chicago. He just presented the dire situation between the US leaders and Russia. Apologies to Climatologists; my attention is not to crash this presentation; I finished Mearsheimer's presentation, feeling distraught...
@@clintstinkeye5607 Russia technology old Russia technology blows up in man's face man's sad everyone in Russia dies 😘. Also do you think Russia can attack other countries and win that fight without starting world war 3 and losing you got another thing coming boy
"Then, in 1995, the name was again changed by the University to the Department of Soil, Water, and Climate." by 1996 I knew we were doomed, as I worked full time for Greenpeace out of Minneapolis. I finished my master's degree doing "sustainability" protest policy activism at University of Minnesota with a final focus on nonwestern meditation. Western science created abrupt global warming and now we can enjoy Western science to document the doom in details. Thanks.
Wonderful presentation on I'd say the most concerning effects of climate change - increased extreme weather events, given the threat it poses to global agriculture. A few notes and references... Newer CMIP6 studies suggest the Arctic will be ice-free in summer as soon as 2030 and almost certainly before 2050 even under best case emission reduction scenarios, which we are not following. The only time emissions have fallen was in the Great Recession and Pandemic lock downs, both temporary. Physicist Tim Garrett studies the correlation between emissions and economic activity, the effect efficiency gains have on increasing energy use (Jevon's Paradox), and that renewable energy has been additive and not displaced fossil energy. Any reduction in fossil fuel consumption by a few, lowers the cost for others to consume more. Thus lifestyle and local community changes are ineffective at reducing global emissions if global compliance is not adopted, which to date has not happened despite 26 IPCC CoPs. References: Screen, James A., and C. Deser. "Pacific Ocean variability influences the time of emergence of a seasonally ice‐free Arctic Ocean." Geophysical Research Letters 46.4 (2019): 2222-2231. Notz, Dirk, and S. I. M. I. P. Community. "Arctic sea ice in CMIP6." Geophysical Research Letters 47.10 (2020): e2019GL086749. Garrett, Timothy J., Matheus Grasselli, and Stephen Keen. "Past world economic production constrains current energy demands: Persistent scaling with implications for economic growth and climate change mitigation." Plos one 15.8 (2020): e0237672.
One of the better presentations available which covers these topics. This is why we have only 5 years within which to act...if....we wish to try to save the arctic in the summer. Already, 75 percent gone. However, the prognosis is not optimistic.
Just a note on predictions. Very few climate predictions have actually come to pass to date if any. There is a website tracking predictions if it hasn’t been taken down.
For those scientists and policy makers who mistakenly believe that the Arctic ice can be restored to 1970 levels and thickness using ships spraying saltwater into the atmosphere to form clouds which might reflect solar radiation during the summer months... According to this lecturer, this may have more harm than good. Cloud formations may cause more warming than cooling, as was stated here. Interesting.
Not forgetting that energy will need to be expended [generators, pumps etc....] in Arctic surface albedo modification, depending upon which method is adopted. Spraying water into the Arctic atmosphere is probably not a good idea, given that it would likely inject yet more H2O - a major greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere as a whole. Using hollow spherical microglass beads, though inert (more or less like sand...) will require some form of mechanical distribution system = energy + [geo]engineering + logistics + economics - human anthropocentrism. . It is all futile of course. The Arctic will be ice-free within a few years
A very good talk, I wish more folks listened. Unfortunately what the majority of Americans care about most is NOT the Climate, it is CONSUMPTION. How many Americans are debt FREE? So few. And politicians who perhaps could do something about Climate, they care more about having large homes, lots of travel, and everyone buying a LOT of stuff. This idea of by 2050 we will be zero carbon? Why not much sooner? Unfortunately I’ve reached the point where I believe we will unfortunately do NOTHING, I agree much with what Dr. James Lovelock has written.
@@simonjohn6156 Actually Joseph Fourier first published on how "dark heat" (i.e. infrared radiation) is what heats up Earth and that "industrial activity" is part of causing that heating up - that was 200 years ago!! So you have a lot of science to catch up on if you think it's all just propaganda. haha. Globally Resolved Surface Temperatures Since The Last Glacial Maximum" Matthew B. Osman, Jessica E. Tierney, Jiang Zhu, Robert Tardif, Gregory J. Hakim, Jonathan King & Christopher J. Poulsen published November 10, 2021 Nature volume 599, pages 239-244 (2021) ----------- Analysis of global mean surface temperature (GMST) the last 24,000 years by combining several hundred previous published paleo analysis from all over Earth, took 7 scientists 7 years to do the work of combining hundreds of previous published paleo analysis and filling in the areas of Earth between the analyses using advanced statistical methods, and calculating the uncertainty in those statistical methods for the infill. "Climate changes across the last 24,000 years provide key insights into Earth system responses to external forcing. Climate model simulations and proxy data have independently allowed for study of this crucial interval; however, they have at times yielded disparate conclusions. Here, we leverage both types of information using paleoclimate data assimilation to produce the first observationally constrained, full-field reanalysis of surface temperature change spanning the Last Glacial Maximum to present. We demonstrate that temperature variability across the last 24 kyr was linked to two modes: radiative forcing from ice sheets and greenhouse gases; and a superposition of changes in thermohaline circulation and seasonal insolation. In contrast with previous proxy-based reconstructions our reanalysis results show that global mean temperatures warmed between the early and middle Holocene and were stable thereafter. When compared with recent temperature changes, our reanalysis indicates that both the rate and magnitude of modern observed warming are unprecedented relative to the changes of the last 24 kyr". Time to grow up people - industrial CO2 induced abrupt global warming was first analyzed in detail in 1890 by Svante Arrhenius! Current CO2 levels are already well above anything in the past 3 million years! There's already over 400 Zettajoules of EXTRA heat in the oceans accumulated since 1995. The Arctic will soon be ice-free with 1200 gigatons of pressurized methane hydrates being released as an "abrupt eruption" - just a 5 gigaton release will double global warming temperatures on Earth.
I am glad to have run across this presentation. I have been contemplating the seemingly contradictory things I’ve been hearing about water vapor and clouds regarding both heating and cooling of the planet. My take aways from this presentation are that a: it is a very complicated subject, b. water vapor and clouds, though related, are separate entities, c. I need to read the article in Scientific American. I always like to hear what Dr. Jennifer Francis has to say. Thank you for this discussion. 👋🏼 from Saint Paul, MN.
Remember that water vapor/CO2/CH4 and any other gases are not distributed uniformly across the globe. We are going to see continued increases in the severity of events and not just the numbers. I also don't think that the arctic sea ice cover models are really accurately capturing the collapse of sea ice. Look at the graph she shows of modeled and actual sea ice coverage. You will see that it is already responding outside of 2 standard deviations of modeled responses. We ran (are running) an experiment on the planet we lived on. SMH.
What I have been somewhat confused about, is the difference between greater water vapor in the atmosphere due to warming causing mega-rain events over land, vs. recent reports of concern about fewer ‘clouds’ (a.k.a. water vapor?) over the oceans, thereby causing greater heating of the oceans. Why wouldn’t warmer air temperatures draw more vapor from the oceans, creating more, rather than fewer clouds?
@@trulyaghast9712 well trees also transpire water, figures large trees, 150 gallons a day, mainly in warm tempratures, and vast numbers have burnt up in the western United States, in the last 20 years, also not to mention the clearing of tropical forests, for farming and replanting with trees for palm oil, vast areas.
@@stevemace1725 Trees use water everywhere they are! The earth has become 35% greener last 60 years. Due to more Co2. The Amazone forrest, a large part of it, was farm land 600 years back. When it comes to oxygen production in rain forests it use same amount it produce. The oceans are main producers of oxygen.
My life improves as society and order breaks down. In this case, as in many others, I benefit from things that harm most people. I wish it wasn't that way, but I didn't make it this way.
Achieving net-zero is equivalent to an addict saying "this is the last time...one last party" It will take massive amounts of petroleum to create new "green" infrastructure...mining...carbon pollution...other pollution...wars for rare earth metals, etc.
Any melting in the Arctic is unlikely to reach the warming experienced earlier in this interglacial when the temperature experienced along the Russian Arctic coastline was up to 7°C higher than at present.
As regards the melting of Arctic Ice, the records nearly always seem to start in 1979. Strange that, considering it was a year of record extent for Arctic Ice. Even so, data from NOAA (2022 Arctic Report Card) show winter (March) ice coverage has hardly changed since '79, and that the summer (September) coverage trend had stopped declining since 2007. In September 2022, sea ice reached a minimum extent of 4.87 million square kilometers in the Arctic. This is higher than the extent in 2007, which means the Arctic summer sea ice trend is zero for the past 16 years. It was almost as high as 1995. Summer 2023 is one of the coldest in several decades in the Arctic, and May 2023 was the coldest on record there. The Greenland surface mass balance (SMB) for the past 11 months is a massive but very normal 450 billion tonnes of ice accumulated. 5 out of the last 7 years have seen huge accumulations above the average (1981-2010). How inconvenient! Didn't someone predict in 2007 Arctic ice free by 2010, or 2015, or 2013, or in 5 years? Or was it in 2008 the Arctic ice sheet would melt away. Also predicted in 2008 North Pole ice free in ... 2008 ... or in 10 years. 2009 prediction: Arctic ice free in 2014. 2012 prediction: snow will be gone by 2020. And 2013 star prediction: Methane catastrophe in 2 years because of ice free Arctic. 2018 prediction: zero chance of permanent ice in Arctic by 2022. The Arctic Ice is still there, and it's stopped shrinking. If you consider global sea ice cover, it was basically flat from 1981 to 2008, rose until 2010, stayed level until 2015, dropped until 2018, and then rebounded almost all the way back to the 1990-2000 average. Nobody predicted theses changes, nor can they explain them. The changes have no relationship to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The climate crisis/emergency/apocalypse is make-believe. Multiyear ice is an unproductive habitat as far as marine organisms are concerned: first year (seasonal) ice over continental shelves is the most productive and this is where the vast majority of polar bears, seals, fish, whales, and sea birds are found. Therefore the decline of extremely thick multiyear ice (>4 years old) could be seen as an unconcerning development with regards to the wildlife in the region, especially since 2-3 year old ice - that can be used as a resting/hunting platform for seals and polar bears - hasn't declined in summer since 2007. In fact, biologically, the Arctic is in good shape with all its regions showing a positive trend in primary productivity over an extended period (2003-2022). This has resulted in more food for seals, walruses, bowhead whales and polar bears, which are hence maintaining or expanding their populations. "Greenland ice sheet mass balance from 1840 through next week." (Mankoff et al., 2021). If you examine Fig.2 on page 5, you will see there would be no correlation with the exponential increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide (280ppm to 420ppm) and the change in the annual Mass Balance Sum shown in the paper. Indeed there have been periods of increasing mass of the Greenland ice cap in the 1940's, 70's, 80's and 90's. (Remember CO2 was rising all the time.) The Greenland ice sheet is thought to contribute 0.7mm/yr to sea-level rise, so 54mm by 2100 (just over 2 inches). That sounds small because it is small. Also an accounting error. More recently Greenland Total Ice Mass Balance rate of loss reached its maximum in 2012 but the trend rate of loss has been diminishing ever since. That's while we've added 500 million tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere (14% of total human emissions). The average annual loss is 0.005% of the total mass (around 3 million gigatonnes). That's neglible. Come back in 20,000 years. There's no "death spiral" in the region as some people have reported. In fact, there is, I think, no evidence of any crisis/emergency. That is silly nonsense designed to scare people.
Walks in nature help out as you ponder we are going to witness the arctic ice disappear.....I'm sure we all know what this really means.thanks for the talk.....
And exactly what does this mean? Arctic ice has disappeared in the past. Life was in far greater danger when glaciers cover the northern hemisphere. History proves life flourishes under warming. The greatest diversity of life on this planet lives in the tropics not Greenland.
@@anthonymorris5084 The loss of Arctic sea ice has been accelerating for decades. Not only is less area now covered in ice than since records started, it also is thinner and consists of only 10% or so multi-year ice. Loss of Arctic sea ice will severely impact crop yields all across the Northern Hemisphere and, due to globalization, the world. Please take the time to research what scientists have to say, as they devote their lives to their fields. Don't be a mouthpiece for Big Oil unless they're paying your ass
@@SouthCom1917 *"The loss of Arctic sea ice has been accelerating for decades."* Where and when did I dispute this? Why are you telling me this? *"Loss of Arctic sea ice will severely impact crop yields all across the Northern Hemisphere"* Hyperbolic nonsense. Evidence please. The loss of sea ice is a phenomenon that has occurred numerous times throughout history. While there is evidence that this is occurring, there is no evidence that this has any serious negative consequences. Even the polar bear has survived this melting in the past. There are however, positive aspects to this phenomenon which the climate zealots all conveniently ignore. Why, because it ruins your narrative. Please take the time to research what scientists *actually* have to say, (instead of listening to sensationalized media and engaging in parroting) as they devote their lives to their fields. Don't be a mouthpiece for the environmental movement unless they're paying your ass. When you put "Big" in front of "oil" does that help make them sound more nefarious?
It does not matter at all because we will all be dead before this The decrease of plant DIF will crush crop production any season now Nights are becoming too warm and only a few disrupts crop production Plant DIF is what will get us -54yo horticulturist
1:01:25 saying countries who have larger populations (while emitting amongst the highest levels of pollutants) but have a lower per captia output only throws shade on their overall output. It's misleading at the least.
Everyones doubling down to make as much `profit` as possible and that's the fundamental stumbling block..the capitalist model has left government powerless and without the means to implement and to be able to respond as now its entirely business led .
The entire Western world has embraced the "capitalist model". The West represents the most successful societies the planet has ever seen, by any metric you choose to examine. Who do you think is going to solve climate change, Somalia? Ethiopia? Venezuela? It's Western innovation and investment that produces the technological advancements that keep us safe.
@@Mickju Data proves we've never been safer, healthier or more prosperous than at any time in history. There is no reason to be hopeless. Human beings are incredibly innovative and we have faced far greater challenges.
@@anthonymorris5084 Somalia etc are exactly the people to solve climate change , who else lives happily on way under 1 ton CO2 footprint ?? You are the problem ,all this success you bleat about is on technology robbing natures stored wealth as a good thing ? Thats like robbing a bank and congratulating yourself on all the wealth `you created ` Technology has barely created any non robbed wealth and has lead to an existential crisis on your watch because of your views . Metrics , Soil health metrics ? Clean safe water reserve metrics ? Easilily obtained mineral metrics ? mass extinction event right now metrics ..you FOOL .
@@anthonymorris5084 No it does not , that is now a lie . We have never ever faced a challenge like this and nor has the planet EVER warmed so rapidly . Use your tech to research what happens with such rapid rise you hopeless fool .
Very informative! One thing I wish was added has to do with the bath tub. What a great way to simulate CO2 in the atmosphere. The drain can also be increased in size by planting trees or I believe every country needs to invest in Carbon Capture and Store technology (CCS). Also since the oceans absorb the vast majority of CO2 and there is a limit as to how much Carbon the oceans can absorb. That drain could become smaller........
C3S published an update yesterday. I'll keep it short, as no readers here. During the 3.5 yrs. 'til now, temps above the 1991-2020 baseline have increased 0.75 degC, so 0.214/yr. At this rate, we will see 2 degC above preindustrial by 2027, and 3 degC by 2032. And all of this heat is in spite of the 1.2 trillion tons of melting global ice, 3.3 billion tons per day, the 321 million cubic miles of oceans heating to 70 degF, 90 degF along the East Coast of the US, and the 1 trillion tons of water vapor evaporating daily. Simply put, for anyone reading, our AC is on "high" and it ain't enough to cool us down. Think going over Niagra Falls in a barrel.
Earth having ice caps is a relative rareity. Before a couple million years ago there were no known ice caps. They're still melting. But they will melt. 100%
Since then east coast AUSTRALIA is experiencing 3 flood events breaking records with RAIN BOMBS bouncing off and onto the coast. I guess related to simultaneous heat waves at both poles & ice sheet melting. Anyhow..expecting another 500+ ml rain in coming days.
I just saw video of a sub surfacing in Arctic about 2 months ago. Ice was 10 to 15 feet thick and air temp was about -15. No sign that the place was melting!
@grindupBaker The video showed ice that was thick and -15 proves it not melting unless there is a new ice that melts at -15. Batteries on the drone only last about 1/47 mile.
No one is talking about water pressure in ocean increasing with more volume of water, this puts extreme pressure on ocean floor, deepest areas, which are adjacent to lava ridges..this is going to effect plate tectonics, and probably could create more volcanic activity
Don't forget as temperature and atmosphere circulation increases so too does Evaporation increases... Hence torrential downpours increases, causing more regular and greater flooding....
The few arctic temperature sensors are located in warm areas of the Arctic and represent huge areas of unmonitored locations. If you could see the Arctic ice extent in the early 20th century you would see similar ice levels. Where did the sea ice data prior to 1980 come from? There is no evidence of increasing rate of sea level rise. Where are you getting that information?
Climate Change reminds me of how in Skyrim, the Dragons were locked away in another universe only to appear much later in the skies killing everyone and for them to deal with 😂
The human population in the world has past eight billion. Let's suppose that because of 'climate change' that population is reduced to say two billion. Wouldn't that be a good thing not only for the planet but also for those who were left?
I offered the Obamas $100 for their beachfront property in martha's vineyard. Haven't heard back yet, but I'm hopeful. I'll send them a link to this video. That should do the trick.
Great presentation but omits dozens of tipping points already passed and likely sea ice gone by 2023. we are in 6th mass extinction and scientists should be much more honest with themselves and lay people.
The World Ocean or Global Ocean is the interconnected system of the oceanic waters of the sea, and comprises the bulk of the hydrosphere, covering 361,132,000 square kilometers or 139,434,000 square miles of Earth's surface, with a total volume of roughly 1,332,000,000 cubic kilometers. The distribution of water on the Earth's surface is extremely uneven. Only 3% of water on the surface is fresh; the remaining 97% resides in the ocean. Of the freshwater, 69% resides in glaciers and ice, 30% underground, and less than 1% is located in lakes, rivers, and swamps. these extract have been copied and pasted from educational sites and are true, the estimates for sea level rise is up to 60 meters for Antarctica and a further 7.2 meters for Greenland being a total of 67.2 meters, so my question is , with the total ocean area ( 139,434,000 square miles ), and the vey small % of water locked in ice , ( which is 69% of the remaining 3% ) how do you contribute a 67,2 meter sea level rise, ? love to see your answer and the calculations how you come by this exorbitant number, regards owen, PS I've asked this question to a large amount of scientist, will you be the first to answer the question
I thought scientists said we have had several ice ages and warm periods. I believe one claims the earth was tropical during the age of dinosaurs . Maybe dinosaurs are coming back after it gets hot again.
Shame, I forwarded the first 10 mins to get to the data. Non academics don’t follow the timeless rituals of mutual accolades. This is one aspect of academia that drives me insane
Mirrors in the desert and solar farms represent unprecedented and permanent plant and animal habitat destruction. I thought that this was what we were trying to avoid.
@@anthonymorris5084 what plants...its the desert lol. And there's a lot of desert. If you're worried about the scorpions and cacti they can be moved. But that's a weird thing to worry about compared to human extinction and the destruction of most of the natural world from overheating compared to one very sparsely populated biome. Same with open tundra or just putting solar on house roofs. There are lots of ways to do it.
@@radscorpion8 I have no issue with putting panels on roofs. It's a free country. Deserts are incredibly diverse ecosystems with a wide variety of unique life forms, many endangered species exist in these environments. There isn't a scientist with an ounce of credibility claiming humans are going extinct, and the greatest threat to nature and wildlife has always been caused directly by humans. From deforestation, to poaching and plant and animal habitat destruction resulting from human encroachment. This has sent numerous life forms to extinction and threaten even more. Warming hasn't killed anything.
again ....lots of wishful thinking....lots of pointing to us little individual folks to do something about climate change,,,when really the only ones to really do something are the huge corporations the huge military forces the huge food producers,,,,AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO WATCH THIS TALK
I'm a retired physics professor. I create short videos on climate change topics that thousands of people watch. I plan to distill the key ideas from this lecture into a short video that will get a large number of views.
Even if they all sat down and watched and got up and did a 180 it wouldn't make a difference now as you probably already know if your following the studies,reports and results....the human mind is a reminder as to we're we go from here now.
Most atmospheric geoengineering proposals do nothing re CH4 pollution, which is getting worse as melting hydrates + an increasingly leaky natgas system from wells to gas appliances increase the short-run concentration of CH4, which then breaks down to increase atmospheric CO2. I would guess the Russian war has substantially increased the rate of CH4 buildup, would suspect that the Keeling curve might be accelerating measurably as a result (like the 2015 Calif. gas storage blow-out did). Not good for acidifying oceans & reduced O2 in the warming oceans, esp on the continental shelves…
The Eskimo says it's melting from below not top down, the magnetic field of the north pole I would expect is the problem, maybe if all the billionaires put their money into a volcano all would be ok,
This is the problem with academics. They have this ritual that goes back centuries. Unfortunately they don’t adapt to the mediums they use and thus we are left with 15 mins of mutual massage. I just forwarded through it all to get to the findings
Why is it only happening on the US side and not the Russian Side. I remember seeing the Russian side full of Polar Bears, plenty of ice and cold temperatures.
So...not much of a criticism on the content, but more about the presentation... Do you really have to spend 13 minutes out of an hour and fifteen minute presentation congratulating everyone and mentioning your accomplishments, and thanking each other, and expressing your gratitude? I'm not saying not to do any of this...but 12 minutes seems more performative than informative. Yes...I want to know the expertise of each speaker, their area of study... But quite a lot of this is wasted ceremony. I want the info.
I think you are missing the decade long series of record breaking temperatures, a 200mph cyclone, Australian floods, german floods, Mozambique floods, Mississipi floods, I could go on, but i suspect you actually know.
Comparing one single moment in time to another, say in 1970, is not very illuminating. Watch some Tony Heller videos for a better historical perspective.
@@drorbenami4827 Good to see that you agree that only 1 million humans could not possibly have the effect you claim. Apparently fire did not exist naturally on a much larger scale before humans tamed it.
Nice talk, good explanation. Heavy on the positive outlook, situation is much grimmer. And just look at COP26, another chance lost. No decisive change at all just kicking the can down the road again.
your not wrong no one is taking this seriously enough gen z is so fuck and my God I don't even want to think the shit storm coming for the generation after gen z 😢😢😢😢
@@woodelfdragon8603 agree, however, at this moment my concerns are about the possibility of Nuclear War, after listening to Professor John Meirshimer from the University of Chicago. He just presented the dire situation between the US leaders and Russia. Apologies to Climatologists; my attention is not to crash this presentation; I finished Mearsheimer's presentation, feeling distraught...
@@kirstinstrand6292 Russia weak
@@woodelfdragon8603 -
Crazy man run Russia. Russia have big bomb.
Bomb goes BOOM if crazy man mad.
Everybody die.
Crazy man smile.
All bad.
@@clintstinkeye5607 Russia technology old Russia technology blows up in man's face man's sad everyone in Russia dies 😘. Also do you think Russia can attack other countries and win that fight without starting world war 3 and losing you got another thing coming boy
"Then, in 1995, the name was again changed by the University to the Department of Soil, Water, and Climate." by 1996 I knew we were doomed, as I worked full time for Greenpeace out of Minneapolis. I finished my master's degree doing "sustainability" protest policy activism at University of Minnesota with a final focus on nonwestern meditation. Western science created abrupt global warming and now we can enjoy Western science to document the doom in details. Thanks.
Western science created global heating??? That is one mad statement.
The "i" in Life stands for irony.
11:25 this talk actually begins
Wonderful presentation on I'd say the most concerning effects of climate change - increased extreme weather events, given the threat it poses to global agriculture. A few notes and references...
Newer CMIP6 studies suggest the Arctic will be ice-free in summer as soon as 2030 and almost certainly before 2050 even under best case emission reduction scenarios, which we are not following.
The only time emissions have fallen was in the Great Recession and Pandemic lock downs, both temporary. Physicist Tim Garrett studies the correlation between emissions and economic activity, the effect efficiency gains have on increasing energy use (Jevon's Paradox), and that renewable energy has been additive and not displaced fossil energy.
Any reduction in fossil fuel consumption by a few, lowers the cost for others to consume more. Thus lifestyle and local community changes are ineffective at reducing global emissions if global compliance is not adopted, which to date has not happened despite 26 IPCC CoPs.
References:
Screen, James A., and C. Deser. "Pacific Ocean variability influences the time of emergence of a seasonally ice‐free Arctic Ocean." Geophysical Research Letters 46.4 (2019): 2222-2231.
Notz, Dirk, and S. I. M. I. P. Community. "Arctic sea ice in CMIP6." Geophysical Research Letters 47.10 (2020): e2019GL086749.
Garrett, Timothy J., Matheus Grasselli, and Stephen Keen. "Past world economic production constrains current energy demands: Persistent scaling with implications for economic growth and climate change mitigation." Plos one 15.8 (2020): e0237672.
2030? Try the next few years...
Thank you.! ! !
Your lecture has expanded my understanding of the mecanics of climate change.
One of the better presentations available which covers these topics. This is why we have only 5 years within which to act...if....we wish to try to save the arctic in the summer. Already, 75 percent gone. However, the prognosis is not optimistic.
Fantastic speaker, so easy to understand complex issues related to climate
10:40. Speaker begins
10:48
Dr. Francis is great-straight talk and clear.
Just a note on predictions. Very few climate predictions have actually come to pass to date if any. There is a website tracking predictions if it hasn’t been taken down.
For those scientists and policy makers who mistakenly believe that the Arctic ice can be restored to 1970 levels and thickness using ships spraying saltwater into the atmosphere to form clouds which might reflect solar radiation during the summer months... According to this lecturer, this may have more harm than good. Cloud formations may cause more warming than cooling, as was stated here. Interesting.
Not forgetting that energy will need to be expended [generators, pumps etc....] in Arctic surface albedo modification, depending upon which method is adopted. Spraying water into the Arctic atmosphere is probably not a good idea, given that it would likely inject yet more H2O - a major greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere as a whole. Using hollow spherical microglass beads, though inert (more or less like sand...) will require some form of mechanical distribution system = energy + [geo]engineering + logistics + economics - human anthropocentrism.
.
It is all futile of course. The Arctic will be ice-free within a few years
Good talk with great backup research. Thank you for mentioning subsidies. It's like nothing will get done until we get $ out of politics ~
One of the most cogent responses to wanting to eradicate people to address climate change.
Thank you Jennifer, excellent talk and information. M gracias
A very good talk, I wish more folks listened. Unfortunately what the majority of Americans care about most is NOT the Climate, it is CONSUMPTION. How many Americans are debt FREE? So few. And politicians who perhaps could do something about Climate, they care more about having large homes, lots of travel, and everyone buying a LOT of stuff. This idea of by 2050 we will be zero carbon? Why not much sooner? Unfortunately I’ve reached the point where I believe we will unfortunately do NOTHING, I agree much with what Dr. James Lovelock has written.
this lecture is PURE GENIUS.
@@simonjohn6156 Actually Joseph Fourier first published on how "dark heat" (i.e. infrared radiation) is what heats up Earth and that "industrial activity" is part of causing that heating up - that was 200 years ago!! So you have a lot of science to catch up on if you think it's all just propaganda. haha. Globally Resolved Surface Temperatures Since The Last Glacial Maximum" Matthew B. Osman, Jessica E. Tierney, Jiang Zhu, Robert Tardif, Gregory J. Hakim, Jonathan King & Christopher J. Poulsen published November 10, 2021 Nature volume 599, pages 239-244 (2021) -----------
Analysis of global mean surface temperature (GMST) the last 24,000 years by combining several hundred previous published paleo analysis from all over Earth, took 7 scientists 7 years to do the work of combining hundreds of previous published paleo analysis and filling in the areas of Earth between the analyses using advanced statistical methods, and calculating the uncertainty in those statistical methods for the infill. "Climate changes across the last 24,000 years provide key insights into Earth system responses to external forcing. Climate model simulations and proxy data have independently allowed for study of this crucial interval; however, they have at times yielded disparate conclusions. Here, we leverage both types of information using paleoclimate data assimilation to produce the first observationally constrained, full-field reanalysis of surface temperature change spanning the Last Glacial Maximum to present. We demonstrate that temperature variability across the last 24 kyr was linked to two modes: radiative forcing from ice sheets and greenhouse gases; and a superposition of changes in thermohaline circulation and seasonal insolation. In contrast with previous proxy-based reconstructions our reanalysis results show that global mean temperatures warmed between the early and middle Holocene and were stable thereafter. When compared with recent temperature changes, our reanalysis indicates that both the rate and magnitude of modern observed warming are unprecedented relative to the changes of the last 24 kyr".
Time to grow up people - industrial CO2 induced abrupt global warming was first analyzed in detail in 1890 by Svante Arrhenius! Current CO2 levels are already well above anything in the past 3 million years! There's already over 400 Zettajoules of EXTRA heat in the oceans accumulated since 1995. The Arctic will soon be ice-free with 1200 gigatons of pressurized methane hydrates being released as an "abrupt eruption" - just a 5 gigaton release will double global warming temperatures on Earth.
I am glad to have run across this presentation. I have been contemplating the seemingly contradictory things I’ve been hearing about water vapor and clouds regarding both heating and cooling of the planet. My take aways from this presentation are that a: it is a very complicated subject, b. water vapor and clouds, though related, are separate entities, c. I need to read the article in Scientific American. I always like to hear what Dr. Jennifer Francis has to say. Thank you for this discussion. 👋🏼 from Saint Paul, MN.
Remember that water vapor/CO2/CH4 and any other gases are not distributed uniformly across the globe. We are going to see continued increases in the severity of events and not just the numbers. I also don't think that the arctic sea ice cover models are really accurately capturing the collapse of sea ice. Look at the graph she shows of modeled and actual sea ice coverage. You will see that it is already responding outside of 2 standard deviations of modeled responses. We ran (are running) an experiment on the planet we lived on. SMH.
What I have been somewhat confused about, is the difference between greater water vapor in the atmosphere due to warming causing mega-rain events over land, vs. recent reports of concern about fewer ‘clouds’ (a.k.a. water vapor?) over the oceans, thereby causing greater heating of the oceans. Why wouldn’t warmer air temperatures draw more vapor from the oceans, creating more, rather than fewer clouds?
@@trulyaghast9712 well trees also transpire water, figures large trees, 150 gallons a day, mainly in warm tempratures, and vast numbers have burnt up in the western United States, in the last 20 years, also not to mention the clearing of tropical forests, for farming and replanting with trees for palm oil, vast areas.
@@stevemace1725 Thank you, Steve. It is a sorry state of affairs. However, this still does not answer my particular question.
@@stevemace1725 Trees use water everywhere they are! The earth has become 35% greener last 60 years. Due to more Co2. The Amazone forrest, a large part of it, was farm land 600 years back. When it comes to oxygen production in rain forests it use same amount it produce. The oceans are main producers of oxygen.
Absorbtion of Sun heat into dark waters speeds melting and Ocean temp rise, but have we ever measured it ?
My life improves as society and order breaks down. In this case, as in many others, I benefit from things that harm most people. I wish it wasn't that way, but I didn't make it this way.
Found the capitalist.
Won't help u when we extinct
@@Azamat421 Humans won't go extinct anytime soon. Civilization may crash, but small groups will survive.
just a great presentation, information rich, thank you.
Merci pour vos nobles efforts… mais en réalité nous sommes condamnés peu importe les mesures que nous allons prendre.
Another powerful lecture from Dr. Francis.
Achieving net-zero is equivalent to an addict saying "this is the last time...one last party"
It will take massive amounts of petroleum to create new "green" infrastructure...mining...carbon pollution...other pollution...wars for rare earth metals, etc.
Any melting in the Arctic is unlikely to reach the warming experienced earlier in this interglacial when the temperature experienced along the Russian Arctic coastline was up to 7°C higher than at present.
As regards the melting of Arctic Ice, the records nearly always seem to start in 1979. Strange that, considering it was a year of record extent for Arctic Ice. Even so, data from NOAA (2022 Arctic Report Card) show winter (March) ice coverage has hardly changed since '79, and that the summer (September) coverage trend had stopped declining since 2007. In September 2022, sea ice reached a minimum extent of 4.87 million square kilometers in the Arctic. This is higher than the extent in 2007, which means the Arctic summer sea ice trend is zero for the past 16 years. It was almost as high as 1995. Summer 2023 is one of the coldest in several decades in the Arctic, and May 2023 was the coldest on record there. The Greenland surface mass balance (SMB) for the past 11 months is a massive but very normal 450 billion tonnes of ice accumulated. 5 out of the last 7 years have seen huge accumulations above the average (1981-2010). How inconvenient! Didn't someone predict in 2007 Arctic ice free by 2010, or 2015, or 2013, or in 5 years? Or was it in 2008 the Arctic ice sheet would melt away. Also predicted in 2008 North Pole ice free in ... 2008 ... or in 10 years. 2009 prediction: Arctic ice free in 2014. 2012 prediction: snow will be gone by 2020. And 2013 star prediction: Methane catastrophe in 2 years because of ice free Arctic. 2018 prediction: zero chance of permanent ice in Arctic by 2022. The Arctic Ice is still there, and it's stopped shrinking.
If you consider global sea ice cover, it was basically flat from 1981 to 2008, rose until 2010, stayed level until 2015, dropped until 2018, and then rebounded almost all the way back to the 1990-2000 average. Nobody predicted theses changes, nor can they explain them. The changes have no relationship to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
The climate crisis/emergency/apocalypse is make-believe.
Multiyear ice is an unproductive habitat as far as marine organisms are concerned: first year (seasonal) ice over continental shelves is the most productive and this is where the vast majority of polar bears, seals, fish, whales, and sea birds are found. Therefore the decline of extremely thick multiyear ice (>4 years old) could be seen as an unconcerning development with regards to the wildlife in the region, especially since 2-3 year old ice - that can be used as a resting/hunting platform for seals and polar bears - hasn't declined in summer since 2007. In fact, biologically, the Arctic is in good shape with all its regions showing a positive trend in primary productivity over an extended period (2003-2022). This has resulted in more food for seals, walruses, bowhead whales and polar bears, which are hence maintaining or expanding their populations.
"Greenland ice sheet mass balance from 1840 through next week." (Mankoff et al., 2021). If you examine Fig.2 on page 5, you will see there would be no correlation with the exponential increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide (280ppm to 420ppm) and the change in the annual Mass Balance Sum shown in the paper. Indeed there have been periods of increasing mass of the Greenland ice cap in the 1940's, 70's, 80's and 90's. (Remember CO2 was rising all the time.)
The Greenland ice sheet is thought to contribute 0.7mm/yr to sea-level rise, so 54mm by 2100 (just over 2 inches). That sounds small because it is small. Also an accounting error.
More recently Greenland Total Ice Mass Balance rate of loss reached its maximum in 2012 but the trend rate of loss has been diminishing ever since. That's while we've added 500 million tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere (14% of total human emissions). The average annual loss is 0.005% of the total mass (around 3 million gigatonnes). That's neglible. Come back in 20,000 years.
There's no "death spiral" in the region as some people have reported. In fact, there is, I think, no evidence of any crisis/emergency. That is silly nonsense designed to scare people.
Well, this was informative. Thank you 🙃🙃
best explanation I've come across
Walks in nature help out as you ponder we are going to witness the arctic ice disappear.....I'm sure we all know what this really means.thanks for the talk.....
And exactly what does this mean? Arctic ice has disappeared in the past. Life was in far greater danger when glaciers cover the northern hemisphere. History proves life flourishes under warming. The greatest diversity of life on this planet lives in the tropics not Greenland.
@@anthonymorris5084 The loss of Arctic sea ice has been accelerating for decades. Not only is less area now covered in ice than since records started, it also is thinner and consists of only 10% or so multi-year ice. Loss of Arctic sea ice will severely impact crop yields all across the Northern Hemisphere and, due to globalization, the world. Please take the time to research what scientists have to say, as they devote their lives to their fields. Don't be a mouthpiece for Big Oil unless they're paying your ass
@@SouthCom1917 *"The loss of Arctic sea ice has been accelerating for decades."* Where and when did I dispute this? Why are you telling me this?
*"Loss of Arctic sea ice will severely impact crop yields all across the Northern Hemisphere"* Hyperbolic nonsense. Evidence please. The loss of sea ice is a phenomenon that has occurred numerous times throughout history. While there is evidence that this is occurring, there is no evidence that this has any serious negative consequences. Even the polar bear has survived this melting in the past. There are however, positive aspects to this phenomenon which the climate zealots all conveniently ignore. Why, because it ruins your narrative.
Please take the time to research what scientists *actually* have to say, (instead of listening to sensationalized media and engaging in parroting) as they devote their lives to their fields. Don't be a mouthpiece for the environmental movement unless they're paying your ass.
When you put "Big" in front of "oil" does that help make them sound more nefarious?
@@anthonymorris5084 You make me laugh. 😂
@@PT-cu2fg Did you work on that reply all day?
Starts at 11:27
THANK YOU SOOOO MUCH !!!!
ohh my God, will you get on the talk?
Lol
So who’s sending this memo to the Rich? I don’t think they will stop flying because it’s good for the planet.
It does not matter at all because we will all be dead before this
The decrease of plant DIF will crush crop production any season now
Nights are becoming too warm and only a few disrupts crop production
Plant DIF is what will get us
-54yo horticulturist
1:01:25 saying countries who have larger populations (while emitting amongst the highest levels of pollutants) but have a lower per captia output only throws shade on their overall output. It's misleading at the least.
important......pls watch
Everyones doubling down to make as much `profit` as possible and that's the fundamental stumbling block..the capitalist model has left government powerless and without the means to implement and to be able to respond as now its entirely business led .
You are correct, and I don't see any solution for that. It seems hopeless to me.
The entire Western world has embraced the "capitalist model". The West represents the most successful societies the planet has ever seen, by any metric you choose to examine. Who do you think is going to solve climate change, Somalia? Ethiopia? Venezuela? It's Western innovation and investment that produces the technological advancements that keep us safe.
@@Mickju Data proves we've never been safer, healthier or more prosperous than at any time in history. There is no reason to be hopeless. Human beings are incredibly innovative and we have faced far greater challenges.
@@anthonymorris5084 Somalia etc are exactly the people to solve climate change , who else lives happily on way under 1 ton CO2 footprint ?? You are the problem ,all this success you bleat about is on technology robbing natures stored wealth as a good thing ? Thats like robbing a bank and congratulating yourself on all the wealth `you created ` Technology has barely created any non robbed wealth and has lead to an existential crisis on your watch because of your views . Metrics , Soil health metrics ? Clean safe water reserve metrics ? Easilily obtained mineral metrics ? mass extinction event right now metrics ..you FOOL .
@@anthonymorris5084 No it does not , that is now a lie . We have never ever faced a challenge like this and nor has the planet EVER warmed so rapidly . Use your tech to research what happens with such rapid rise you hopeless fool .
Very informative! One thing I wish was added has to do with the bath tub. What a great way to simulate CO2 in the atmosphere. The drain can also be increased in size by planting trees or I believe every country needs to invest in Carbon Capture and Store technology (CCS). Also since the oceans absorb the vast majority of CO2 and there is a limit as to how much Carbon the oceans can absorb. That drain could become smaller........
C3S published an update yesterday. I'll keep it short, as no readers here. During the 3.5 yrs. 'til now, temps above the 1991-2020 baseline have increased 0.75 degC, so 0.214/yr. At this rate, we will see 2 degC above preindustrial by 2027, and 3 degC by 2032. And all of this heat is in spite of the 1.2 trillion tons of melting global ice, 3.3 billion tons per day, the 321 million cubic miles of oceans heating to 70 degF, 90 degF along the East Coast of the US, and the 1 trillion tons of water vapor evaporating daily. Simply put, for anyone reading, our AC is on "high" and it ain't enough to cool us down. Think going over Niagra Falls in a barrel.
Save Our Planet Now
I love how RUclips has education for free.
Earth having ice caps is a relative rareity. Before a couple million years ago there were no known ice caps. They're still melting. But they will melt. 100%
Dr. Francis provides an excellent explanation of the science of climate change but her solutions are completely out of touch with reality.
I just saw a sub surfacing in the Arctic. There was plenty of nice thick ice and cold temperatures.
Since then east coast AUSTRALIA is experiencing 3 flood events breaking records with RAIN BOMBS bouncing off and onto the coast. I guess related to simultaneous heat waves at both poles & ice sheet melting. Anyhow..expecting another 500+ ml rain in coming days.
That is La Nina, not climate change.
Since summer melt in the Arctic has remained the same for the last ten years, there is no measurable climate crisis
I just saw video of a sub surfacing in Arctic about 2 months ago. Ice was 10 to 15 feet thick and air temp was about -15. No sign that the place was melting!
@grindupBaker Well that is what the Capt of the Sub said
@grindupBaker The video showed ice that was thick and -15 proves it not melting unless there is a new ice that melts at -15. Batteries on the drone only last about 1/47 mile.
@grindupBaker It was a Physics video but I could not help see all the ice boulders. The US Navy is sure secretive about certain parts of the submarine
No one is talking about water pressure in ocean increasing with more volume of water, this puts extreme pressure on ocean floor, deepest areas, which are adjacent to lava ridges..this is going to effect plate tectonics, and probably could create more volcanic activity
Don't forget as temperature and atmosphere circulation increases so too does Evaporation increases... Hence torrential downpours increases, causing more regular and greater flooding....
The few arctic temperature sensors are located in warm areas of the Arctic and represent huge areas of unmonitored locations. If you could see the Arctic ice extent in the early 20th century you would see similar ice levels. Where did the sea ice data prior to 1980 come from? There is no evidence of increasing rate of sea level rise. Where are you getting that information?
white roofs or solar white houses??
Has the Arctic already melted completely? When will it melt completely based on more recent trends?
The polar air drifts from East to West. The jet stream moves from West to East because the circumference of the earth is less than at t equater.
Climate Change reminds me of how in Skyrim, the Dragons were locked away in another universe only to appear much later in the skies killing everyone and for them to deal with 😂
The human population in the world has past eight billion. Let's suppose that because of 'climate change' that population is reduced to say two billion. Wouldn't that be a good thing not only for the planet but also for those who were left?
The jet stream bounces off the high pressure of the East to West arctic high pressure.
I offered the Obamas $100 for their beachfront property in martha's vineyard. Haven't heard back yet, but I'm hopeful. I'll send them a link to this video. That should do the trick.
Great presentation but omits dozens of tipping points already passed and likely sea ice gone by 2023. we are in 6th mass extinction and scientists should be much more honest with themselves and lay people.
The World Ocean or Global Ocean is the interconnected system of the oceanic waters of the sea, and comprises the bulk of the hydrosphere, covering 361,132,000 square kilometers or 139,434,000 square miles of Earth's surface, with a total volume of roughly 1,332,000,000 cubic kilometers.
The distribution of water on the Earth's surface is extremely uneven. Only 3% of water on the surface is fresh; the remaining 97% resides in the ocean. Of the freshwater, 69% resides in glaciers and ice, 30% underground, and less than 1% is located in lakes, rivers, and swamps.
these extract have been copied and pasted from educational sites and are true,
the estimates for sea level rise is up to 60 meters for Antarctica and a further 7.2 meters for Greenland being a total of 67.2 meters,
so my question is , with the total ocean area ( 139,434,000 square miles ), and the vey small % of water locked in ice , ( which is 69% of the remaining 3% ) how do you contribute a 67,2 meter sea level rise, ?
love to see your answer and the calculations how you come by this exorbitant number,
regards owen,
PS I've asked this question to a large amount of scientist, will you be the first to answer the question
I thought scientists said we have had several ice ages and warm periods. I believe one claims the earth was tropical during the age of dinosaurs . Maybe dinosaurs are coming back after it gets hot again.
The credits should be at the end for people who care about them. I'm already bored and leaving the lecture before it started. Bye, bye birdie.
Shame, I forwarded the first 10 mins to get to the data. Non academics don’t follow the timeless rituals of mutual accolades. This is one aspect of academia that drives me insane
mirrors in the desert and solar
Mirrors in the desert and solar farms represent unprecedented and permanent plant and animal habitat destruction. I thought that this was what we were trying to avoid.
@@anthonymorris5084 what plants...its the desert lol. And there's a lot of desert. If you're worried about the scorpions and cacti they can be moved. But that's a weird thing to worry about compared to human extinction and the destruction of most of the natural world from overheating compared to one very sparsely populated biome. Same with open tundra or just putting solar on house roofs. There are lots of ways to do it.
@@radscorpion8 I have no issue with putting panels on roofs. It's a free country.
Deserts are incredibly diverse ecosystems with a wide variety of unique life forms, many endangered species exist in these environments.
There isn't a scientist with an ounce of credibility claiming humans are going extinct, and the greatest threat to nature and wildlife has always been caused directly by humans. From deforestation, to poaching and plant and animal habitat destruction resulting from human encroachment. This has sent numerous life forms to extinction and threaten even more. Warming hasn't killed anything.
again ....lots of wishful thinking....lots of pointing to us little individual folks to do something about climate change,,,when really the only ones to really do something are the huge corporations the huge military forces the huge food producers,,,,AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO WATCH THIS TALK
That’s right!
I'm a retired physics professor. I create short videos on climate change topics that thousands of people watch. I plan to distill the key ideas from this lecture into a short video that will get a large number of views.
Agreed. Do my best to tell the details on my channel.
Even if they all sat down and watched and got up and did a 180 it wouldn't make a difference now as you probably already know if your following the studies,reports and results....the human mind is a reminder as to we're we go from here now.
they will watch and figure ways to fight the change that will help us all.
47:22...oof. This not aged well.
Most atmospheric geoengineering proposals do nothing re CH4 pollution, which is getting worse as melting hydrates + an increasingly leaky natgas system from wells to gas appliances increase the short-run concentration of CH4, which then breaks down to increase atmospheric CO2. I would guess the Russian war has substantially increased the rate of CH4 buildup, would suspect that the Keeling curve might be accelerating measurably as a result (like the 2015 Calif. gas storage blow-out did). Not good for acidifying oceans & reduced O2 in the warming oceans, esp on the continental shelves…
So you guys all get on zoom and talk about this? Gee, how well does that work?
Aerosols aerosols aerosols destroy our protection from the sun. Geez. Constant and nonstop since planet started warming.
The Eskimo says it's melting from below not top down, the magnetic field of the north pole I would expect is the problem, maybe if all the billionaires put their money into a volcano all would be ok,
11+ minutes of introductions, you event organizers are boring your audience to death. We didn't come for your preening, look at me intros -- get to it
This is the problem with academics. They have this ritual that goes back centuries. Unfortunately they don’t adapt to the mediums they use and thus we are left with 15 mins of mutual massage. I just forwarded through it all to get to the findings
Why is it only happening on the US side and not the Russian Side. I remember seeing the Russian side full of Polar Bears, plenty of ice and cold temperatures.
So...not much of a criticism on the content, but more about the presentation...
Do you really have to spend 13 minutes out of an hour and fifteen minute presentation congratulating everyone and mentioning your accomplishments, and thanking each other, and expressing your gratitude?
I'm not saying not to do any of this...but 12 minutes seems more performative than informative.
Yes...I want to know the expertise of each speaker, their area of study...
But quite a lot of this is wasted ceremony.
I want the info.
jetsterm has stop ;;john moore reported on this
Good presentation but there is no adverse weather events if anything there's been less
I think you are missing the decade long series of record breaking temperatures, a 200mph cyclone, Australian floods, german floods, Mozambique floods, Mississipi floods, I could go on, but i suspect you actually know.
Are you kidding us? Surely you must be.
@@clive373 : China Floods, having a 1000 year flood they are at the moment. Called out thousands++++military to try to secure the Three Gorges Dam
If it happens we will have to rebuild all of our ports to compensate for the dropping ocean levels
Cut down on the intro, please…10 minutes is a bit much.
Comparing one single moment in time to another, say in 1970, is not very illuminating. Watch some Tony Heller videos for a better historical perspective.
Tony Heller ...... *HAHAHAHA* .... you're a comedian!!
If you don't know this stuff, you will likely have no clue over how incompetent this person is. Really it is just appalling.
How about what can we stop doing? Stop doing.
It’s the Arctic Meltdown dun a nu nu da na na nu nu nu...the final count down
Wow. This is really 😴
It is 10,000 years late
Meh.... in the end, nothing really matters.
First 10 minutes waste time! loads b*s, no substance, lots thanks you, and titles ego work.
If you're a climatologist you are clueless
The earth warmed up 20,000 years ago because the cavemen discovered fire....
Oh boy .... what an ignorant comment.
@@godfreypigott ditto
@@drorbenami4827 Good to see that you agree that only 1 million humans could not possibly have the effect you claim. Apparently fire did not exist naturally on a much larger scale before humans tamed it.
Be Vegan ;)