More intensive and more accurate data coming, for fascists to deny. Odds this winds up on a twitter caucus chopping block right quick?
6 Likes
9 Likes
1 Like
I saw a documentary about this a long time ago
4 Likes
3 Likes
rising cocoa-prices are and will be the least of our problems the next 30 years.
and nobody in power will draw any consequences.
e/
The new study also confirms past concerns that climate models systematically overestimate the stability of the AMOC because they don’t accurately account for freshwater input, said Rahmstorf.
He said such model weaknesses are “Why, in my view, the IPCC has so far underestimated the risk of an AMOC collapse. The most recent climate assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, estimates the chances of an AMOC breakdown this century at less than 10 percent.
“The new study adds significantly to the rising concern about an AMOC collapse in the not too distant future,” Rahmstorf said. “We will ignore this risk at our peril.”
4 Likes
On the other hand, if you want people to (finally, finally) sit up and take notice, their being deprived of their precious Tropical commodities might be a meaningful nudge.
3 Likes
its fucking insane, isnt it?
5 Likes
aaaand SST is now literally off the charts;
Im out of words, and everything I would write right now could be misinterpreted as something self-harming. its not, its just…Im not quite yet at the last step of grief, where acceptance kicks in.
1 Like
1 Like
These are the climate grannies. They’ll do whatever it takes to protect their grandchildren.
4 Likes
I was looking for a place to post some pictures of this weekend’s walk in the wildlife refuge near me in Los Angeles. This place is about sea level, and does have a dam built nearby. But it’s rare to see this much water. The flooding did some damage. We could see where the backhoes had been in to clear out some of the brush. One of the photos shows brush blocking the way.
Is there someplace for nature type photos?
Also, check out the fish left behind. I’ll just post five.
7 Likes
Since you’re showing pictures after our deluge of rain, it’s appropriate here. But there is also this thead for outdoor pictures: Post Your Outdoor Recreation Pics
3 Likes
Thank you. That’s what I was looking for. I did try to stay in bounds of the topic for my question. 
6 Likes
AND … they moved the top of the graph
something like 21.25° now instead of 21.15°
2 Likes
if this is partly through recently desulphurisation of ship-fuel, then we are trapped in a another bitter catch22; it may be actually a termination shock.
1 Like
My money is still on the Tonga Eruption in 2022. The timing is right; the physics is plausible and still being worked out.
Whether it was a “tip-over” event or one that will leave us with a 5 to 10 year return to the established trend line is an open question.
I can see how tongas 150 million t of water injected into the stratosphere heats the atmosphere, but I fail to see the same for the oceans (how exactly should that even work? e/ ah, possibly through global energy imbalance, okaay…), and right now it seems the oceans heat the atmosphere, not the other way around.
e/ and the impact is -according to a study mentioned here- actually not that big, its in the context of, for example, el nino, almost nothing more than noise;
The model calculated the monthly change in Earth’s energy balance caused by the eruption and showed that water vapor could increase the average global temperature by up to 0.035°C over the next 5 years. That’s a large anomaly for a single event, but it’s not outside the usual level of noise in the climate system, Jenkins said.
e2/ on the other hand, it takes “only” 10-20 million t of sulphurdioxid into the stratosphere to cool the planet for 0.5°C for about 1-2 years, as shown by pinatubo 1991.
I found some notes on SO₂ at the EU Copernicus site, where they estimate:
shipping is only one of the SO2 emissions sources, and only accounts for 3.5% of global emissions, according to some estimates.
They cite an analysis reported in Carbon Brief which estimates the reduction in SO₂ emissions due to the shipping fuel is about 10% of emissions, so higher, and
the likely side-effect of the 2020 regulations to cut air pollution from shipping is to increase global temperatures by around 0.05C by 2050.
That gives us estimates in both cases, SO₂ and vulcanism, that are well short of what we need to explain the rise in SST. 
Further down that page they link to a July 2023 review of the North Atlantic SST heatwave to which I’ll gladly defer. (The update they did in September appears only to be observations, rather that an attempt at specific explanations.)
2 Likes
according to hansen, they underestimate the effects of the sulphur in the lower atmosphere over the dark waters of the oceans and make the fail to make their calculations on global average and not locally.
The new research, comprising peer-reviewed work of Hansen and more than a dozen other scientists, argues that this imbalance, the Earth’s greater climate sensitivity and a reduction in pollution from shipping, which has cut the amount of airborne sulphur particles that reflect incoming sunlight, are causing an escalation in global heating.
e/ there was actually quite the drop in manmade sulphurdioxide globaly from 2019 to 2021 of around 20 Mt. and its also albedo over water which gets less trough fewer “artificial” cloud-cover over shipping routes;
A global standard limiting sulfur in ship fuel reduced artificial “ship track” clouds to record-low levels in 2020
2 Likes
