Home | About | Donate

'We Have Less Time Than We Thought': Alarming New Study Shows Oceans Have Retained Far More Heat Than Previously Believed

#1

'We Have Less Time Than We Thought': Alarming New Study Shows Oceans Have Retained Far More Heat Than Previously Believed

Common Dreams staff

Offering a stark warning that humanity may have even less time to drastically cut carbon emissions than the United Nations suggested in its latest alarming report on the climate crisis, new research (pdf) published in the journal Nature on Wednesday shows that Earth's oceans have retained 60 percent more heat each year over the past 25 years than scientists previously believed.

6 Likes
#2

The Trump administration’s continued ignorance and lack of action is wholly unacceptable,

How about we become a tsunami of rebellion so we can start to repair and restore our eco-systems? The 60% of the Colorado population who support the state amendment 74 need to hear how we will sue them. Selfishness in the face of such a collective threat should not be tolerated. Write letters to any of the Colorado papers, contact and flood the phones of all those in congress who enable the climate deniers and fossil fuel corporations.

5 Likes
#3

I remember reading about this several years ago on geoengineeringwatch.org. It was a study which was listed as a source of an article if i remember correctly. Dane Wigington has also talked about it repeatedly.
None of this is new information, it has simply been ignored for as long as it was possible to do so.

9 Likes
#4

Too late now as this Extinction Event scenario could have been prevented decades ago. Let the Rich live underground in their Bunkers, and feast on each other when their food and water supply are gone. Too bad we won’t be here to witness it!

11 Likes
#5

Future headline? WE HAVE WAITED TOO LONG, NO TIME LEFT!

6 Likes
#6

Only 58 views here. I guess folks don’t want to read the bad news and I can’t say that I blame them. Be happy, spend lots of time with your family and friends and maybe thinking about working less for the man.

18 Likes
#7

This should make Bolsonaro & Trump go for a swim. It will be more terrifying than Jaws.

2 Likes
#8

Let Michael Brune, as a world leader in the environmental movement, lead the way by ending the Sierra Club’s international trips.

#9

I’m afraid that’s already the headline.

8 Likes
#10

I am very worried about Fukushima—because it’s still throwing out nuclear ick into the ocean. I won’t even eat tuna anymore because those giant fish swim by that travesty of a human made disaster. The oceans are heating? Well I suppose all that plastic adds to it too-----but does anyone know exactly what Fukushima has been doing in all that time? It’s still leaking horror into the water! What does that to to the world’s ocean? Could that be melting the ice too?

8 Likes
#11

We know what to do. What’s it going to take?

4 Likes
#12

Bad idea. The trips motivate people to protect places they would otherwise never experience. I would rather see people end their international trips for shopping.

4 Likes
#13

It’s all about the science…

4 Likes
#15

And the C02 added to the atmosphere from burning fossil fuel to power their trip deteriorates the place they go to “save”. Look at Mt. Everest. Your response is classical imperial racism. Besides Sierra Clubbers shop on those trips.

1 Like
#16

An empty hat would appear “primed” with a few dollars. Gradually more and more money was somehow added to the hat. No one knew how that amount continued to grow. It was truly a mystery as the amount of cash in the hat continued to increase. Then one day the hat full of cash just disappeared. So did the Second Lieutenant. No one seemed to know or care what happened to the hat full of cash or the Second Lieutenant.

1 Like
#17

Yeah you know it is bad when you don’t hear about it.

1 Like
#18

“This global crisis demands nothing less than swift and meaningful action by every world leader to ensure a safe and healthy future for all.”
—Michael Brune, Sierra Club

The statement is fine, except I’m looking diligently for the “swift”, the “meaningful” and the “action” parts.

The Arctic is melting down. Maybe 100 million years of hydrocarbons have been deposited in the permafrost and in the methane clathrates along the Arctic Ocean’s continental shelf. The action of this stuff getting loose shall eventually drive our greenhouse gases to about 1000 ppm, which is catastrophic.

I want environmental organizations to care about this likely disaster. See no evil speak no evil is wrong, so don’t clam up so much.

If your neighborhood is downwind from a brush fire on a windy day, you call the public fire department. In practice you’ll never say, “but fire is a natural ecological thing.” Instead you’ll want to save your house. Using the same logic, the Arctic meltdown demands that we form a public Arctic meltdown department and inhibit the catastrophe well before it happens, not suddenly call a world emergency at the last minute.

If humanity wants to stop and possibly reverse the big meltdown, then humanity will look for ecologically rather benign ways of doing the job. I recommend two devices:

  1. Floating wind-powered salt water pumps running when the temperature is 40 below zero will locally create more ice. Building a lot of them will do half the job.

  2. Wind-powered snowmaking machines will coat small pieces of tundra with snow in late spring and in early fall. That will do the other half of the job.

As for destroying the fossil fuel industry, the big three targets are self-heating houses, nighttime electricity generation and transit.

I’m hoping to have a ‘sunrise’ ceremony for my off-grid zero fuel self-heating 12 month warm weather crop greenhouse next Wednesday! I have my own personal standards for “swift and meaningful action.” Oh, and my wrist hurts a bit tonight. Too much pouring concrete posts, and I’m too old for this work. How about you? Want to change the world?

Nighttime electricity will be cheap and easy when solar power towers become twice as cheap and when they have zero bird kill issues. Well, I’m an inventor with ideas. We simply need to reflect ten suns or less at one time into the heat retention area, and the bird kill problems are gone and that’s the end of the other half of the natural gas industry.

Transit is harder but only because it costs more money, not because we can’t get lifetime 90% less energy use per passenger mile (yes, including the freeway construction energy costs!) and get almost all of that energy from renewable electricity.

There’s a reason why we are going to have a world that chroncally won’t grow much food anymore, and that reason is because the climate change lobbying groups never, ever want to fight for R&D in the above named fields. The Koch brothers will always fight against any R&D that destroys their industry and bankrupts them. Your environmental organizations may have to pry the critical patents and critical R&D from their cold, dead hands, and given where climate change is going, that might just be the way things turn out for them. So, kick your org into gear early, please.

If you work at a university, shove and protest your college into doing the work that may well save your own great grandchildren from a slow, terrible chronic starvation. For starters, try to build small prototypes of those two Arctic machines described above. What have you got to lose? Your job?

So, if university test-graders (sometimes called “professors”) are all too cowardly to do the R&D, we then need a committee of honestly brave fundraisers to build a climate R&D funding organization. If we can have giant cancer-causing companies funding cancer research, why not inhibit and then stop the great Arctic meltdown?

Folks, why, if we don’t have time, do we have so much time to waste?

2 Likes
#19

HI sklendhiu: Oh that is sooooo depressing. The ignore it-- and it doesn’t exist philosophy. : (

2 Likes
#20

I stopped eating Pacific fish soon after Fukushima.

We know from H-bomb testing in the South Pacific that when krill (think shrimp or little lobsters) consume the radioactive cesium and other isotopes with fairly long half-lives, they often don’t live that long and then their heavy exoskeleton shells carry their bodies down to the bottom of the ocean. In this way, the top of the ocean mostly clears itself of radioactive isotopes and the surface fish get somewhat safer for humans to eat in a few years. I might just start eating Pacific fish again in one more year. We’ll see.

#21

HI PaulK, maybe this is what’s killing all the whales. : (

2 Likes