Is this analysis of the probable long term effects of climate change logical?

[DennisTate]

Over in another forum I got a PM that I had to post to several discussions.

I personally think that this analysis is logical and basically correct.

I believe that we need to make some major changes.... some of them need to be
in how we view central banking policy!

Quote Originally Posted by AboveAlpha

We have passed a THRESHOLD as no matter what we do we have gone BEYOND THE POINT OF A FIX as far as CLIMATE CHANGE.

NOTHING we do from this point on will stop the melting of the Northern and Southern Polar Sea Ice and the Greenland Glaciers.

Here in lies the problem and if you want to learn more run a search on this.....CDIAC.....CARBON DIOXIDE INFORMATION ANALYSIS CENTER.

The CDIAC is a part of the U.S. DOE...DEPT. OF ENERGY'S OFFICE OF SCIENCE at Oak Ridge National Labs.

If you watch the top of the web page there is a chart and every 20 to 30 seconds or so the CHART CHANGES and will give you the WORLD'S MOST ACCURATE AND UNBIASED DATA concerning CO2, CH4...which is METHANE which exists at the bottom of all Earth's Ocean's Arctic Lakes and within Permafrost and Tundra and CH4 holds in HEAT in our Atmosphere at a rate of approx.71 TIMES GREATER THAN CO2

The CH4 at the bottom of the Oceans and in Permafrost and Arctic Lakes exists as CH4 GEL or Methane Gel.

The Human generated emmisions of CO2 have warmed up the Earth's Ocean's and thus Air to a point that is CAUSING THE GEL FORM CH4 TO BUBBLE UP AND OUT INTO OUR ATMOSPHERE AS METHANE GAS!!!

This is how DIRE the problem is....the U.S. DOE's Office of Science's CDIAC is the ONLY DATA the U.S. Military considers to be trustworthy and viable thus this data is imputted into either Banked and Networked IBM Supercomputers or is imputted into the U.S. Military's new QUANTUM COMPUTERS for ONE SOLE PURPOSE!!!

That purpose is TO PLAN FOR THE EVENTUALITY OF WORLDWIDE WAR OVER RESOURCES!!!

What is going to happen and NOT MAYBE HAPPEN but WILL HAPPEN is this......when too much FRSH WATER is dumped into the NORTH ATLANTIC CURRENT or GULF STREAM which is a OCEAN WATER HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEM.....as Warm Gulf of Mexico Water in a very strong current flows around the tip of Florida and up North up the East Coast and then angles across the Atlantic Ocean to the British Isles...which is by the U.K. which is further North than Massachusetts has much milder winters......

.....well the WARM WATER is LIGHTER and travels upon the top of the bottom COLD WATER THERMOCLINE....which is the COLD WATER flowing from the Arctic Ocean around Greenland and above the U.K. as this colder heavier water flows underneither the warmer lighter water coming up from the Gulf of Mexico......

......well there will come a day....SOON.....when the Earth has warmed up just a single degree to much and this will cause so much Polar and Greenland FRESH WATER ICE MELT....as the ICE that covers Greenland and the North Polar Arctic Ocean is FRESH WATER.....and because it is FRESH WATER....IT IS LIGHTER THAN OCEAN SALT WATER........

.......because of this when too much LIGHTER FRESH WATER MELTS AND IS DUMPED INTO THE NORTH ATLANTIC....as it is cold water but NOT SALT WATER....IT WILL WEIGH ROUGHLY ABOUT THE SAME WEIGHT AS THE WARM SALT WATER THAT IS FLOWING UP FROM THE GULF OF MEXICO AROUND THE TIP OF FLORIDA AND UP NORTH AND ACROSS THE ATLANTIC.

When this happens the Cold but FRESH WATER melted from Global Warming will STALL THE WARM SALT WATER TRAVELING NORTH FROM THE GULF OF MEXICO.

Thus warm water will stop flowing NORTH and the COLD WATER will STOP FLOWING SOUTH....as the COLD WATER will reach a point of desalinization so that it weighs the same as the WARM SALT WATER TRYING TO TRAVEL NORTH.

This will STALL THE NORTH ATLANTIC CURRENT'S HEAT TRANSFER SYSTEM!!!

And GUESS what happens next??

Have you ever watched the movie THE DAY AFTER TOMMORROW????

If you have....then you understand.

AboveAlpha

 

[DennisTate]

One important statistic to know is that the colossal amount of H2O being ADDED to the central part of Antarctica has so far....
saved us from being hit by rising ocean levels.

http://www.habtheory.com/1/100.php

At a symposium of the Union of Geodesy and geophysics, Dr. Pyyotor Shoumsky reported that the south polar ice cap was growing at a minimum rate of 293 cubic miles of ice annually. To put that number in perspective, Lake Erie contains only 109 cubic miles of water. Thus, a volume of ice forms on top of the existing ice at Antarctica each year which is almost three times the volume of water in Lake Erie!

But this will not continue forever and......
Every cubic meter of ocean water that is desalinated and added to the water table of North Africa or Qatar of Jordan or Israel...... will NOT be putting pressure on the oceans to overflow New Orleans, Bangladesh, The Netherlands and parts of Florida!

Japanese engineers don't merely design good cars!

http://www.ssb-foundation.com
Sahara Solar Breeder Foundation

 

[eclipsenow]

One important statistic to know is that the colossal amount of H2O being ADDED to the central part of Antarctica has so far....
saved us from being hit by rising ocean levels.

http://www.habtheory.com/1/100.php


But this will not continue forever and......
Every cubic meter of ocean water that is desalinated and added to the water table of North Africa or Qatar of Jordan or Israel...... will NOT be putting pressure on the oceans to overflow New Orleans, Bangladesh, The Netherlands and parts of Florida!

Japanese engineers don't merely design good cars!

http://www.ssb-foundation.com
Sahara Solar Breeder Foundation

It's the tightening of the Antarctic Vortex, the circular storm that sweeps around the south pole. It means huge bands of water that used to fall over South Australia as rain for Adelaide now fall as snow in Central Antarctica, leaving SA drier and hotter and Central Antarctica actually colder. Yes, while the global physics is an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs per second extra heat added, the local physics of extra energy in our atmosphere can counter-intuitively whip winds into different speeds or directions and make some regions colder. Or at least, move that cold around, as is the case with the Jet Streams 'drunk' on climate change that then wander south and dump Arctic weather across Canada and the northern US.

As for the survey question: NO, a tax will not do the job because here in Australia the ONLY answer is actually illegal. Energy sources that are MOSTLY OFF like wind and solar will only bankrupt our nation. But if backed by a mostly nuclear grid, solar could probably help take the edge of afternoon summer grids.

 

[DennisTate]

It's the tightening of the Antarctic Vortex, the circular storm that sweeps around the south pole. It means huge bands of water that used to fall over South Australia as rain for Adelaide now fall as snow in Central Antarctica, leaving SA drier and hotter and Central Antarctica actually colder. Yes, while the global physics is an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs per second extra heat added, the local physics of extra energy in our atmosphere can counter-intuitively whip winds into different speeds or directions and make some regions colder. Or at least, move that cold around, as is the case with the Jet Streams 'drunk' on climate change that then wander south and dump Arctic weather across Canada and the northern US.

As for the survey question: NO, a tax will not do the job because here in Australia the ONLY answer is actually illegal. Energy sources that are MOSTLY OFF like wind and solar will only bankrupt our nation. But if backed by a mostly nuclear grid, solar could probably help take the edge of afternoon summer grids.

This is an exceptionally good answer.

I think that you will enjoy the angle on all this that New Mexico, biologist and coach has taken.

Global Warming II by Carl Cantrell

“

So how is our problem of continental drying causing global warming? It all has to do with vegetation and sunlight. When sun light hits a plant, it causes a process which we call photosynthesis where the energy from the sun light creates oxygen for us to breath, water for us to drink, and is stored as sugar for plants and animals to use. When the same sun light hits the soil, all of its energy turns into heat and is radiated back into the atmosphere, carried away by running surface water such as rain fall, is carried away to other areas by our winds, and diffuses down into the soil towards the earth's crust. All of this warms our planet increasing its average temperature.”

“Therefore, the less vegetation you have on the planet, the more sunlight is being turned into heat and the warmer the planet becomes. This is very critical because warmer and dryer winds dry out other land areas faster decreasing the vegetation on those land areas. Less humidity in the air also reflects less sun light back out into space so that more sun light strikes the earth and more heat is generated….”

“The truth is that you can do more to decrease global warming by just reducing the average temperature for the Sahara Desert by one or two degrees than if we humans completely quit using fossil fuels and returned to the cave….”

“So, how would you start working to resolve this problem? Easy, cool the deserts and get some vegetation growing on them as soon as possible. But the method is much more complex than that. You have to use the prevailing trade winds in relation to the deserts to get the best results as quickly as possible and it will be extremely expensive….”

“Then we build desalination plants along the coast near these water sheds and pipe water to the tops or ridges of the water sheds…”

“This will do a number of things. First, it will increase the moisture in the desert soil so that it will develop water tables and water will begin to run in the streams. This water will increase the amount of vegetation in the area and decrease the amount of heat being generated by sun light cooling the watered area and all areas down wind of the watered area. As more available water evaporates, it will cool the air and reflect more sun light back out into space cooling the area even more. Cooler and more humid air will have less of a heating effect on areas down wind and will reflect more sun light back into space in those areas cooling areas we won't be watering yet. Cooler and more humid air will also have less of a warming effect on our seas and oceans.”

“Rain water running off of cooler soil will decrease the heating effect on our oceans and our planet crusts which will decrease catastrophic storm activities for other areas and seismic activity for the entire planet. Also, returning more ocean water to the surface and aquifers of our continents will lower the sea levels providing more usable land for us to farm and build on.”

“With cooler desert areas and increasing vegetation, less water will evaporate from our deserts increasing the amount of surface water even more and increasing the amount of vegetation and animal life by huge amounts because deserts currently take up more than 20% of our land surface. Populations will be able to spread out and there will be less competition for existing land areas.”

“This strategy has to be done in steps with the first step being to begin slowing the rate at which our global warming is increasing. We need to focus on that until we have brought it to a point to where the temperature is not increasing any more and is reasonably stable. While we are doing this, we need to come to a global consensus of just how cool we want to cool our planet down to. If we cool it down too much, we will begin to have devastatingly harsh winters in large populated areas and even cause an ice age to set in.”

“Then we begin cooling the planet down to a point which will be most beneficial for all countries or the planet as a whole. We need to gradually bring the temperature down because there may be a lag effect in which the planet will continue cooling after we stop increasing our efforts to cool it off more. We may even want to stop cooling the planet once or twice before we reach our targeted temperatures to see if there is a lag effect…”


“We need to start working on this as soon as possible because, if the planet reaches a point to where it is warming faster than our technology can possibly stop or reverse this warming trend, then our planet is lost and all life will cease to exist on this planet within a relatively short period of time. We will need to start with the largest and hottest deserts because cooling them will have the greatest benefit in the least time (Global Warming II by biologist Carl Cantrell).”

 

[eclipsenow]

This is an exceptionally good answer.

I think that you will enjoy the angle on all this that New Mexico, biologist and coach has taken.

Global Warming II by Carl Cantrell

“

Let me guess, that was written by a biologist, not a climatologist? His thinking about sunlight being converted into sugar is very biology sounding, but a climatologist would just measure the albedo of green forest cover verses the albedo of deserts. It's physics, not biology. EG: The polar ice caps don't have any green, but deflect 90% of the short wave sunlight. As that melts because of CO2 actually trapping heat the way the physicists can show us it does (at 4 Hiroshima bombs per second!), gradually the ice retreats, and seawater traps 90% of the incoming short wave sunlight and converts it to outgoing longwave heat. This is then bounced back by the CO2.

Here's albedo for kids, and it explains:

Albedo is a measure of the tendency of a surface to absorb and re-emit incoming radiation, and thus lower its own temperature. Its value ranges from 0% (for an object which absorbs all radiation) to 100% (for an object which reflects all radiation). Powdered charcoal has a low albedo; whilst, a mirror has a relatively high albedo. The albedo of an object can be used to help determine it's chemicalcomposition. Every molecule of every substance has its own albedo, but albedo can also refer to a collection of very many objects, and can even be applied to objects of a very large scale, such as the planet Earth, which has an albedo of 37-39%....

....the college weather station at Fairbanks[?], Alaska, is about 3°C (5°F) warmer than the airport at Fairbanks, partly because of drainage patterns but also largely because of the lower albedo at the college resulting from a higher concentration of pinetrees and therefore less open snowy ground to reflect the heat back into space.

http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/al/Albedo​

In other words, while your biologist has whacky theories about sunlight and sugar, in some contexts plants can WARM an environment, not cool it, because their albedo (reflectivity) is lower than snow!

The other thing: plants absorb CO2 as they grow, and if we plant heaps of trees to soak up all that CO2 (and then find ways to turn them into wooden skyscrapers which are a thing now!), we could soak up CO2 as wood for centuries in our cities. (No, they're not a fire risk!) But the price tag of desalinating enough seawater to fill the Sahara and Australian outback with trees?

3.5 TRILLION a year! (below). Far better to do what the French did.
1. Nationalise power
2. Fast track nukes
3. Sit back and enjoy the world's cleanest, most abundant electricity without all the health costs and become the highest exporter of electricity in the world! Yep. The French showed us the way decades ago.

*****

My price tag for the desalinated water comes from page 416 of the PDF below.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-009-9626-y
It would cost $43 per ‘barrel’ of Carbon.

A ‘barrel’ is 0.11 Ton C (Carbon, or 110kg Carbon).

Humans emit 9 billion tons C a year.

9 billion / barrels (0.11 Tons C) = 81.818,181,818 ‘barrels’ of Carbon a year.

At $43 / barrel, that’s $3.5 trillion a year!

 

[DennisTate]

Let me guess, that was written by a biologist, not a climatologist? His thinking about sunlight being converted into sugar is very biology sounding, but a climatologist would just measure the albedo of green forest cover verses the albedo of deserts. It's physics, not biology. EG: The polar ice caps don't have any green, but deflect 90% of the short wave sunlight. As that melts because of CO2 actually trapping heat the way the physicists can show us it does (at 4 Hiroshima bombs per second!), gradually the ice retreats, and seawater traps 90% of the incoming short wave sunlight and converts it to outgoing longwave heat. This is then bounced back by the CO2.

Here's albedo for kids, and it explains:

Albedo is a measure of the tendency of a surface to absorb and re-emit incoming radiation, and thus lower its own temperature. Its value ranges from 0% (for an object which absorbs all radiation) to 100% (for an object which reflects all radiation). Powdered charcoal has a low albedo; whilst, a mirror has a relatively high albedo. The albedo of an object can be used to help determine it's chemicalcomposition. Every molecule of every substance has its own albedo, but albedo can also refer to a collection of very many objects, and can even be applied to objects of a very large scale, such as the planet Earth, which has an albedo of 37-39%....

....the college weather station at Fairbanks[?], Alaska, is about 3°C (5°F) warmer than the airport at Fairbanks, partly because of drainage patterns but also largely because of the lower albedo at the college resulting from a higher concentration of pinetrees and therefore less open snowy ground to reflect the heat back into space.

http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/al/Albedo​

In other words, while your biologist has whacky theories about sunlight and sugar, in some contexts plants can WARM an environment, not cool it, because their albedo (reflectivity) is lower than snow!

The other thing: plants absorb CO2 as they grow, and if we plant heaps of trees to soak up all that CO2 (and then find ways to turn them into wooden skyscrapers which are a thing now!), we could soak up CO2 as wood for centuries in our cities. (No, they're not a fire risk!) But the price tag of desalinating enough seawater to fill the Sahara and Australian outback with trees?

3.5 TRILLION a year! (below). Far better to do what the French did.
1. Nationalise power
2. Fast track nukes
3. Sit back and enjoy the world's cleanest, most abundant electricity without all the health costs and become the highest exporter of electricity in the world! Yep. The French showed us the way decades ago.

*****

My price tag for the desalinated water comes from page 416 of the PDF below.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-009-9626-y
It would cost $43 per ‘barrel’ of Carbon.

A ‘barrel’ is 0.11 Ton C (Carbon, or 110kg Carbon).

Humans emit 9 billion tons C a year.

9 billion / barrels (0.11 Tons C) = 81.818,181,818 ‘barrels’ of Carbon a year.

At $43 / barrel, that’s $3.5 trillion a year!

Thank you for these exceptionally well thought out comments on this topic.

I have actually campaigned for public office three times already and plan to do so again in
the near future.

At a meeting several years ago I met a man who claimed to be an expert on the environment.

He asked me if I knew which one nation on earth had experienced COOLING in its climate in
these past six decades. I guessed Israel.... and he said that I was correct!

I made that guess based on the fact that Israel, on a per capita basis,
led the world in planting trees and in desalinating ocean water for reforestation,
agriculture and for towns............

Your criticism of Mr. Carl Cantrell's theory makes sense......
but he could still be onto an idea that has potential.........

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/dr-chaim-henry-tejman-on-climate-change.7648528/

Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman on climate change!

I certainly am in agreement with Dr. Tejman that trees will play a vital role in climate stabilization!


Global Warming

Our environment is obviously undergoing major changes, and I believe that trees have a vital role in the atmospheric balance. Trees possess the ability to absorb much of the incoming energy. Gradually, trees that have absorbed energy submerge beneath the ground and turn into coal. Mankind is presently consuming unprecedented amounts of energy. Instead of storing the energy, like nature, we are releasing it into the atmosphere. Therefore, an international effort must be made to stop cutting down trees and to plant as many more as possible.

From what I have read the deforestation in Brazil is probably one of the most astonishingly destructive things taking place on this third rock!

 

[eclipsenow]

Thank you for these exceptionally well thought out comments on this topic.

I have actually campaigned for public office three times already and plan to do so again in
the near future.

At a meeting several years ago I met a man who claimed to be an expert on the environment.

He asked me if I knew which one nation on earth had experienced COOLING in its climate in
these past six decades. I guessed Israel.... and he said that I was correct!

I made that guess based on the fact that Israel, on a per capita basis,
led the world in planting trees and in desalinating ocean water for reforestation,
agriculture and for towns............

Your criticism of Mr. Carl Cantrell's theory makes sense......
but he could still be onto an idea that has potential.........

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/dr-chaim-henry-tejman-on-climate-change.7648528/

Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman on climate change!

I certainly am in agreement with Dr. Tejman that trees will play a vital role in climate stabilization!


Global Warming


From what I have read the deforestation in Brazil is probably one of the most astonishingly destructive things taking place on this third rock!

He wants to grow trees to form coal? My goodness. Where to start? Sorry, but Dr Chaim is not really explaining himself very well at all. It takes millions of years for trees to lock CO2 up as coal, and we simply don't have that time. No, if I were you I'd stick to reading what peer-reviewed climate scientists say we should be doing. Don't get me wrong, I'd love the world to stop deforestation and increase tree planting for so many reasons. Especially if we're planting hardwoods for future skyscrapers! Wood skyscrapers are a thing now, and a large scale movement of society towards using superior wooden cross-beams for superstructures of wooden skyscrapers would lock an enormous amount of CO2 away for centuries.

But just planting trees is not a solution for climate change. There's only one. The mass deployment of nuclear power. Because nuclear power is controversial I think it should be rolled out by the state ASAP. It's the only way.

 

[[serious]]

Over in another forum I got a PM that I had to post to several discussions.

I personally think that this analysis is logical and basically correct.

I believe that we need to make some major changes.... some of them need to be
in how we view central banking policy!

It seems to be a mashup of several different concepts, so there isn't a single answer here. Quick and dirty response to several concepts the poster discusses:

1. "Methane gun" hypothesis: The idea is that rising temps will trigger a relatively sudden methane release causing very extreme warming and potentially destroying most life on earth. This one is exceedingly unlikely. potential methane deposits are far too deep to react quickly to atmospheric temperature changes.
2. Stalling of ocean currents in the atlantic. It's plausible that melt water from primarily greenland could result in changes to the gulf stream. The gulf stream does seem to be slowing as I recall. A full stall is unlikely though.
3. Day after tomorrow style ice age. Flat out impossible. My guess is they were looking at ideas about the above gulf stream changes causing a temperature drop in Europe and assumed that it would be a global issue. Speaking of, best sources I've seen seem to indicate that cooling from such a shutdown would be smaller than the increase from warming.

Now, as far as some effects of global warming being unavoidable at this point, that's 100% accurate. However, that does not mean we shouldn't do anything about it. If your house is on fire you don't say, "well, my house is already on fire, no sense doing anything about it" you call the fire department and minimize the damage.

 

[DennisTate]

It's the tightening of the Antarctic Vortex, the circular storm that sweeps around the south pole. It means huge bands of water that used to fall over South Australia as rain for Adelaide now fall as snow in Central Antarctica, leaving SA drier and hotter and Central Antarctica actually colder. Yes, while the global physics is an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs per second extra heat added, the local physics of extra energy in our atmosphere can counter-intuitively whip winds into different speeds or directions and make some regions colder. Or at least, move that cold around, as is the case with the Jet Streams 'drunk' on climate change that then wander south and dump Arctic weather across Canada and the northern US.

As for the survey question: NO, a tax will not do the job because here in Australia the ONLY answer is actually illegal. Energy sources that are MOSTLY OFF like wind and solar will only bankrupt our nation. But if backed by a mostly nuclear grid, solar could probably help take the edge of afternoon summer grids.

Good post!

And solar does seem to be improving based on what I have read about
The Sahara Forest Project, (Norway, Jordan, Qatar and Tunisia)
The Sahara Solar Breeder Project, (Japan and North Africa)

 

[DennisTate]

Here is some wonderful news that indicates that my well informed friend who I quote in the opening post may soon be proven to be partly incorrect.


Graphene screens and low cost desalination of ocean water.

 

[FireDragon76]

One thing that causes deserts is not just a lack of water but also the salinity of the soil, due to irrigation practices. This was particularly a problem in Egypt and Mesopotamia.

 

[DennisTate]

One thing that causes deserts is not just a lack of water but also the salinity of the soil, due to irrigation practices. This was particularly a problem in Egypt and Mesopotamia.

True... but the Dr. Geoff Lawton Permaculture research in Jordan gives us hope that that problem can be solved fairly easily.

 

[DennisTate]

One thing that causes deserts is not just a lack of water but also the salinity of the soil, due to irrigation practices. This was particularly a problem in Egypt and Mesopotamia.

For sure.......
those Graphene screens may be the answer to that problem and
there is also another option that could be applied in most nations of the world.

Tony Lovell on Soil Carbon: Putting Carbon Back Where It Belongs - In the Earth (TEDx video) - The Permaculture Research Institute

TONY LOVELL ON SOIL CARBON: PUTTING CARBON BACK WHERE IT BELONGS – IN THE EARTH (TEDX VIDEO)

I love the nice progression of logic in this presentation. Running the numbers like this shows not only how powerful a carbon sink our earth’s soils can be, under the right management, but also just how futile and what a goose-chasing diversion most contemporary technological ‘fixes’ for climate change really are.


When you see the upwardly stepped red line (10:32) showing the seasonal rise and fall of CO2 concentrations (zigzagging seasonally due to the massive intake of CO2 by the northern hemisphere’s deciduous forests over the north’s summer months), try to imagine how that line could peak and begin to step downwardly. It can happen — with holistic education aimed at a widespread effort towards large-scale rehabilitation of our soils; be they deserts, savannahs, scrub lands, set-asides, farms and gardens. Rapid revegetation can put our CO2 rich skies back into balance — pulling the carbon down into our soils, where it becomes a source of fertility, and thus even more vegetation…. The cycle of stupidity, that is our current carbon cycle, can thus become a cycle of stability, health and prosperity.

And, in case you think it can’t be done, consider that we’ve actually cooled the earth before — and not that long ago. Take a look at what is now termed the ‘little ice age’, which ran approximately from 1350 to 1850AD. Over these centuries there were a few significant dips in average global temperatures, and there is a lot of evidence to show that these cooling periods were caused by rapid regional revegetation in Europe, Eurasia and the Americas. In this case the rapid revegetation was caused, not by the work of such educational institutes as our own, but rather because of a sudden die-off of human population numbers, due to disease.

 

[eclipsenow]

A good dose of biochar would help the soils as well. And yes, the global cooling event after the Black Plague is well documented and I have seen it in history documentaries.

 

[DennisTate]

A good dose of biochar would help the soils as well. And yes, the global cooling event after the Black Plague is well documented and I have seen it in history documentaries.

Which sure seems to back up the Carl Cantrell theory that I quoted in my 2008 campaign writing.

www.BankingSystemsFlaws.blogspot.ca/

 

[DennisTate]

Here is a great video by Tony Lovell:

 

[eclipsenow]

I love the attention to detail on the interactions on biological systems, but my problem is that the IPCC said managed soil might sequester 1 to 4 billion tonnes per year. But extracting 575 billion tonnes is still going to take 143 years at the top estimate of that! I think we also need to look at massive biochar schemes everywhere we grow crops. Then there's this.

Kelp farming could FIX THE OCEANS
Bren Smith has pioneered vertical kelp farming with shellfish at the bottom. It could feed the world *many* times over, easily feeding 10 or 11 billion people. It will also clean up our oceans, soak up excess nutrient flows from agriculture, and stimulate fisheries and ocean ecosystems to grow. TED talk here.

Kelp farming could FERTILISE FARMING
While kelp itself can be eaten in various salads and fried snacks and sushi, we can also harvest kelp for fertiliser for our cereal crops like corn, wheat, rice, etc. We could biochar it to improve soil quality. We can use kelp to recapture nutrients flushed out to sea and return NPK to our farms, creating a sustainable supply of non-mineral phosphorus! Kelp farming requires "no fresh water, no deforestation, and no fertilizer – all significant downsides to land-based farming – these ocean farms promise to be more sustainable than even the most environmentally-sensitive traditional farms."
The Coming Green Wave: Ocean Farming to Fight Climate Change

Kelp farming could IMPROVE CATTLE GAINS
Some seaweeds can supplement cow diets to eliminate their methane burps! Cattle methane is not only bad for climate change, but can lose 15% of the cow's potential growth!
Seaweed could hold the key to cutting methane emissions from cow burps

Kelp farming could REPLACE CATTLE?
Now it gets crazy. We can turn kelp into meat! Vat-grown stem-cell meat is nearly economical. That is real meat, without hurting a single cow or chicken or pig or turkey.
Lab grown meat prices have dropped 30,000 times in less than four years and are about 3-4 times more expensive than regular ground beef | NextBigFuture.com
That would mean all the meat we could want, from the oceans!
Price of Lab-Grown Burger Falls from $325K to $11.36
We use about a third of the non-ice surface of the land for animal grazing. Imagine handing that back to nature, to agroforestry, to beautiful hardwoods for furniture or to new managed ecosystems for threatened species. Imagine being able to feed the world while healing the land? That is the promise of kelp, all in an open-sourced vertical farming plan from Bren Smith. HOME

Kelp farming could FIX CLIMATE CHANGE BY 2085!
The following paper looks at recycling kelp nutrients out in the less fertile areas of the ocean to scale up kelp farming to cover 9% of the world's oceans! The in-situ nutrient recycling also separates out and buries the CO2 at sea in large plastic bladders (made from kelp syngas which would also replace a *lot* of the world's oil requirements with carbon negative energy), restoring our atmospheric carbon to a safe 350ppm by 2085!
Process Safety and Environmental Protection - ScienceDirect.com

 

[DennisTate]

A good dose of biochar would help the soils as well. And yes, the global cooling event after the Black Plague is well documented and I have seen it in history documentaries.

I guess this is one of the reasons why a number of intellectuals have been discussing a seventy to ninety percent depopulation of the earth.

 

[eclipsenow]

I guess this is one of the reasons why a number of intellectuals have been discussing a seventy to ninety percent depopulation of the earth.

Well, that's a bit of a myth. IPAT cuts both ways, as a multiplier of harm and as a divider. I discuss it more here.
Reduce population growth

 

[DennisTate]

This response to a related discussion was so insightful that I think it fits in perfectly here.

Are rising ocean levels greatest threat from climate change.

Four years later...

I live in an arctic country north of 60 degrees and next door to Russian taiga and tundra. One third of my country is located above the Arctic Circle and every third person living above the Arctic Circle in the world is a fellow Finn.

If a macho man like Vladimir Vlamirovitch Putin himself is worried enough to admit it aloud and call it a natural security threat, you can bet we are a lot more than just a little bit concerned about what's happening to our planet. 77% of Finns name climate change as the most serious threat and want the government to do more to combat it. Our conservative President names it as the #1 most serious threat to our country, and of the eight presidential candidates for 2018 election, no less than five list climate change as one of the most important issues.

I say planet, not country, for the very reason that Finland is estimated to be one of the very few "winners" of accelerating climate change, a country where the harms are offset by new advantages.

Water, water, every where,
Nor any drop to drink.​

When the rest of the world will be drowning in melt water but without a drop of clean fresh water to drink or use for irrigation, we will feel sorry for you all -- and sell water to you like Saudis currently sell oil.