Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#11

Post by _Microft »

mjevans wrote: post #10

On the slim bright side; The 'northwest passage' (It seems to be the Northern Sea Route) is viable and might save some fuel emissions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Passage

The width of this slim bright side you talk about - is it epsilon?

The harm done by ships travelling the northwest passge might outweigh any emission savings (there - not in total). Carbon dioxide emissions are a rather non-localized problem while soot, spilled oil, invasive species, noise pollution and you name it, are very localized problems.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#12

Post by kortilla »

bamboozled wrote: post #6
irrational wrote: post #2

I feel terrible for the polar bears. I wonder if there is any possibility that they wont go extinct.

You should probably also feel bad for every living create on earth including for yourself. Their extinction is likely a sign ours might not be so far behind. Edit: Go for the down vote, but the uncomfortable truth is that we're not likely to colonize Mars in 50 years or live underground, we need the biosphere just like these creatures. No level of denial will alter this fact.

At our current rate humans won’t face extinction for thousands of years. We don’t need a biosphere to live in a 5C warmer planet.

What will happen is likely massive unrest and famine due to crop shortages leading to a significant population decline. But we can lose 80% of the population and barely be set back 1-2 centuries.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#13

Post by feralimal »

deanCommie wrote: post #7
feralimal wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But numbers are increasing! https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/03/05/study-polar-bear-num... So, don't worry!

Shame on you: * https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/climate-depot/ > ClimateDepot.com is the website of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) employee Marc Morano, a conservative global warming denier who previously served as environmental communications director for a vocal political denier of climate change, Republican Sen. James Inhofe.

I know nothing about climate depot. But I think the studies it is citing are valid, no?

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#14

Post by rcMgD2BwE72F »

mjevans wrote: post #10

On the slim bright side; The 'northwest passage' (It seems to be the Northern Sea Route) is viable and might save some fuel emissions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Passage

That is if we ignore the Jevons effect: "In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress or government policy increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the rate of consumption of that resource rises due to increasing demand." https://web.archive.org/web/20150529111127/http://sspp.proqu...

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#15

Post by CalRobert »

I would be curious if anyone can give a scientific analysis of the "Blue Ocean Event" theory. If you apply heat to a pot of water that has ice cubes, most of the energy goes to melting the ice, and once the ice is melted the remaining water warms much more quickly. Are we not due for similar abrupt disruption when the ice finally disappears?

I've tried to find any strong support or criticism of this idea but haven't come up with anything thorough.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#16

Post by nickff »

deanCommie wrote: post #7
feralimal wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But numbers are increasing! https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/03/05/study-polar-bear-num... So, don't worry!

Shame on you: * https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/climate-depot/ > ClimateDepot.com is the website of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) employee Marc Morano, a conservative global warming denier who previously served as environmental communications director for a vocal political denier of climate change, Republican Sen. James Inhofe.

I think the parent poster was being sarcastic; either way, you're engaging in an ad hominiem attack.

Wouldn't it be better to point out that it is normal for animal populations to fluctuate, or that this is likely a transient phenomenon? Perhaps you could find a study or two to buttress your view?

Your comment is more likely to alienate people than to convince them, though perhaps your objective is to improve your status among like-minded people, rather than to engage with an outgroup.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#17

Post by dependsontheq »

CalRobert wrote: post #15

I would be curious if anyone can give a scientific analysis of the "Blue Ocean Event" theory. If you apply heat to a pot of water that has ice cubes, most of the energy goes to melting the ice, and once the ice is melted the remaining water warms much more quickly. Are we not due for similar abrupt disruption when the ice finally disappears? I've tried to find any strong support or criticism of this idea but haven't…

I'ts not a lot of ice compared to the ocean. A bigger problem is that ice reflects light and in this way keeps the temperature down.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#18

Post by fnord123 »

deanCommie wrote: post #5
irrational wrote: post #2

I feel terrible for the polar bears. I wonder if there is any possibility that they wont go extinct.

I remain optimistic that the human race will figure things out before we completely decimate all ocean life and before we make half of the planet inhospitable. However, I am certain the powers that be will not take any action until MAJOR death waves in the western world such as the destruction of a major picturesque city from a freak weather event. Before that, I expect we will lose: * Polar bears * Wild Tuna * Wild…

If I understand your position correctly, you are optimistic that the human race will figure things out once a huge number of [poor] people are killed?

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#19

Post by anaganisk »

kortilla wrote: post #12
bamboozled wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should probably also feel bad for every living create on earth including for yourself. Their extinction is likely a sign ours might not be so far behind. Edit: Go for the down vote, but the uncomfortable truth is that we're not likely to colonize Mars in 50 years or live underground, we need the biosphere just like these creatures. No level of denial will alter this fact.

At our current rate humans won’t face extinction for thousands of years. We don’t need a biosphere to live in a 5C warmer planet. What will happen is likely massive unrest and famine due to crop shortages leading to a significant population decline. But we can lose 80% of the population and barely be set back 1-2 centuries.

Its mother Nature b we're talking about, no level of optimism can predict what can go wrong.

Re: German ship completes historic Arctic expedition

#20

Post by nickff »

CalRobert wrote: post #15

I would be curious if anyone can give a scientific analysis of the "Blue Ocean Event" theory. If you apply heat to a pot of water that has ice cubes, most of the energy goes to melting the ice, and once the ice is melted the remaining water warms much more quickly. Are we not due for similar abrupt disruption when the ice finally disappears? I've tried to find any strong support or criticism of this idea but haven't…

Interesting question, it relates to the heat of fusion of water ice.[1] I think the issue is that there just isn't that much ice on Earth, so its heat capacity (which is somewhat proportional to its temperature) dominates the equation. Here's the information you'd need to do the math yourself:

>"It has been estimated that there are 1,386 million cubic kilometres (333,000,000 cubic miles) of water on Earth.[6] This includes water in liquid and frozen forms in groundwater, oceans, lakes and streams. Saltwater accounts for 97.5% of this amount, whereas fresh water accounts for only 2.5%. Of this fresh water, 68.9% is in the form of ice and permanent snow cover in the Arctic, the Antarctic and mountain glaciers; 30.8% is in the form of fresh groundwater; and only 0.3% of the fresh water on Earth is in easily accessible lakes, reservoirs and river systems."[2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_fusion

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosphere#cite_note-Shikloma...

Post reply on HN