If this global warming proceeds will there be a significant accelerating at some point?

Question

And when will we see that. And will it be reversible with a great and concerted world effort? And which world governments will be most challenged and possibly fail? Which of you futurists see what is over the horizon? Oh yes, and who is indifferent and who is not?

Answer 1

That is not clear. There are some factors that could accelerate global warming. One,ovviously, would be continued increases in CO2 emissions.

But there are some collateral effects that may make the warming worse. Here's three:
>the oceans have been absorbing much of the excessCO2--butthey are reaching a saturation point (already have, in some areas). when tha tpointis reached, moreCO2 would stay in the air,accelerating gw.
>extensive loss of polar ice means that there is less toreflect the sun's radiation--meaning more heat will be absorbed.
>this one is a bit complicated--bearwith me.There areextensivemethane depositsunderthe frozen tundrainthe Artic (Siberia). Methane is 20 times as good a greenhouse gas as CO2. If the global warming reaches the point that the permafrost layers melt, tha tmethane will be released. The good news is tha tmethanebreaks down fairly quickly--about 10 years. Thebad news is tha tgeologists tell us this has happened in Earth's past due to natural warming cycles. The last time (several million years ago) the resulting temperature spike killed appproximately 50% of all living things.

Can we reverse/prevent these scenarios. Yes--in the sense that changing the way we produce energy (get away from fossil fuels) will, along with halting defrestation, stop the mechanismtha tis driving most of the global warming. That will take time--it took decades to make this mess and it won't go away overnight no matter what we do. But it's doable. And would be an economicplus--modernforms of enrgy production (nuclear,solar,wind)are alsocheaper to operate, lowering energy costs andhelpingeconomicgrowth.

But--if the hypothesis aboutmethane releas is correct (andletmeemphasize, this is a hypothesis, not proven fact) and melting were to release that methane, thereisnothingwe cando except wait it out and try to survive untilthe methane breaks down (and a lot of us won't- make it). If the hypotheseis is correct, we either stop global warming short of that point--orwe've had it.

Answer 2

the breaking point for the acceleraton, where the rate of change, is now estimated to be around the turn of the current century. That seems a bit optimistic to me. even this slow melt down will have increased effects of droughts, forest fires, hotter summers and growing deserts. and places like new orleans and sri lanka will be regular disasters in the stormy season. the soon-to-be inevitable disaster will strain the economies of most every nation. but some will fare far better than others. that matters in the geo political sense.

these "slight" changes year by year in the immediate future will topple governments and change the world order. they don't tell you this at CNN or the BBC. we can wait, then we can all cringe together and wait for it to get worse while the leaders concentrate on growing business and immigration of cheaper labor. the leaders would sell the old grannies because they do not hestitate to sell their souls.

read "a pact with the devil" by al gore.

Answer 3

Yes.

The biggest tipping point will come when the ocean becomes so warm that instead of absorbing some of the CO2 that we create, it will start outgassing back CO2 that we created in the 20th century. This is currently projected to happen sometime around 2100. If we don't have a handle on our CO2 emissions by that time, climate change will accelerate rapidly, and we're all screwed.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11089968&dopt=Citation

Answer 4

Yes, at some point we will begin to trigger various natural feedbacks. Some examples:

The more ice melts, the warmer the planet will get because ice reflects sunlight while dark oceans absorb it. Less ice means a warmer planet means even less ice means an even warmer planet, etc. etc.

CO2 is less soluble in warmer water, so at some point the oceans will not be able to absorb as much CO2. This means more CO2 accumulating in the atmosphere, which means more warming, which means even less ocean CO2 absorption, more in the atmosphere, more warming yet, etc. etc.

Methane is trapped in the permafrost in Siberia and elsewhere. As this permafrost melts, the methane (a very strong greenhouse gas - 24 times more than CO2) gets released into the atmosphere, increses warming, melts more permafrost, etc. etc.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2006-09-06-permafrost-warming_x.htm

Generally the "tipping point" for a runaway greenhouse effect which will be beyond our capability of stopping is proposed to be around 3-4°C warmer than today. The IPCC worst case scenario (which is unfortunately the scenario we're currently meeting) says we will have a 6.4°C warming by 2100. So we could very well trigger this runaway greenhouse effect this century.

If we trigger it, we will not be able to reverse it. However, we can avoid triggering it by reducing emissions in the meantime, before we get to the trigger point.

Answer 5

individuals can only unite and urge cooperation from their own government. until there is unity, nothing else need be done. alone your efforts are like pizzen into the wind.

Answer 6

How can we close this endless Global Warming thread?
There are thousands of articles concerning the facts of Global Warming in this forum. Everybody can search and read them.

Stop this endless global warming 'questions', please: Go to report and block this spam!

Answer 7

I am indifferent.

Nobody really knows if there will be some kind of tipping point, but lots of people say there will be. 20 years or so seems to be the favored number as to when, but I don't thing anyone really knows. I don't think there will be, but I an no expert.

Answer 8

It's already becoming worse. There's nothing right now that we can do to make it better--however we can try to prevent it from getting worse. More people need to live "green friendly" and with that,w e can prevent some of the devestating effects that are already on their way.