"Has anyone looked seriously into any means of increasing snow cover on the permafrost? That seems to me like the most likely way of slowing the thawing."
There are several important implications on snow cover on the permafrost: Before Milutin Milankovic theory of slow orbital forcings (from the small insolation variations that lead into the onset and disappearance on perennial snow and ice covers), there was a time that it was thought the ice-free Arctic Ocean was triggering the massive snowfalls. The foremost theory that was dominant before recent resurgence of Milankovic becoming so popular, the leading contender was developed by Maurice Ewing and William Donn at Lamont Earth Observatory in 1950's. Ewing-Donn Arctic snow cover model of 1950's attempted to explain the cyclic glacial - interglacial periods being entirely driven by the marine percipitation falling onto the periphery of the Arctic Ocean. Ewing-Donn snow percipitation model proposed that during warm periods the Arctic became ice free and large amounts of water evaporated from the sea surface and fell as a snow on the neighbouring continents, causing ice sheets to start growing. The vast white expanses would then reflect so much sunlight back into space that the whole Earth would cool and eventually the Arctic would freeze again. There is no doubt the E-D is an important consideration today as the Arctic will be ice free. The Ewing-Donn percipitation model was only abandoned when it was be found out that even during the interglacials the Arctic Ocean was never ice free (sic!). From this point of view alone sea ice losses must be noted for the potential surprises once the sea ice is gone away. >From geoengineering and current climatic change in the Arctic, there is >certainly some sort of resurrection of the Ewing-Donn research on snow cover >impact in the ice-free Arctic. My observations are as follows: The all-time record sea ice melting in September 2007 was followed by equally all-time record snow percipitation, by February 2008 the snow cover broke all records, with snow and cold air approaching Vietnamese border in China, destroying 60% subtropical trees. Huge summertime melting will result in huge wintertime snow cover and consequently a large snow shield that cools down the climate like Maurice Ewing and William Donn forecasted. Thank god for these guys!! I also have noted that the autumns are followed by far more intense winter storms and snowfalls, and suggest this is the ED-effect in action. I was also expecting that the large ED-effect of February 2008 would have a large negative feedback like their research suggested, possibly kicking in an ice age or semi-permanent glaciers, or mega-snow storms. But the ED-effect despite its intensity was very short lived. In Yakutia the snow actually melted away at record speeds, as well as there were measured winter time emissions of methane. I suggest that the cumulative hammering of talik and the heat pulses leave the ground warmer each year. In the past when the soils and rocks were extremely cold permafrost, the ground provided initial support against spring melt away. But as the soils and bedrocks have warmed up, the snow that falls on top of them will melt away and back into the ocean rather easily. The heat in the ground also helps the methanogenic microbes to continue munching biomaterials, amplifying heating. So, what is the conclusion? I think the conclusion is that the snow cover despite its large volumetric increases, and especially in the post-sea ice Arctic Ocean will produce a massively amplified ED-effect that can produce huge expansions of the Northern Hemisphere snow covered areas and break new records. However, as the soils under the snow are warmer and with microbial activities even occurring throughout the winter, or at least methane emissions, the decay and absorbtion of heat makes even thickened snow covers inherently volatile for melting. (1.) dangerous snow covers will form winter time around the ice-free Arctic Ocean with storms just like the ED-effect suggest. But these do not lead into permanent or semi-permanent snow cover formations. (2.) the snow covers will rapidly melt away when the spring time sun and heat arrives due to the microbial activity and warmer soils and rocks under the snow cover. Snow will rapidly melt away at record early like happened in April-May 2008 and soon all snow has melted back into the ocean, producing huge spring and summer time melt water pulses. (3.) the expansion of maximum snow area will occur in the ice-free Arctic naturally and this will cool and reflect heat and sunlight for short while. As the soils are warmer and microbially active, the percipitation rate will be overcome by the warmth of soils in the ice-free Arctic Ocean and no ice ages are forthcoming. The warmer is the ocean, the warmer is the permafrost and rocks beneath, and the faster is the melt back (even with the reduced retention of sunlight despite of the larger reflective snow cover). Geoengineering More Snow will not work because, Therefore, I do not see any chances for expanded snow cover to survive any longer in a warmer climate providing only a deeper transitions from summer to winter to summer. Increased snow cover from higher vapourisation rates is unable to cool climate due to thawing and higher heat retention of soils, making the overlying snow blankets much more volatile in conditions of the early spells of warmth and sunshine in the springs. Intense, but not strong. It is effect hard like a glass, but brittle like it, and it is terefore not the good old "iron ground" of the permafrost past. Finally, I would like to draw your attention to demise of the Ewing-Donn snow percipitation model, the ice-free Arctic Ocean generating large percipitations that became sustained snow covers and ice sheets. The ED-effect of snow fall providing the crucial tipping point to the ice age. We at FIPC are looking at the United Nations General Assembly complaint (UNGA 101292) against the Western nations where there is the ED-effect, not produced by ice-free Arctic Ocean large percipitations triggering glaciations but the large "Mega-Surtsey" event that discharged hot rocks to build major parts of Iceland - Jan Mayen ridge. This then causing the Ewing-Donn effect, geothermally (volcanically) heated water vapour falling from all year round hot Jacuzzi-hot Icelandic seas onto the cold grounds in the cold Arctic climate to cause the ice age fluctuations. UNGA101292 complaint to the United Nations General Assembly is essentially a revised Ewin-Dunne effect with the snow coming from the sea, not because the Arctic was sea ice-free, but that the Icelandic Seas acted as supplier of steam onto the cold grounds, and then this soon amplified by wider snow area and cooling climate. UNGA 101292 stipulates that the Arctic Ocean sea ice loss leads to a rapid ice sheet slide out within years of the break-up of the Arctic Ocean sea ice. The Hudson Bay (laurentide ice sheet) land containment failure occurred immediately after break up of the North Atlantic Sea Ice between South Carolina and Portugal and its rapid retreat to Newfounland. So to speak, we at FIPC are calling for a second death to Miluting Milankovic and a resurrection of Maurice Ewing and William Donn with the old Ewing-Donn snow percipitation from the Arctic Ocean resurrected to explain the huge and worsening winter storms and the wild fluctuations of snow area to its all time record in February 2007, while modifying the old ED-percipitation source for ice age from ice-free Arctic Ocean to geothermally-warmed Arctic Ocean and Icelandic Seas. (These heatings supporting the Apectodinium fern bloom in the geothermal, mineralised jacuzzi from Iceland to the North Pole. Due to mantle radiomineralisation, resulting cores provide distorted ages.) Let's forget this hope with snow, the volatility factor has kicked in and even thick snow blankets today will melt away fast due to today's warm climate. Unlike, during the ice age climate and soils were cold, sea was ice covered, but the Icelandic Seas were hot and producing all snow in a tight feedback loops driven by snow-pile up on land and the decreasing sea levels, these ice sheets pressing on land and fallen sea level and sea floor pressure sucking volcanic stuff out from the Mid Atlantic Ridge. We will see Greenland ice sheet land containment failure as per UNGA 101292 complainants. Long live resurrected Maurice Ewing and William Donn and dead be Milutin Milankovic. If you have any comments about the Ewing-Donn Glaciation-Interglacial theory of the Lamont Earth Observatory that was very popular just before Milutin Milankovic came to spoil the show (when the Arctic Ocean was discovered having been always ice covered). Rgs, Albert > Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11:58:06 -0700 > Subject: [geo] Re: Baked Alaska > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > > Has anyone looked seriously into any means of increasing snow cover on > the permafrost? That seems to me like the most likely way of slowing > the thawing. > > On May 28, 6:58 am, John Nissen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Alvia, > > > > It's interesting that Dr Schuur talks only of CO2, whereas others > > consider methane much the greater threat. > > > > But it's this nonsense at the end which upsets me. To imagine that > > reducing emissions can stop permafrost thaw is rediculous. Clearly, if > > insulation won't work, there is no option but solar radiation management > > - and the sooner the better. > > > > How can Dr Schuur say such a thing? Does he not realise what a > > desperate situation we are in, with the whole Arctic warming and sea ice > > threatening to disappear? > > > > Cheers, > > > > John > > > > > Burning fossil fuels adds about 8.5 gigatonnes of emissions each year, > > > but it is a process that can theoretically be controlled. > > > > > > Permafrost thaw, though, would be self-reinforcing and could be almost > > > impossible to brake. > > > > > > "It's not an option to be putting insulation on top of the tundra," > > > Schuur said. > > > > > > "If we address our own emissions either by reducing deforestation or > > > controlling emissions from fossil fuels, that's the key to minimising > > > the changes in the permafrost carbon pool." > > _________________________________________________________________ View your Twitter and Flickr updates from one place – Learn more! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/137984870/direct/01/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
