More Glacial Junk Science Journalism

Crispin – Sorry I have not been able to respond to you.
A few things to note: First, the cryosphere itself contains some CO2 (as per the ice core records), so melting ice releases some CO2 just as it turns to freshwater, which you have been asserting will absorb it. Secondly, we are seeing ~2ppm/year increases in CO2 during current melting, which indicates that the current ice melt is not fully counteracting our emissions.
While not my area of expertise, you might find this article informative:
http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/08/02/ice.free.ocean.may.not.absorb.co2.a.component.global.warming
“But our research shows that as the ice melts, the carbon dioxide in the water very quickly reaches equilibrium with the atmosphere, so its use as a place to store CO2 declines dramatically and quickly. We never really understood how limited these waters would be in terms of their usefulness in soaking up carbon dioxide” – Dr. Wei-Jun Cai, Marine Biology UGA
As to your earlier doubts about CO2 doubling, at the current rate of 2ppm (which was ~1ppm as recently as the 1960’s – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ – third figure) it will take only about 80-85 years to reach 560ppm, twice the pre-industrial CO2 levels.

Scientifically described, statistically short, specifically useful, mathematically understandable, easy calculations, GOOD SHOT.
The KM3 scale physically is quite touchable.

@KR
>Crispin – Sorry I have not been able to respond to you.
It’s quite OK. It gave me time to discuss this issue with a couple of experts in chemistry and physics.
>A few things to note: First, the cryosphere itself contains some CO2 (as per the ice core records), so melting ice releases some CO2 just as it turns to freshwater, …
Granted.
>…which you have been asserting will absorb it.
Let us put numbers on this so small effects are not magnified in word but not in deed. The release of CO2 from melting is microscopic and I will accept expert advice on the typical quantities involved. I assert that as ice forms all CO2 is expelled and confirmed that today with an expert in such chemistry. I continue to assert that melting ice will absorb many, many times more CO2 than is released from air bubbles. It is a question of relative mass.
Ice melting frees water that contains virtually no CO2 at all. I am sure you will agree with this fact. Each winter when the Arctic ocean freezes, it releases virtually all the CO2 contained in the seawater. In the spring when it melts, that water can again absorb CO2. Increasing the volume of the oceans with fresh water from ‘fossil ice’ create a new absorber of great capacity. Huge.
>Secondly, we are seeing ~2ppm/year increases in CO2 during current melting, which indicates that the current ice melt is not fully counteracting our emissions.
This is a clear indication that either the melt rate is not very large, or else the emission from all sources is larger than the new absorption capacity. Simple mathematics will quickly establish which, as the fresh water, as has often been noted, tends to remain in the upper ocean and is the most exposed to the atmosphere, guaranteeing that its uptake of CO2 is optimised. One of the indirect proofs of a low melting rate of all ice reservoirs would be a low uptake of CO2 into the new seawater. Agreed?
This is a phenomenon of such a large scale that one can take the planet as a whole to conduct this exercise. CO2 enters and leaves the ocean quite rapidly with a change in sea temperature or air pressure. It is no coincidence that the sea water is about 300 ppm, similar to the atmosphere’s 392.
As you no doubt will have gathered by now, my intent was to draw to your attention the fact that any large scale melting of ice will lead immediately to a large uptake (seawater-sequestration) of CO2. The amount it will absorb is known with accuracy and the uptake rate is rapid. This is basic water chemistry.
>http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/08/02/ice.free.ocean.may.not.absorb.co2.a.component.global.warming
>“But our research shows that as the ice melts, the carbon dioxide in the water very quickly reaches equilibrium with the atmosphere, so its use as a place to store CO2 declines dramatically and quickly. We never really understood how limited these waters would be in terms of their usefulness in soaking up carbon dioxide” – Dr. Wei-Jun Cai, Marine Biology UGA
I am surprised that he seems not to understand that fresh water freed from its ice-bound state will absorb as much CO2 as other water. He seems to he saying it does absorb, therefore it is not a future store. Well, he supports my point that the uptake is immediate. Its ‘usefulness’ will relate to the quantity of new meltwater. “The water very quickly reaches equillibrium with the atmosphere” indeed! His final statement is silly to the point of embarrassment. Catastrophic ocean rise forecasting is based on the melting of vast portions of the large ice sheets. Each ton of ice melted will ‘very quickly’ absorb 300 g of CO2. If the CO2 is not going down, then logically the ice is not melting because CO2 absorption is ‘very quick’. I can’t see anyone asserting that water does not absorb CO2.
>As to your earlier doubts about CO2 doubling, at the current rate of 2ppm (which was ~1ppm as recently as the 1960′s – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ – third figure) it will take only about 80-85 years to reach 560ppm, twice the pre-industrial CO2 levels.
That figure is based on the current estimation of fuel use, correct? Without getting into how that particular projection was made, I can refer you to the Doctoral thesis of the aforementioned Dr Willem Nel (Univ of JHB) on peak energy from all sources. Peak oil, soon. Peak uranium, 2035. Peak energy, 2050. Peak coal 2070. After that we are in serious trouble if we don’t start building nukes based on something other than U23x. Africa is OK for new hydro but not the other continents.
560 ppm CO2 is just above the upper limit Nel calculated as a possible CO2 maximum based on the available resouces, assuming a doubling of known reserves of all fossil fuels. His opinion is that we should not worry about CO2 – we will run out of anything to burn before long. And he did not consider putative ice melting absorbing on the scale I have calculated above.
As far as I am concerned, this issue of new seawater will be ‘the elephant in the room’ during any future discussion of ice melt. The science is sound, the numbers are known, the effect is immediate, the impact is massive. For me, all talk about increasing CO2 causing catastrophic ice sheet melting without even a nominal calculation of the absorption of CO2 by that meltwater sitting on the surface of the ocean reduces such talk to ‘bunk’. We cannot deny that mankind produces a lot of CO2. We cannot deny that CO2 has an insulating effect in the atmosphere. We cannot deny that increasing temperatures, however caused, melts glaciers and ice sheets like that in Greenland. We similarly cannot deny that melted ice absorbs CO2 rapidly at known rates. The amount absorbed by a melted Greenland ice sheet will be 1500 gigatons, perhaps 500-1000 times our total annual emission rate, half of which already disappears.
I am open to other calculations that factor in the CO2 contained in trapped air in the ice. There may be some mileage for alarmists in the fact that meltwater has a pH well below that of the ocean. The CO2 uptake of seawater for any given temperature, pH, air pressure and atmospheric concentration is known quite exactly, however.
There is a well-known annual CO2 variation in concentration particularly in the Northern Hemisphere. This is likely due to the melting and refreezing of ice. Let’s say 15 x 10^12 tons of ocean ice melts and freezes each Arctic season. That will absorb then release 4.5 x 10^9 tons of CO2. Isn’t that approximately equal to all human emissions per year? Now apply that to all the snow and ice that forms in the NH each winter and melts each summer and you get an indication of the scale of the ‘breathing’ of CO2 in and out of the hydrosphere. It is a lot! It seems this factor has been overlooked in the rush to alarm.