Climate Change – An Engineer Looks at the World

Polar Bears in the Hot Tub – Antarctic Ice – No Bears Chapter 6

June 25, 2018 by Art Krugler Leave a Comment

Environmental Scientists are very concerned about the immense amount of ice contained on the very large Antarctica continent. Picture a block of ice two miles thick and one and 1/2 times as large as the United States.

Should all the ice melt and flow into the oceans, scientists calculate sea levels would rise 216 feet. Since most of humanity lives near ocean shores, mass migration to higher land would be required and it would be catastrophic.

Major action is already being taken in the United States to prepare for rising sea levels.

Ocean front cities are preparing for higher shore erosion. Ocean front planning commissions are requiring new projects to raise the site by adding fill dirt, as much as six feet, before building new construction.
The US Navy is planning for new harbors as existing Navy yards become flooded.
States bordering the ocean are projecting sea rises and spending money planning for major projects and major expenses.
States, California included, are mandating sustainable cities and ‘green’ energy to halt global warming.

These are all life changing mandates and very disruptive and expensive.

What if ice is actually returning to the Arctic?
There is daily data at: “charctic interactive Sea Ice Graph”.
Take time to select the recent years 2012, 2015, 2016 and 2017;
note each year has more summer ice than 2012. How can that be if CO2 which is increasing causes ice to melt??
What if ice is actually increasing on the large East Antarctica to offset any loss in the West?
What if we have actually already entered the next ice age?
What would weather be like during a descent into an ice age?
Would we not see more winter snow, and heavy summer rain?
Would we stop calling it “severe weather caused by climate warming”?
What if all this effort and expense is unnecessary, wasteful and actually harmful?
What if all the effort to reduce atmospheric CO2 is pure waste of time and money?

Our search for answers is not about whether temperatures have increased since 1980. Temperature has probably increased.

Nor is our search for reasons about the melting of Arctic Ice between the years of 2000 and 2012. The measurements of temperature and ice area may be assumed to be correct for that short period of melting ice.

Nor is there doubt about the very rapid increases in CO2 concentration since 1990.

What is this chapter about? Actually?

Why has the temperature, as reported by NOAA, increased by 10 to 15 deg. F along the Antarctic Peninsula but other areas rose only about 1.5 degrees.
Why has the ice melted on only two mountain glaciers on West Antarctic?
Why are there about 127 known volcanoes along West Antarcticas’ coast but only one in all of vast East Antarctica?
Why are there visible cracks in the West Antarctica ice shelves that are melting?
If it is melting from warmer air, engineering calculations predict cracks on the bottom of the ice which would not be visible from above, but if from warm water beneath the ice, the cracks would occur and be visible from above; as they are.

Lets begin with a map of Antarctica. Then check out a list of volcanoes.

Notes for the Map of Antarctica:

The black wavy line follows a mountain range that divides East and West Antarctica.
East Antarctica (the larger area) is to the right, West Antarctica is to your left.
Antarctica’s Peninsula extends up from West Antarctica toward Chile.
Two bays contain major ice shelfs; the Ross Ice Shelf and the Ronne Ice Shelf.
The red dots locate 36 volcanoes which are listed on graph at the end of the Chapter 6.
Mount Erebus on West Antarctica is actively emitting gas and steam; others are not erupting.
Four other volcanoes on West Antarctica, erupted in 1876, 1892, 1905 and 1970.
East Antarctica, in contrast, has a single dormant volcano located 300 miles offshore.

MAP OF ANTARCTICA VOLCANOES ARE LOCATED WITH RED DOTS

EAST ANTARCTICA vs WEST ANTARCTICA vs ANTARCTIC PENINSULA

ANTARCTICA INFORMATION

Penguins, over 10 million of them, choose Antarctica as their home.

Researchers are concerned about the future of these excellent swimmers.

There are 70 research stations studying and reporting on penguins, climate and ice.

The concern originated with rising CO2 levels and rising temperatures.

Antarctica has totally baffling questions if CO2 is assumed to cause both rising temperature and melting ice.

But first, some facts about Antarctica, the “Down Under Continent”.

While North Pole regions have thousands of polar bears none exist on Antarctica.
Mammals, in fact, do not live on the continent.
At 5.4 million sq. miles it is almost twice as large as the United States’ 3 million sq. miles.
East Antarctica is much larger (72% of Antarctica’s’ area) and reported to be gaining ice.
West Antarctica, 18% of the area, has numerous volcanoes and is the only area of alarm.
Antarctica is a continent resting on rock, while most of Arctic Ice floats on sea water.
Under the snow lies rocky mountains and a mountain range dividing the continent.
Snow and ice depth over the continent ranges up to 2 miles thick.
Calculations have been made to indicate seas would rise 216 feet if all the ice melted.
Shelfs of West Antarcticas’ sea ice are reported to be melting.
Ice cores reveal over 1.5 million years of history ( CO2, sea level and air temperature).
National Geographic’s Dec, 2015 map of air temperature changes, show air temperature DECREASES of up to 5 degrees over some sea areas surrounding Antarctica.

This map also shows a 3 degree F increase offshore of West Antarctica, while the air temperature rise over snow covered eastern area is about 1.5 degrees F, similar to the entire planet.

THE RING OF FIRE.

1 The Pacific Ocean is surrounded by a “Ring Of Fire”.

2 Location of the Ring is well established:

– 90% of the worlds earthquakes occur on the Ring.

– 75 % of the worlds active volcanoes are located on the Ring of Fire.

– Three of the world’s largest recent eruptions occurred on the Ring of Fire.

3 The Ring extends south along Chiles’ west coast to West Antarctica’s Peninsula and then farther southward offshore of West Antarctica before turning northward toward New Zealand.

This chain of volcanoes and magma along West Antarctica’s shore is 3600 miles long but width is not known; a width of 100 miles would provide 360,000 square miles of hot seabed.

For comparison, Los Angeles to New York is only 2500 miles;

4 There is one active and 35 inactive volcanoes on the peninsula and shore of West Antarctica.

One inactive volcano is located 400 miles off the coast of East Antarctica. (66°48’S,89°11’E)

5 The volcanoes were created by hot magma which still exists beneath them.

DISCUSSION

1 West Antarctica is shown by the National Geographic map to now have 3 degrees higher air temperature than 54 years ago; the rest of Antarctica has risen 1 degree or less. Ocean areas around Antarctica are shown to have cooled as much as 5° degrees Fahrenheit.

2 Ice shelfs and glacier are melting in the Western Antarctica region.

3 Volcanoes are shown on a map of Antarctica by dark dots. See page 11.

Note that most lie off the west shore of West Antarctica under sea ice.

A table is attached listing all the volcanoes located in Antarctica. See Page 12.

4 Sea rise would be minimal from melting ice; ice shelfs are floating, Coastal ice is minimal.

5 While there is not sufficient data to calculate the amount of ice the magma might melt, science cannot be “settled” until data is available and able to predict melting ice shelfs.

6 Melting of land-supported ice would cause sea levels to rise but cannot happen without volcanoes.

7 East Antarctica has been gaining ice in spite of 400 ppm CO2 concentrations.

East Antarctica does not have a source of heat below the ice to cause melting.

This vast area is very unlikely to begin melting any time soon.

8 West Antarctica’s chain of magma and volcanoes along the shore causes floating ice to melt, but will not cause sea levels to rise.

The amount that melts will be determined by magma and volcanic activity, not CO2 concentration.

9 Since only offshore ice is affected by the magma and volcanoes, there will not be enough melted ice to raise sea levels significantly.

10 Further, the net change appears to be an increase in ice.

Ice increases in East Antarctica has been offsetting any loss in West Antarctica.

Volcano List

CHAPTER SEVEN

The topic for this chapter is still being researched.

It was sparked by a discussion with Robert J Tuttle about his book;

The Fourth Source; Effects of Natural Nuclear Reactors.

POLAR BEARS IN THE HOT TUB CARBON SOOT AND THE ARCTIC

June 12, 2018 by Art Krugler Leave a Comment

Jet Planes were very exotic in 1950 and still glamorous in the 60’s. Propeller planes were already using turbine engines rather than piston engines.

I moved my family in 1966 to live under the jet plane approach to Los Angeles Airport. We lived in that house for over 50 years. We often watched in awe as planes from the east flew overhead with flaps and wheels down and engines whining as they flew on to land at LAX 20 miles away. Others, arriving from the west made U-turns overhead to enter the flight path. Their elevation at our house was probably 2 to 4,000 feet above us.

There was a darker side to the glamour however. A white paper towel would turn black when wiped over a counter. Each day, counter tops which appeared clean, were re-coated with black soot which settled from the exhaust. The particles are extremely small – not visible even with the most powerful optical microscopes. A single particle is not visible under an optical microscope and a clump looks like black paint. Powerful electron microscopes are necessary and particles must be pre-coated with a gold film in order to be filmed. I paid two inspection laboratories with electron microscopes, to provide pictures of my samples of soot; both failed. The second one assured me after their attempt failed, that their microscope could photograph particles as small as 2 to 3 nanometers if they prepared the samples by coating them first with gold and then scanning for several hours; the cost would be over a thousand dollars per image with no guarantee for success of any one image. I postponed the opportunity to spend thousands of dollars of savings on the possibility of seeing a photo or two.

With that much soot, I was concerned about the health effects on my family and residents inhaling the soot for over 50 years ?

There was nothing notable in the 14 adults or their 15 children who grew up in this immediate area. No asthma, no missed work or missed school days or any illness. No pulmonary issues. Medical reports claiming serious medical problems from fine particulate soot should be scrutinized very carefully for other vectors.

How is this jet engine soot formed?

Picture in your mind, jet fuel burning in one of the several combustion chambers of a jet engine. It is a microscopic world.

Jet fuel is injected at great pressure, 20,000 to 25,000 psi, through small nozzles to “atomize” the fuel into droplets. Higher pressures create smaller size drops. Current development of higher pressure pumps and nozzles claim particles so small no soot is formed. Size of droplets in current engines is very small, almost like the dust we see floating in a shaft of sunlight in our houses. Each small droplet enters a white hot radiant chamber along with compressed air.

The outer layer of this miniature oil droplet starts to boil immediately – and starts burning – creating an inert shell of CO2 and water vapor around the droplet. This inert shell is a barrier to oxygen reaching the droplet and impedes further burning. The inert shell becomes thicker around the ever smaller droplet. It is so small it floats with the current, not burning completely, but cracking into carbon and hydrogen. Hydrogen gas created by cracking burns readily, but the carbon does not and leaves the engine as an extremely small particle; probably not round and sometimes clustered with other small particles like a small bunch of grapes.

This means that very nearly every droplet of oil creates at least one carbon particle, and most will leave the engine unburned. As stated earlier, 2 million to 3 million particles have been measured in single cubic centimeters of jet engine exhaust. Jet engine fuel creates an exhaust that is lighter than air due to the water vapor formed from burning hydrogen. It rises even higher than the 40,000 foot elevation of cruising jet planes.

While carbon particles are heavier than air, they are actually very light and very small. The hot mix of CO2, water vapor, nitrogen and carbon particles is lighter than air and floats upward. The study of jet engine exhaust reported soot particle diameters between 2 and 60 nanometers; (equal to 0.000000002 to 0.000000060 inches in diameter). From 40,000 feet, they have 7 to 8 miles to settle before reaching earth. Rather than settle, they flow toward the poles with atmospheric currents at 40,000 feet. The diagram from Chapter 4 is repeated below.

Air currents north of the equator, where planes are shown flying in the diagram, must carry much of the soot northward toward Greenland and the North Pole.

Exhaust from piston engines on the ground was shown to also be lighter than air and rises carrying the soot upward to join the jet plane soot.

What problems does this soot cause? Actually two problems!

The first problem. Even while nanoparticles are floating, they are a black solid that absorbs nearly all sunlight that strikes each of the untold millions of particles. Heat They will get hotter. Heat transfer dictates that temperature of the particle is increased by sunlight and that air in contact with those particles is also heated.

Jet engines burn 6,000,000 barrels of oil a day. A barrel of fuel weighs 450 impede; that amounts to 2,700,000,000 lbs of fuel a day (2.7 billion lbs.) and a near infinite number of particles.

Scientists have tried to calculate the impact of this carbon on global warming. One four year study, a 232 page report in the Journal of Geophysical Research, January 2013, (e360yale.edu) is summarized by Carl Zimmer, January 17, 2013.

The report estimates that carbon soot can cause more warming than that attributed to the CO2 blanket; 1.1 watts minimum to 2.1 watts vs the 1.56 watts attributed to CO2. This is over 30% more. The report does not mention jet fuel as a source of carbon released at 40,000 feet or the ground sources generating low density exhaust that rises to join the jet exhaust. The extent of this first problem, heating of the atmosphere, is not really understood. More research is required.

The second problem with this soot!

Air currents carry the soot northward to Greenland and the North Pole and then downward to the surface of the ice. Once on the ice it absorbs more sunlight than soot-free ice. On ice, it increases melting rate several times.

Greenland is experiencing many miles of “black ice”.

It would indeed be useful to know where the soot comes from so the problem could be solved. The author has not found a chemical analysis of the soot.

Each Electron microscope photo of nano-particles taken from the ice would be quite expensive. Each electron microscope photo might cost over a thousand dollars but this is a pittance compared with the knowledge developed.

A simple chemical test would show the soot is not from burning wood as has been speculated. Wood ash contains calcium and other metals which are easily detected by a simple chemical analysis. Photographs could be compared with photos of particles from jet engine exhaust.

Instead of an analysis, many millions of dollars are spent measuring the reduced reflectance of the black ice. Without the soot there would be nothing to measure.

Is the soot caused by burning forest fires?

Wood smoke from a hot fire is normally white, not black. Further, smoke plumes from the Edmonton, Canada fires were photographed from space; the plume was carried by winds directly south over central states of the US, then East over New England and out to sea toward Scotland. The plume from this fire never passed over even southern Greenland. A statement that the soot is forest fire ash is an uninformed opinion and usually wrong.

Photo by Dr. Jason Box

Are there solutions to the soot problem? Yes!

As mentioned above, development of even higher pressure pumps and injectors, from 25,000 to 35,000 psi can create particles so small that the droplet is entirely burned; no soot is formed. If true, this would be extremely helpful. For more images Google Greenland + black ice + photos.

Requiring all engines to be equipped with this high pressure system would eliminate the soot and by reducing unburned fuel, improve economics.

This could be accomplished very quickly and should be pursued.

Next, oxygen within a fuel molecule causes formation of CO2 gas and water vapor inside the

burning droplet. The gases expand explosively and break up the droplet for faster burning without coking. This type of molecule exists in biodiesel fuel. Blends of biodiesel and jet-fuel mixtures have been flight tested satisfactorily. Biodiesel has been proven to be fire safe, and cleaner burning but an optimum ratio has not been determined. Production of more biodiesel should be encouraged.

There may be a mechanical factor as well.

Changing the size and shape of the combustion chamber may change coking.

Diesel engines and gasoline engines have made improvements by changing the shape of the combustion chamber and location and methods of fuel entry. Similar changes could improve combustion in turbine engines.

In conclusion, there is much that can be done to reduce melting of ice from soot.

Environmentally responsible corporations should lead the world – this can be done.

While reducing heat from Magma beneath sea ice is beyond human capability, soot can be reduced quickly and relatively inexpensively. Reducing soot will also reduce absorption of solar energy in the atmosphere and on seas and earth.

Chapter 6 will compare the Antarctic continent to the Arctic Sea area.

Ice on East Antarctica is not melting; ice on West Antarctica’s shore above volcanoes is melting.

Also, shelf ice over open sea is also melting from below.

In Chapter One – Melting Arctic Ice with magma as a source of heat was discussed as well as the time connection to magma but no connection to CO2 concentration.

In Chapter Two, there is the connection of CO2 concentration to gas fuels, rather than coal.

In Chapter Three, the effect of the density of stack gas from burning coal is discussed, and the impact of sulfur and nitrogen from coal on lakes is presented.

In Chapter Four, the chemistry of liquid hydrocarbon fuels causes all to create a stack gas lighter than air. Availability and use of liquid and gas fuels rather than coal, caused the dramatic rise in atmospheric CO2.

Reducing the sulfur content of stack gas from coal plants provided a successful solution to the acid gas and “acid rain” problem in New England.

This Chapter Five tackled the soot problem which plagues Greenland and contributes to global warming.

Chapter Six will compare Antarctica and its massive amount of ice and concerns with its polar opposite, the North Pole.

Stay tuned.

POLAR BEARS – SUMMER VISITORS AND CO2

May 3, 2018 by Art Krugler Leave a Comment

Polar bears are amazing, living in an amazing environment!
There is another amazing creature in the Arctic, a summer visitor!
They understand climate and there is much we can learn from them to understand CO2.

They lead us to answer some big questions:
What if it’s not about burning coal?
What if CO2 is not the main contributor to Global Warming?
What if there are different questions to ask and study?

“Science” knows that:
– CO2 is increasing faster and faster since starting to rise very rapidly in 1980
– Air temperature has been rising at a constant rate after 1980
– Temperature had not increased for 100 years of the industrial revolution
– Area of sea ice over the Arctic Ocean has been decreasing since 1995
– Models based on CO2 acting as a gas blanket do indeed predict doom.

“Settled Science”, knowing all this, decides that to save our planet:
– CO2 must be the demon that must be controlled;
– Concentration is much too high and must be lowered immediately
– It may be too late to save the planet;
– The tipping point may have been passed:
– No price is too high to save the Bears, the planet, and us.

But what if these things that we measure are like wheels on a car, all controlled and directed by a steering wheel we do not yet recognize or understand?

Lets look for answers by understanding why CO2 concentration is running away.

The amazing summer visitor to the North Pole is called the Arctic Tern. Many thousands of Terns fly over 12,000 miles each spring to spend summers with the Polar Bears. They can fly over 300 miles a day. Rather than working hard by flapping their wings, they glide effortlessly much of the time. They can even sleep while they glide. Before winter sets in, they reverse course flying 12,000 miles south. Understanding how they glide can teach us about CO2 concentration.
Yes, of course it sounds ridiculous but please read on. It is really basic science.

They are not the only birds that glide or soar. Eagles, Hawks, Condors , Gulls, Storks, Albatross etc. can soar and glide. Man has also learned how to soar in gliders and sailplanes. All take advantage of the science of rising air currents. Gliding and Soaring are possible wherever air is rising as it does flowing up hills, or up and over ridges or mountain sides, or over a “thermal”.
“Thermals”, our main interest, are rising columns of air and occur over hot places on the ground like over cities with black roads and roofs, or over a power plant with a plume of rising stack gas.

Thermals, the column of rising air, can rise thousands of feet, and surprise, they do not disperse but maintain their slender shape while they rise.
( Go to aviationweather.ws scroll down to Chapter 16 and select Thermal soaring)

Embed the ‘slender waist’ feature of Figure 147 in your mind; it is a very important feature.
Heat sources include chimneys, factories and cities.

There are many more examples:
1 At a kitchen stove, a pot of boiling water creates a column of low density water vapor.
2 Air over a city is warmer and less dense than surrounding air.
Asphalt roads, roofs and parking lots absorb sunlight, become hot and heat city air.
Cities use a lot of energy in lights, factory and office equipment, cars and trucks.
Trees are plentiful in most cities transpiring low density water vapor.
3 Clouds demonstrate the slender waist principle; they do not disperse as they drift along; there is little turbulence at their altitude to aid dispersion. Clouds float at an altitude where their mixture of very small water droplets and humid air equals the density of surrounding air.

THERMALS AND CO2 CONCENTRATION

It is time for some simple science explaining the connection of ‘thermals’ to CO2 concentration.
Simple chemistry that you might have learned in high school is useful but not required to understand this connection.

We, the people, are burning a lot of clean burning natural gas, and burning more every day.
What happens to the gas that goes up the stack? We need to know to understand CO2.

First the Chemistry:
Methane, is chemically CH4, made of carbon and hydrogen; both react with oxygen.
CH4 + air ( oxygen and nitrogen ) => CO2 + 2 H2O + the Nitrogen from the air.
CO2 is a dense gas, 1.5 times as dense as air and if pure it will ‘sink’ to the ground.
H2O vapor is very light, about half as dense as air. Water vapor rises rapidly.
Due to the water vapor, the exhaust gas is 20% lighter than air; and it rises, rapidly.
Each power plant that burns natural gas, creates a lot of stack gas that is less dense than air.
As it leaves the power plant it is like a hot air balloon that rises fast and far.

SO, WE HAVE THERMALS, SO WHAT?? WHY IS IT IMPORTANT??
THE NEXT STEP IS SIMPLE PHYSICS:

We need to ask, what happens to the rising column of CO2 & water-vapor?
1 Until the water vapor is condensed this “THERMAL” remains less dense than air and keeps rising, and rising, and rising into the atmosphere.
2 There are no forests, or bodies of water in the upper atmosphere to remove CO2.
3 In time, CO2 molecules disperse into the entire atmosphere increasing CO2 concentration.
4 Green plants and water absorb a lot of CO2 but do not keep up with our present burn rate.
5 Further, CO2 from burning natural gas enters the atmosphere at very high altitudes, far from the green plants and trees that convert the CO2 into cellulose.
6 All wind/solar power is intermittent; usually a gas burning turbine is used as back-up.
7 The more natural gas we burn, the higher the CO2 concentration becomes.
8 Burning more natural gas each day means the concentration of CO2 in our air must rise.

CO2 HAS INCREASED, AND IT MUST CONTINUE TO INCREASE, & RAPIDLY.
CHEMISTRY IS CORRECT. PHYSICS IS CORRECT AND WORKS.

SO CO2 INCREASES; SO WHAT? WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING?

Think it through, carefully!
Until there is economical battery or other standby power, shutting down coal and nuclear and installing intermittent solar/wind will require more gas burning plants – which will continue increasing CO2 concentration drastically.

Please share your knowledge and wisdom in the comments below.

Credits will be gratefully given in a future issue since this is an on-going conversation.
Make a comment or email me directly.

if you are interested in this subject, subscribe to the blog!

Illustrations courtesy of aviationweather.ws

POLAR BEARS & PRAIRIE CHICKENS – INTERDEPENDENCE

April 26, 2018 by Art Krugler Leave a Comment

When I was a preteen on an isolated farm in Northern Wisconsin, every summer I saw a group of prairie chickens on the edge of our ‘south field’. They cackled and boomed; dooo, dooo dooooo!

Then, One summer they were silent.

We had provided some of their food. We did not shoot them, we did not have a tractor and our two horses and the cows did not graze there to bother them.

Our farm was surrounded by woods, the prairie chicken habitat was ideal and enormous.

Our nearest neighbor lived 2 miles west, through woods. To the south, more woods and 1.5 miles beyond, flowed a river. To the east lay 2 miles of woods and to the north 20 miles of woods. It was not an urban or encroaching environment.

As far as we were concerned, they disappeared with only one possible explanation.

It was the Depression and drought and we were in the middle of it.

When I was six, a lightning strike destroyed our 5 barns, a wood stave silo, a tool shed and our car. The fire insurance adjuster stated the concrete foundation did not burn and if we rebuilt we would be paid for materials. If we did not build, no insurance.

We shot and trapped rabbits for food and income, which we needed.

Rabbits were one important help. But something happened to them as well.

We brought home the usual rabbits to our mother. But one day, she refused to cook one. It had a large boil on its flank and my mother wisely determined that it was too dangerous to eat. She refused to gamble with health and we stopped hunting.

Then the rabbits disappeared – so did that source of meat and income – I remember the change very well.

It was then the Prairie Chickens disappeared; we guessed that without the rabbits, hungry wolves possibly hunted the chickens down – every last one.

Partridge disappeared at the same time.

Then the wolves, coyotes and foxes also disappeared. Barking and howling was no longer to be heard. Their food sources had vanished.

When I was 16 years old, I had a face to face with a very large timber wolf in the woods north of our farm; he was chasing my dog who was racing to me as a last resort for protection. Normally timber wolves lived farther north; had their food sources also disappeared. Fortunately, I spread out my raincoat and maybe yelled. With their last jumps, about 20 feet away, my dog turned around in midair landing at my feet facing the wolf. The wolf changed course ever so slightly. He flew past me, waist high and just outside my raincoat. My dog suddenly became brave and dashed after the wolf.

I was sure he had made a fatal decision and I ran for the clearing; but after a long maybe 15 minutes he rejoined me. He was panting and shaking and could not stop moving, but got lots of hugs.

We also trapped and sold ermine pelts for 10 to 15 cents each. Often our traps were raided. Footprints in the snow pointed to great horned owls who were helping themselves overnight to our trapped animals. My brother figured out how to trap the owls and get rid of them. The thievery stopped and we got our animals back.

But the following year, with no owls, our fields were overrun with mice.

We learned hard lessons of Interdependence.

Thinking about those stories now inspires a new train of thought and a question. My brother solved the problem of the owls stealing our trapped animals with the wrong solution.

What problems are we solving and are trying to solve with the wrong answer?

Polar Bears in the Hot Tub

March 29, 2018 by Art Krugler Leave a Comment

POLAR BEARS are COOL
They live on top of the world.
They have it all to themselves.
Northern Lights provide wide screen entertainment.
No people, No cars.
Few other animals; None as powerful.
No trees, No bugs, No noisy crows.
For dinner, Seals come to them while they wait.
All summer, large swimming pools, everywhere.

BUT, ARE ALL THOSE SWIMMING POOLS BECOMING HOT TUBS??

Polar Bears – HISTORICAL DATA

Life was especially great until 1900 when there were an estimated 25,000 bears.
Then long range rifles with telescope sights were invented.
Bear population dropped significantly to between 5,000 and 10,000 bears.
Then, between 1956 and 1994 Northern nations prohibited hunting.
From 2008 to 2017 the population of Polar Bears rebounded and today there are about 31,000.
Polar Bears – Facts & Myths; Susan J Crockford
After 1990, people, concerned people, began showing up, but armed with cameras, airplanes, satellites in the sky.
Pictures were published; concerned people, started drawing conclusions!

POLAR BEARS – ARCTIC ICE & PUBLIC CONCERNS

Satellite photos showed that ice at the North Pole was melting!
Many research papers were published on causes!
“Ninety-seven percent” of selected scientists agreed; “greenhouse gasses are the cause”!
This is a man-made Catastrophe!
Polar bears will die from lack of ice and food!
The planet will die from hot weather; we will all die!
Burning fossil fuels must be stopped to eliminate CO2!
International Conferences were held in Japan and France!
Political leaders promised to save the polar bears and us!
What if it’s not about us?
What if it’s not about CO2?
What if it’s not about burning fossil fuels?

POLAR BEARS – EARTHQUAKES BENEATH THEIR FEET

Who is not aware of the volcanic eruption of Mount Saint Helens in 1980?
Volcanologists and geologists ‘listened’ to the earthquakes before it erupted.
They established a “RED ZONE” around the mountain and ordered everyone to evacuate.
They established an outer “BLUE ZONE” where only permitted people could go.
Three people died in the red zone.
Three died in the “blue zone” with permits to be there.
Fifty-one other people died outside the blue zone which was considered ‘safe’.
Many lives were saved because scientists listened to the earthquake warnings of rising magma.

Earthquakes under the Arctic Ocean have been active and talking to us since 1975.
They are telling us about white hot magma under the Arctic Ocean and it’s volcanic Islands.
Should we not listen to save Bears, our resources and maybe our lives??

Earthquake records can be found at earthquaketrack.com where time, location, magnitude and depth are

available for many selectable regions. They do not predict catastrophic eruptions!
They do accurately identify areas of rising white hot magma!

Like the Hawaiian Island Chain, the volcanic islands of Iceland, Jan Mayen, Svalbard and Russia’s Severnaya form a straight line chain of active volcanic islands over 2500 miles long.
There is also a parallel undersea ridge some 2600 miles long with similar volcanic activity.
Further, there are active branches to the undersea ridge.
Total length is over 7,000 miles of active earthquakes and rising magma.
The area of hot rock under the Arctic is purely an estimate.
A report estimated the width as up to 150 miles, much wider than earlier estimates.
Then if we add the vertical area of the cracks and channels, the area is truly enormous.
That means over 1,000,000 square miles of hot seafloor to heat THE POLAR BEAR TUBS.

Numerous earthquakes have been recorded under these Islands and Ocean since 1953.
Please note the triangles and dots at the bottom of the graph; annual quake intensity (energy)
triangles between 1960 and 1980 indicate near zero quakes;
Dots after 1980 indicate many quakes, each dot the total earthquake energy for one year.
An example is one location on Iceland which peaked in 2015:
2013 – 5 quakes; 2014 – 8; 2015 – 51; 2016 – 1; 2017 – 1. The quakes started in 1980, reached a peak in 2015 and have diminished to 1 in 2016 and 2017. The magma is no longer rising and the rocky seabed is cooling! If earthquakes do not return, ice will likely return.
It will likely take several years for the existing hot rock to cool and the ice to return.

POLAR BEARS – WILL THEIR HOT TUBS GET HOTTER?

The following chart of data is very helpful in understanding the data.
It was created to visualize the connections between CO2 concentration and air temperature, the area of winter ice, area of summer ice, and earthquakes.

Earthquake records show almost no earthquakes in the Arctic region for a period before 1980.
1 CO2 ppm was rising smoothly from 320 ppm in 1960 to 410 ppm in 2017!
2 Temperature did not rise until 1980; 20 years of no response to rising CO2!!
Actually, in 1880, 100 years earlier, the air temperature was the same as in 1980!
Clearly, air temperature and ice are responding to a different energy source.!!!
3 Winter ice area decreased only after 1990, 10 years after temperature increased!
4 Summer ice area started decreasing in 1998, 18 years after the rising temperature !
Summer ice did not respond to CO2 at all for 18 years of temperature increases!!
5 Thinner winter ice, 1 to 3 feet thick, responded more quickly to magma and earthquakes.
And very significant!!, only along the Russian shore!!
6 Thicker summer ice area, up to 10 feet thick, responded 16 years later.
7 Norwegian expeditions in 2005 and 2008 at 73 deg. North latitude on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge near Loki’s Castle north of Iceland, reported numerous underwater volcanoes and thermal steam vents measuring up to 570 degrees F. The magma is there!!
8 Another Norwegian expedition in 1922 studied unusual melting of sea ice and glaciers north of Svalbard. See a following page for a copy of the published report. Note, accurate records of global earthquakes were not available at this time, 100 years ago.
9 In 2013, Dr Jorge of Norway reported the discovery of an underwater volcanic ridge between Iceland and Svalbard 1,500 KM; equal to the distance from San Francisco to New York City.
http://www.acadiau.ca/~raeside/quizzes/quiz-11clue.html
ttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/02/hot-times-near-svalbard-volcanic-range-discovered/

Note the section on underwater volcanoes and thermal vents.
There can be no doubt that there is a long and large area of hot magma beneath the island chain.
10 Satellite photos show the ice is melting along the Russian shores but not along the Canadian shore. This is just as it should be!

Seawater of the Arctic Ocean is circulating in a counterclockwise direction.
This means it flows over the earthquake zones and gets hotter, then flows along the Russian shore melting ice and cooling off. By the time this heated seawater flows under the ice north of Canada it has cooled off and can no longer melt ice.

There can be no doubt that there is a major source of heat under the Arctic Ocean north of Iceland and Russia!
Earthquakes are telling us the Magma had been rising under the Arctic Ocean!!
And, as for the future, these earthquakes have largely stopped – the magma is not rising now.
If the magma is not rising; this source of heat will disappear.
No help needed from much less powerful human beings!

There is a growing interest in the earthquake-magma-volcano field by earth scientists.
Dr Tolstoy commented that magma may be affecting earths temperature.

Chapter two will explore the history of CO2 concentration in our atmosphere.
The rise is not as simple as “we are burning more so it is rising.”
Nor will CO2 stop rising if we stop burning coal and convert to wind/solar.

Chapter three will discuss the second source of energy that is raising air temperature and
affecting melting ice at the Arctic Ocean and Greenland’s ice fields.