Polar Freezers and the Global Warming

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reactions
1,923
My 'school atlas' and my grammar school 'geography' education had 'the continent of antarctica' as the 'fifth continent' and the arctic as a circular blob of white around the north pole of 'mainly sea ice'.
The atlas, which was far from new in 1972 the year it came to my notice, was done with the mercator projection.
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,471
Reactions
4,616
The Arctic (public school education talking here) is supposed to be an actual land mass whereas the Antarctic is supposed to be one huge iceburg; no land under the ice. I wonder how they would know that unless it had been seen without ice in history's memory. Plus, there's all sorts of things supposedly being found in Antarctica that would had to have been floating buildings and such if there was no land mass for them to rest on.
 

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
355
Reactions
1,229
My memory might be similar to yours here, Onthebit. What I remember of the 'north pole' is an icy continent like Antarctica but at the top of the maps rather than the bottom. It was depicted like a land mass iirc, and not what we see now on maps (a seasonal melting and re-freezing of an ocean: the Arctic Ocean). It was smaller than Antarctica, but they still showed it on maps and globes as an ice cap at the top of the world. I believe it may have even had a name: "Arctica".
This is what I vaguely remember, too! I remember learning about the first white explorers to reach the North Pole and plant a flag there. It would be kinda silly to put a flag in a chunk of ice that's going to break up and melt every season, but that must be what happened. :-/
 

Bald Eagle

Active member
Messages
52
Reactions
166
Just some interesting information about the masses and energies and rates involved.

Basic Science: 4 Keys to Melt Fears About Ice Sheets Melting

Over 26 years, Antarctica’s average annual mass loss was less than 0.00040% of its total. If Antarctica were a 220 lb man, his mass loss each year would be 0.4 grams or about eight tears. (Eight human tears weigh about 0.4 g.) At this alarming rate that makes our most elite climate scientists worried, it would take 250,185 years to melt all of the ice. It would take over 1,000 years of melting to yield 12 inches of SLR from Antarctica if we ignore natural variability and the cyclical nature of ice volume and assume the melt rate continues uninterrupted.

Only aluminum, cobalt, and nickel seem to come anywhere near water - which has the highest latent heat of fusion.
Latent Heat of Melting for some common Materials

What other sources of power does humankind have that could be used to melt a significant amount of ice? The annual global energy production of electric power is 25 petawatt-hours (25×1015 Whr) or 9×1019 Joules. If we could, through some advanced technology, transfer all electric energy generated over one year to heaters buried in the ice, and do this with no transmission or distribution losses, then how much ice could we melt? The answer is 0.02 inches of SLR (equivalent to 4 human hair diameters). This scenario would require that humans not use any electric power for that entire year, for anything other than melting ice. Humanity would have to forego the benefits of electric power for over 146,000 years to melt all of the ice, assuming static conditions in the ice.
 
Last edited:

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
562
Reactions
2,853
Apparently the freezer has some regional outages

Clues to Mysterious, Gaping Holes in Antarctic Ice Revealed

Mystery over 19,000-square-mile holes appearing in Antarctic ice finally solved

Mystery of giant Antarctic ice holes solved by robots, tricked-out seals

But our scientists already know the answer to this riddle:

23397

Edit: Originally I thought this was about melting ice in the center of antarctica, but it appears to be related to the winter ice pack forming around the continent. still interesting.

also: 'Extraordinary': Almost 1/4 of West Antarctic ice is now 'unstable'
 
Last edited:

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
355
Reactions
1,229
I am never sure how much of their explanations to believe. 😕 I mean, these days, everything they discover is because of global climate change. But the world is always changing. The old maps, going back to the 1500s and sometimes earlier, don't seem to show things like polar ice caps, deserts, North America's Great Lakes, or the Himalayan Mountains; and there are odd features such as California being an island, and huge river systems that no longer exist. So much for everything requiring millions of years to change. Seems like it happens within a very short time frame. Maybe Antarctica is shedding the ice that doesn't actually belong there.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,840
Reactions
14,527
LOL. There we go.

Polar Umbrella Buoyant Skyscraper
polar-umbrella.jpg

As the polar ice caps reduce in size due to anthropogenic climate change, new and innovative ways to combat environmental degradation are being considered, embracing a future of positive change. One of the many winners of eVolo’s Skyscraper Competition, the Polar Umbrella Buoyant Skyscraper, is designed to not only change the way we see architectural infrastructure, but also change the way we combat climate change.
  • Designed by Derek Pirozzi, the Umbrella Skyscraper isn’t simply a futuristic environmental experiment, but would also provide research labs, energy harvesting power stations, housing units, and habitation for wildlife surrounding the vicinity. Its umbrella structure is specifically designed to reduce heat gain within the northern and southern arctic regions by absorbing the ultraviolet rays from the sun, while also using it to produce thermal energy via solar panels attached to the outside. Not only that, it would also accumulate the abundant supply of saline water beneath the caps using an osmotic power station within the structure’s core, resulting in the regeneration of thick, protective, ice shelves.
  • Each structure would be meticulously placed in regions most affected by the increase in ice cap temperatures. Eco-friendly tourist destinations would also materialize as a result, in the hopes that a spark of inspiration will arise for people to be equally creative in protecting the one planet we have (for now).
  • The piping system that surrounds the umbrella-like structure would be made up of polyethylene and be used to help pump the harvested sea water to and from the osmotic power station. The composition of the structure would be made up of carbon based zinc coated steel, allowing the structure to not only provide durable coating while submerged in salt water, but also provide necessary protection from extreme atmospheric conditions known throughout the arctic.
  • The top of the canopy would contain an emergency helicopter pad, alongside a catwalk for those visiting, living, or working inside. There would also be several weather balloons placed at the apex of the structure to help collect temperature readings, wind speeds, humidity, etc. Boasting several stories above the arctic shelf, each section would acquire its own necessary function. The length of the entire structure, alone, woud come close to a similar height as that of the Empire State Building – 433 meters (or 1420+ feet).

  • The design of such marvelous infrastructure is merely the tip of the iceberg (pun intended). With the growing scientific and technological fields dedicated to combating climate change, and as innovative ideas continue spurring throughout open space of the international mindset, we’re quickly becoming enveloped in a futurist crusade for progressive change. Do we have what it takes to successfully defeat such a great foe, all while changing the world as we know it for the good? I believe so.
  • For more information on Derek Pirozzi’s Polar Umbrella Buoyant Skyscraper, click here.

 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,471
Reactions
4,616
Actually, it looks and sounds pretty awesome. Way too small to cover the entire arctic region and I don't see how it's going to combat climate change except to provide shade to that one area but I like the idea of combining functional architecture with technological innovations for energy needs.

Is it just me or do these people seem a little under dressed for being the the Arctic?
 
Top