The Mini Ice Age Starts Here

Discodog

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html#ixzz17L2KFCXB

So should we be making preparations for colder winters ?

Has the emphasis on global warning ignored a potentially more serious issue for Ireland ?

I for one welcome our new polar bear overlords.

snow ghost

Probably media sensationalism, playing to the news worthiness of the current cold spell wrapped in the right-wing leanings of the Daily mail and its fairly conservative and global warming sceptic readership.

Best to find the original sceintific papers, without the journalistic spin.

Mmcd

I'm not sure of all the steps to verifying a scientific statement, all I know is the first one is making sure its not from the Dailymail!

gurramok

Isn't the mini ice age something to do with the lack of sunspots?

gbee

Discodog wrote: »

Has the emphasis on global warning ignored a potentially more serious issue for Ireland ?

Global warming was a scam deliberately and criminally executed to enforce more control over people by making them afraid and extracting more coin from them in taxes.

All the trends for the past twenty/thirty years were showing a cooling trend with occasional highs. This will continue, we will have severe winter conditions in Ireland for the next three to five years, then it will become mild again for maybe seven more years before cooling more severely than before, this pattern will repeat.

Gaps of 50 and 100 years can be observed in trends either upwards or downwards where even extreme opposite weather is experienced.

On top of these trends ~ local weather will be effected by the usual weather activators, so if a cold spell is coming because of La Nina, then this any cold event to hit us this year and for the next five years or so will be colder than 'normal'.

Discodog

The article & book are being widely discussed. People need to realise that if we have a succession of cold winters it has huge implications for the Irish economy. Many people have not financially recovered from last winter. So far this cold spell has cost millions. For once we need some serious study & appraisal of this possibility.

To many here snow is fun. To the majority it's a huge problem.

d'Oracle

snow ghost wrote: »

Probably media sensationalism, playing to the news worthiness of the current cold spell wrapped in the right-wing leanings of the Daily mail and its fairly conservative and global warming sceptic readership.

From the Daily Mail?
Neverrrrr.:D

Danno

Yet another classic example of divide and conqer by the powers-that-be.

Min

I think humans did great during the medieval warm period to fight manmade global warming.

From what I read, the scientists are now saying we will have cooling for 20 to 30 years then the runaway man made global warming/climate change will again be out to tax us and create more green jobs.

Meanwhile an ice free Arctic has been postponed and no doubt will be again.
AA roadwatch said the delays were due to ice.

marco_polo

And then there is what the two scientist actually said.

http://thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/about-that-daily-mail-mini-ice-age-story/


Old news is old btw.

d'Oracle

gbee wrote: »

Global warming was a scam deliberately and criminally executed to enforce more control over people by making them afraid and extracting more coin from them in taxes.

Criminally?

Are you a crazy?

How bout this.
Global warming, whether it exists or not, will never be a threat.
Reason being is that when the oil runs out, which it is already doing, we will all be immesurably ****ed. Just so happens that the methods of abating this just happen to be the same as the potential methods of abating GW if it is real or not.

Lip up and learn to ignore conspiracy nutism, for the good of your offspring and yourself.

Bjorn Bored.

we are not running out of oil,thats another load of cobblers.

d'Oracle

Ah right sorry.
Everything is a conspiracy then.
Incidentally, what nonsense source is it this comes from?
The one which contravenes at least 2 different definitions of what peak oil is?

Bjorn Bored.

look there are experts on either side of the agrument, i am not gonna bring up a whole heap of links but they are there and lots of them can be seen on youtube. Peak oil is total BS, as is global warming,in my opinion.
As an example just look at the amount of oil that escaped during the Gulf spill, it just kept on gushing out long after the well was supposed to dry up, I mean literally millions of tons of the stuff,and that was just one well! Even BP admitted "surprise" at the amount of oil that spilled out.
I just dont buy it, in the 1970s they told us we would have no oil left by the 90s but here we are,still with lots of oil,and still with huge carbon taxes and increases in price, maybe in a few hundred yrs there may be a problem but right now it all about keeping the price up and keeping the people paying for it.

DublinWriter

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

we are not running out of oil,thats another load of cobblers.

Of course we are, oil in a finite resource. India and China are starting to put a huge drain on global supply.

Wertz

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

I just dont buy it, in the 1970s they told us we would have no oil left by the 90s but here we are

They told us too, that we'd have a mini ice age.
Lots of new oil fields found since the 70's and lots of people born to grow up and consume it...scientific perspectives have changed....the simple fact that consuming something depletes it hasn't.
Peak Oil may in iteslef be a conspiracy to stem the flow to poorer countries and conserve supplies...or it could simply be that we rely far too much on the stuff for a whole swathe of things besides just energy and that it eventually has to run out, since we live within a closed system with finite resources.

d'Oracle

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

look there are experts on either side of the agrument, i am not gonna bring up a whole heap of links but they are there and lots of them can be seen on youtube. Peak oil is total BS, as is global warming,in my opinion.
As an example just look at the amount of oil that escaped during the Gulf spill, it just kept on gushing out long after the well was supposed to dry up, I mean literally millions of tons of the stuff,and that was just one well! Even BP admitted "surprise" at the amount of oil that spilled out.
I just dont buy it, in the 1970s they told us we would have no oil left by the 90s but here we are,still with lots of oil,and still with huge carbon taxes and increases in price, maybe in a few hundred yrs there may be a problem but right now it all about keeping the price up and keeping the people paying for it.

I'm sorry, it doesn't matter if you produce links or experts.
The two reasons you chose to bring in are awful.

You are not comparing scales with scales. It was a huge amount of oil got out, but only huge relative to a small amount. Relative to the amount of oil consumed in powering vehicles, Powerplants, vehicles that bring oil to powerplants and vehicles, vehicles and systems to extract oil, systems to refine oil, manufacturing of pharmaceuticals, manufacturing of plastics etc....in fact to put it better, generally consumed by the population of the world, it was not massive. At all. Which is in itself indicative of the amount of oil consumed on a day to day basis in the world.

In the 70's they told you they had no oil, because the largest resources were not being made available. The result was a move away from building oil burning engines as large and inefficient as humanly possible. Nobody (who knew what they were talking about )said the worlds oil reserves oil were running out in the 70's.

There are very few experts with any real credibility who question peak oil.
There are supposed experts who are too scared to face up to the reality and allow it to cloud their conclusions.

Back on topic: This isn't a beedin' ice age.
Its a bit of cold weather.

gothwalk

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

we are not running out of oil,thats another load of cobblers.

This one, at least, is easy to defeat.

Follow my logic, please.

1) The amount of oil on the planet is finite.
2) No further oil is being created.
3) We consume oil.

Now, I'm going to assume you accept these. 1 and 3 are pretty solid for anyone, I feel. If you don't accept 2, you've a lot of explaining to do.

If we consume some of the finite amount of oil, there is is less there. If no more is being created... well, no more appears, and when we use more, there is still less remaining. If we keep using it, there will be none left. This is pretty simple. When you use something, and then there isn't any more, then you have run out. Hence, we are running out of oil.

What I think you MAY mean is that you reckon there is a great deal of oil remaining. This is possible, but not likely. If there was more oil available, our delightful capitalist system would dig it up and sell it. The supply is not increasing. We can tell this because the price is not falling. There is indeed oil in hard to reach locations - deep sea, oil sands, etc. This is very expensive to extract, and so that's not happening either.

All the evidence - that is, basic logic regarding finite amounts, and an observation of rising, not falling oil prices, suggests that we are indeed, in every meaningful manner, running out of oil.

Bjorn Bored.

well i still dont think we are runnin out no matter what any "experts" (employed by the oil industry incidentally say) all we need to do to get more oil is to drill deeper and deeper,difficult but not beyond modern techniuques. recently they found a well off the coast of brazil that is 4 times the size of saudi arabias capacity, as i did say in my post maybe in a few hundred yrs we will have aproblem i never said it was infinte,but we are in no danger of runnin out any time soon.

As for the topic by the OP,now that is one theory I do buy into. What scientists are realising is that low sun spot activity acyually leads to mini ice ages. We are in a very low activity cycle right now, infact throughout history there have been times like this. There is proof that the thames river froze over in the summer months sometime in the 17th century,so it happens lets not kid ourselves. You see the way I see it if capitalism can make a **** load of profits from something they will,but when mother nature decides to send us into a little ice or a volcano erupts and brings our air travel to a halt for instance age they cannot control that.

Wertz

The thing about drilling deeper and going to the likes of the arctic to drill increases production costs by an awful lot...when you start to see cost of production outstripping the cost people are willing to pay for the resource, then the end is nigh.

...and as mentioned it's not simply about energy...it's about many aspects of agri food sector, pharma, plastics and other industrial chemicals.
the shame about oil is that we waste so much simply burning it when it is a treasure trove of chemicals we can't really source anyplace else...

gothwalk

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

There is proof that the thames river froze over in the summer months sometime in the 17th century,so it happens lets not kid ourselves.

I'm sorry, you what?

The Thames certainly froze over in cold winters between the 15th and 19th centuries, but never in summer.

Bjorn Bored.

i hate posting youtube links but this shows my points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHD4U2q_p4c&playnext=1&list=PLC5496A0BDAFD9EDC&index=20

i would hate btw to think that we will have to use oil in as much as we are doing now ,i am all for cleaner energies.

drdeadlift

gothwalk wrote: »

This one, at least, is easy to defeat.

Follow my logic, please.

1) The amount of oil on the planet is finite.
2) No further oil is being created.
3) We consume oil.

Now, I'm going to assume you accept these. 1 and 3 are pretty solid for anyone, I feel. If you don't accept 2, you've a lot of explaining to do.

If we consume some of the finite amount of oil, there is is less there. If no more is being created... well, no more appears, and when we use more, there is still less remaining. If we keep using it, there will be none left. This is pretty simple. When you use something, and then there isn't any more, then you have run out. Hence, we are running out of oil.

What I think you MAY mean is that you reckon there is a great deal of oil remaining. This is possible, but not likely. If there was more oil available, our delightful capitalist system would dig it up and sell it. The supply is not increasing. We can tell this because the price is not falling. There is indeed oil in hard to reach locations - deep sea, oil sands, etc. This is very expensive to extract, and so that's not happening either.

All the evidence - that is, basic logic regarding finite amounts, and an observation of rising, not falling oil prices, suggests that we are indeed, in every meaningful manner, running out of oil.

I didnt know the earth stopped producing oil,i thought the oil from the deepwaterhorizon was a continuous flow as the oil was/is being produced right now.Cant find the name fro that type of oil.

Bjorn Bored.

gothwalk wrote: »

I'm sorry, you what?

The Thames certainly froze over in cold winters between the 15th and 19th centuries, but never in summer.

sorry you are correct i was sure i read that somewhere it did however freeze right up to april at one point,not quite summer but not far away either, if we were to have a volcano eruption combined with a freezing temperature situation,then we could be in for a repeat of 1816, known as the" year without a summer"

gothwalk

drdeadlift wrote: »

I didnt know the earth stopped producing oil,i thought the oil from the deepwaterhorizon was a continuous flow as the oil was/is being produced right now.Cant find the name fro that type of oil.

"Fictional".

Oil is a remnant of organic life in the geological past. It takes millions and millions of years to accrue. While there is an argument to be made saying that organic matter in the current era is forming future oil, it's doing so at the same rate - over millions of years.

What happened at the Deepwater Horizon was that oil which exists at a deep level in the earth's crust was being forced up into the water through a man-made well, under pressure. It wasn't being created or produced, it was just moving from one place (deep in the crust where it's formed) to another (the water). The actual amount that came out, while massive in environmental terms, was pretty small in oil production terms.

Possibly you're misunderstanding the way the term "oil production" is used? It means getting the oil out of the ground and turning it into forms we can use, not making oil.

gothwalk

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

sorry you are correct i was sure i read that somewhere it did however freeze right up to april at one point,not quite summer but not far away either, if we were to have a volcano eruption combined with a freezing temperature situation,then we could be in for a repeat of 1816, known as the" year without a summer"

I don't believe the Thames has been frozen over in April in recorded history. Any references I can find are to January and February.

1816 was indeed referred to as the year without a summer, and there were frosts recorded in some unusual parts of the world in June (mostly in North America). However, it's not universally agreed that that was due to volcanic eruption; there have been connections with low sunspot activity made as well.

As far as most parts of the world were concerned, though, 1816 was just not very warm, rather than badly cold during the summer. It was certainly enough to cause crop failures, but far from enough to give widespread winter temperatures in summer. Or, for that matter, enough to freeze the Thames.

Mmcd

Okay I have a few questions about this whole thing. I'm not going to make my mind up completely on the subject because the whole point of science is to always question things but I would probably be more on the side of non man made global warming or a very small portion is man's fault.

Anyway what I'm wondering is why if this year is so cold and such then why is it due to go down in the top three warmest years since 1800? I can accept the years during the 90s being warm with increased sun activity and such but surely shouldn't it have changed enough by now that this year isn't warmer than all the 90s bar 1998 (I can get a source for this if needed - can't remember at the moment where it was).

Also in reference to the oil. The only reason people are against nuclear energy at the moment is because they can. In fifty years (probably alot longer because there is alot of oil still) people will not be so much against it when electricity drastically increases in price. Also seeing as even if oil is gone in 100 years there is still even more coal left. And I would personally not be surprised if this ends up all being irrelevant if cold fusion or some form of fusion becomes possible seeing as the timescale is quite big!

Edit: The other question is why did the mini ice age last so much longer than the 20/30 year cycles that are mentioned here?

DublinWriter

drdeadlift wrote: »

I didnt know the earth stopped producing oil,i thought the oil from the deepwaterhorizon was a continuous flow as the oil was/is being produced right now.Cant find the name fro that type of oil.

Huh?!??!

The earth doesn't produce oil - it's feckin' dinosaur juice!

gurramok

Mmcd wrote: »

Anyway what I'm wondering is why if this year is so cold and such then why is it due to go down in the top three warmest years since 1800? I can accept the years during the 90s being warm with increased sun activity and such but surely shouldn't it have changed enough by now that this year isn't warmer than all the 90s bar 1998 (I can get a source for this if needed - can't remember at the moment where it was).

It would be a gradual cooling, not a sudden cooling. Just like in the 90's it was a gradual hotting up, not sudden jumps. Another few years of this winter and last winter and we would then definitely know whats going on if the sunspots are related to the weather i'd guess.

Pangea

Discodog wrote: »

So far this cold spell has cost millions.

Ok the day before the budget and the week after the IMF forces us to loan 85 Billion and you talk about the cold spell costing us a lot . Its nothing compared to what those feckers in the Dail are gona put us through at least with snow it gives people some joy. :pac:

th3 s1aught3r

Discodog wrote: »

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html#ixzz17L2KFCXB

So should we be making preparations for colder winters ?

Has the emphasis on global warning ignored a potentially more serious issue for Ireland ?

Stopped reading when I saw it was in the Daily Mail

sh1tstirrer

Bjorn Bored. wrote: »

we are not running out of oil,thats another load of cobblers.

Back in the 70's we were told that oil was running out fast and it would become scarce. There is a lot of it burnt since then and it keeps coming.

Godge

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055544236

The above thread should answer some of your questions about the mini ice-age

Discodog

Pangea wrote: »

Ok the day before the budget and the week after the IMF forces us to loan 85 Billion and you talk about the cold spell costing us a lot . Its nothing compared to what those feckers in the Dail are gona put us through at least with snow it gives people some joy. :pac:

Joy for a very few & abject misery for most. Does your definition of joy include more accidents/injuries, hugely increased journey times, higher fuel bills etc etc. ?.

I have always fancied going on a storm chasing trip but I wonder how I would cope with the joy of seeing a tornado & balancing it against wrecked lives.

Btw the way the IMF haven't forced us - we managed it all by ourselves.

Mmcd

Discodog wrote: »

Joy for a very few & abject misery for most. Does your definition of joy include more accidents/injuries, hugely increased journey times, higher fuel bills etc etc. ?.

I have always fancied going on a storm chasing trip but I wonder how I would cope with the joy of seeing a tornado & balancing it against wrecked lives.

Btw the way the IMF haven't forced us - we managed it all by ourselves.

If you can't change the outcome of something it really is irrelevant how you feel about it. In fact I would go as far as to say I feel sorry for someone who can't see it for its beauty. Two people can experience the same hardship etc.. but one still gets to marvel at it. I know which one I'd rather be!

Discodog

Mmcd wrote: »

If you can't change the outcome of something it really is irrelevant how you feel about it. In fact I would go as far as to say I feel sorry for someone who can't see it for its beauty. Two people can experience the same hardship etc.. but one still gets to marvel at it. I know which one I'd rather be!

Well I would not recommend asking someone who has had their house wiped out by a tornado or who has lost a loved one on a snowy road if the weather is beautiful & marvellous.

Of course even the most adverse weather has a beauty unless one is on the receiving end.

BEASTERLY

Discodog wrote: »

Well I would not recommend asking someone who has had their house wiped out by a tornado or who has lost a loved one on a snowy road that the weather is beautiful & marvellous.

Of course even the most adverse weather has a beauty unless one is on the receiving end.

Correct me if im wrong but there hasnt been any fatal road accidents since the snow began two weeks ago. I know there was a related death in carlow this morning alright. The roads have actually become safer due to lower speeds etc. So if on fatal crash is caused by snow 5 more could have been prevented by it. The alternative is rain and strong winds which can be responsible for plenty more road deaths than snowy conditions.

And as was said before, its out of our control, we may aswell enjoy it.

''nothing is good or bad, but thinking makes it so''

Discodog

How many successive cold winters would it take to justify the idea of a mini ice age ?.

isle of man

Discodog wrote: »

How many successive cold winters would it take to justify the idea of a mini ice age ?.

when theres real proof of it.
2 cold winters does not make it a mini ice age

thetonynator

BEASTERLY wrote: »

''nothing is good or bad, but thinking makes it so''

Shakespeare fan?! :P

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

How many successive cold winters would it take to justify the idea of a mini ice age ?.

isle of man wrote: »

when theres real proof of it.
2 cold winters does not make it a mini ice age

What proof and how long?

I would expect to see polar ice extending beyond it's 20th century average extent as an indicator of a long term cooling trend.

But I don't think it's a mini ice age as such, more a change of weather patttern, if it is linked to solar activity, then we can expect a decade or two (or more) of colder winters, but no ice age*

*no glaciers forming on the shannon.

Discodog

So we have some cold winters & governments, especially the Scots, are under pressure to buy proper snow clearing equipment. When can you reasonable state that we are facing colder winters ?.

A decade or two of colder winters has immense implications. If we were to have regular winters like last year it would necessitate a totally different approach to snow & ice.

gbee

Discodog wrote: »

A decade or two of colder winters has immense implications. If we were to have regular winters like last year it would necessitate a totally different approach to snow & ice.

Yes, mind you we used be better prepared for cold winters in Ireland, but for the last 50 years or more it was becoming a rare necessity.

Also a big change has taken place in local authorities, Health & Safety, work practices, budgets and bureaucracy.

When I was a boy, anyone with drivers licence could drive a council digger or scraper [excellent snow ploughs BTW] and they got a few bob in the hand and a pint or a drop, job done!

This year we have councils threatening legal action because people want to throw grit on the ice and the councils say they need permits and a safety course ........... BONKERS.

I welcome our new snow overlords!

gothwalk

In my opinion, if the rest of this winter brings more snow and ice, and 2011/2012 is similar, then it'll be time to start changing the policies and recognising that we need the infrastructure to handle colder weather. This basically comes down to there being plans in place for local authorities to clear snow and grit roads, and whatever changes need to be made to keep the buses running.

It may, of course, all change again, even after three in a row, but it's beyond coincidence and happenstance at that point.

gbee wrote: »

This year we have councils threatening legal action because people want to throw grit on the ice and the councils say they need permits and a safety course ........... BONKERS.

At the moment, that's happening because it's exceptional. If it becomes ordinary, things will adjust, and there'll be some middle ground whereby people are expected to clear their own driveways (as in most countries where winter has an impact) and local authorities will deal with public areas.

dloob

drdeadlift wrote: »

I didnt know the earth stopped producing oil,i thought the oil from the deepwaterhorizon was a continuous flow as the oil was/is being produced right now.Cant find the name fro that type of oil.

It's called abiotic oil, how much oil is produced that way is a bit of a heated topic.
Current thinking is very little, a few dissagree of course.

As for the mini ice age I heard a bit about it on the radio recently.
A climatologist from Galway mentioned that the liffey was frozen over one year on june 23rd.
I'm afraid can't remember what year they said it was.
During that time there were also hard frosts and snow in August.

gothwalk

dloob wrote: »

As for the mini ice age I heard a bit about it on the radio recently.
A climatologist from Galway mentioned that the liffey was frozen over one year on june 23rd.
I'm afraid can't remember what year they said it was.
During that time there were also hard frosts and snow in August.

He was either smoking something or talking about the real ice age. The Liffey has not frozen in June any time since records or even history began, and indeed, if it did, we'd have a record of it as "that year everyone in Ireland died".

In order for the Liffey to freeze over, it would take sustained sub-zero temperatures for days. That would assure that every crop in the country - and in June, that's all of them - was dead, and without modern shipping, everybody in the country would starve to death over the following months.

Snow in August is possible. I've seen a few snow-flakes in July, in the foothills of the Wicklow Mountains a bit west of Bray. Of course, it melted as soon as it appeared, and lasted for about 30 seconds in total. You won't get more than that.

A hard frost in August is less likely; as before, you'd need sustained cold for hours for that to happen, and clear skies - pretty much necessary for frost in all but the very coldest of periods - mean that the land is getting well warmed by the sun for all the long hours of daylight.

So I think you must have missed some context.

Panrich

For people advocating deeper drilling etc. as an answer to a shortage of easily available land based supply, I would urge an exploration of the term ERoEI.

Speak Now

Discodog wrote: »

How many successive cold winters would it take to justify the idea of a mini ice age ?.

Well the little ice age was from the 16th to 19th Centurys

Panrich

gothwalk wrote: »

He was either smoking something or talking about the real ice age. The Liffey has not frozen in June any time since records or even history began, and indeed, if it did, we'd have a record of it as "that year everyone in Ireland died".

In order for the Liffey to freeze over, it would take sustained sub-zero temperatures for days. That would assure that every crop in the country - and in June, that's all of them - was dead, and without modern shipping, everybody in the country would starve to death over the following months.

Snow in August is possible. I've seen a few snow-flakes in July, in the foothills of the Wicklow Mountains a bit west of Bray. Of course, it melted as soon as it appeared, and lasted for about 30 seconds in total. You won't get more than that.

A hard frost in August is less likely; as before, you'd need sustained cold for hours for that to happen, and clear skies - pretty much necessary for frost in all but the very coldest of periods - mean that the land is getting well warmed by the sun for all the long hours of daylight.

So I think you must have missed some context.

The mount tambura earthquake in 1816 caused major problems globally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

gothwalk

Panrich wrote: »

The mount tambura earthquake in 1816 caused major problems globally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

Yes, it did. It lowered global temperatures by a small amount, and caused some unseasonal frost and snow in North America. And there wasn't much sunshine to be had anywhere. Even that amount of change brought about crop failures in Ireland.

It did not, and could not, cause the Liffey to freeze in June.