Climate Change and The Great Ocean Conveyor

The Gulf Stream, AMOC...all terms we hear quite a lot these days. And they all seem to be linked with climate change, or even abrupt climate change according to some. The circulation of currents around our globe is an extremely complex system that brings nutrients to our ocean food chain and heat energy to different parts of the planet. This week we attempt to understand the basics.
Help support this channels independence at
/ justhaveathink
Or with a donation via Paypal by clicking here
www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
Visit our website at
www.justhaveathink.com
Interested in mastering and remembering the concepts that I present in my videos? Check out the FREE DiveDeeper mini-courses offered by the Center for Behavior and Climate. These mini-courses teach the main concepts in select JHAT videos and go beyond to help you learn additional scientific or conservation concepts. The courses are great for teachers to use or for individual learning.
climatechange.behaviordevelop...
Research References below:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoh...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanti...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_St...
science.sciencemag.org/content...
www.gfdl.noaa.gov/research_hi...
www.theguardian.com/environme...
www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-en...
www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
www.sciencedaily.com/releases...
www.educapoles.org/news/news_d...
oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/c...
www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fea...
earth.yale.edu/sites/default/...
#greatoceanconveyor #abruptclimatechange #AMOC

[@antdavis3843]

You make the highest quality and most informative videos on KZbin. Keep them coming!

[@ganeshrohilla539]

Thank you so much for making such information so easy to access. In the times like these, it is important now more than ever to share the knowledge and science to everyone, so that they understand the gravity of the situation. Thank you!

[@nicedwards7420]

Hotty-salty circulation! 🤣 Love it! Great explanation 👍

[@lghammer778]

Bill Nye's awesome! I love how he's a mech engineer & that he took an astronomy class taught by Carl Sagan, what a champ

[@ek9772]

Thank you for the concise, clear presentation.

[@tundra_hunter278]

Great video! I really appreciate the pace of talking (slowly and clearly explaining things).

[@grindupBaker]

Absolutely. And GoogleTranslate copes with the accent so language isn't an issue (it translates into English fine).

[@Jyoti_002]

And the best explanation of thermohaline circulation. Thank you 🙏

[@pauldjerassi620]

PHEW we both need to have a lie down after that John haha its very inter woven and complicated ,thank you for a video that i would need to watch two or three times over to get to grips with it all,Thank you paul

[@jesalasbahamon]

Thank you for the video, really clear and easy to understand!, very illustrative!

[@ElElGato1947Gato]

Thanks, Dave. Clear & concise.

[@Miata822]

Posting links to the research discussed in your videos is perfect. Linking source materials is what separates the wheat from the chaff in climate change commentary.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Bill. I agree with you, and I will always try to be as thorough in this respect as I possibly can be. Thanks for your support. All the best. Dave

[@joostdela]

Great work! Clear and concise, hitting all the major points, keep up the good work!!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thank you :-) Much appreciated.

[@fnusharon223]

superb explanation, helped me a lot! Thank you so much! Keep up the good work! :)

[@firejester77041]

Ty Bill I'm using this video for school and it's GReat!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Fantastic! That's great to hear :-)

[@RichardRoy2]

I did click the like button, but, somehow, that seems inadequate. So I thought I'd say thank you, for the fine, enjoyable, informative insights you provide. It's hard for me to say any one presentation was more impactful than another, but I thought your presentation on soil regeneration a big piece of a puzzle on human effects on our world. The idea of looking at water as a green house gas, and the indirect path we can take to reverse it was, simply put, amazing. Looking at my back yard quite differently now. Thank you.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Richard. I really appreciate your feedback and support. Have a great weekend :-)

[@kitersrefuge7353]

Very good program thank you.

[@kiwidaza]

Enjoyed the video good information

[@tinkertaylor4447]

Great video yet again..

[@oldmikie]

Excellent work

[@marinaclarasanchezsuarez2905]

Extraordinary video⭐🥰✨

[@MarcoNierop]

Wow, great video again! I find it amazing how all these huge current systems work... I have read somewhere that massive ammounts of freezing not-so-salt seawater, coming in from the AMOC at the east coast of Greenland, forming huge fields of pankace ice patches.. Salt is forced out of the ice, making the the remaining seatwater very salt, brime, and remain fluid at even very low temperatures below the normal freezing point. this brime is heavier than the water coming in from the AMOC stream, so it starts to sink and forming the thermo-haline conveyer belt. The speed and ammounts of brime sinking there is mind bogling huge. What some scientists are warning for is that the Greenland land based ice sheet may melt at such rate that it starts diluting the salt water with so much fresh water right there that it may reduce the sink rate or even prevent it from sinking at all, and this way in turn will form some sort of blockage of the AMOC, stopping the AMOC or changing its course altogether, and this in turn may lead to the paradox that due to reduced transported heat to western Europe the winters may get colder, while the rest of the world may experience it only getting hotter. But to be honest, its not what we see happening right now, winters AND summers only getting hotter in western Europe the last ten years.. We have had hardly any ice and snow this winter.. Facinating stuff this is,

[@kohinoorbegum7739]

Thank you

[@Anna133199]

Your videos are great, but I wish you'd use better sources. Not newspaper articles and master theses, but articles from peer-reviewed scientific journals. Those newspaper articles are basically summaries of summaries.

[@PieterPatrick]

He did question the newspaper articles and didn't use them as source.

[@davidwatson8118]

Thanks Great work 😎👍

[@khairularchi]

Albeit the seriousness of the scientific facts, I'm thoroughly enjoyed the unintentional innuendos on the explanation. Plus with the great graphical presentation glued my attentions spend yet understand what the information are trying to conveyed. 😆👌

[@toni409]

This is all well and good of course and I'm only here to ask if there is or will there be an Humboldt Current for Dummies?

[@scottwood5515]

All caught up finally!!! Got your link from Black Bear News.....Thanks for all your hard work!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Scott. Thanks for your support. Much appreciated. Interesting to hear you got here from Black Bear News. I've watched a couple of his videos before. I'm very flattered he's mentioned me. All the best.

[@dallastaylor5479]

Interesting!

[@richardabrahams585]

Bravo!!!!

[@kirtg1]

Thanks

[@stephenmason5827]

As we lose the ice in the Arctic and BOE becomes more pronounced the jetstream will move over Greenland being the coldest area, would expect drastic changes in the jetstream

[@grindupBaker]

Greenland might not be by much the coldest area in the northern hemisphere winters. Likely (well almost certainly) it will be the coldest area in the northern hemisphere summers. Reason is North America & Asia also have much snow cover in winter so high albedo. However, much less solar radiation in northern Greenland so maybe it will usually be coldest. What I'm really saying are 2 things: - It isn't a matter of the coldest spot in the high latitudes being some kind of temperature "pole", it's a matter of the pattern of the coldness steering the air mass, not the same thing (e.g. one evening here at Georgian Bay the air above at 500 hPa was colder than the air above Greenland at 500 hPa except a miniscule spot in far northern Greenland). - Temperature must be compared at 500 hPa or some such above 2000 m altitude, not compared at surface (unless surface temperature is adjusted to sea level by adding 8 degrees / km altitude or some such). Reason is Greenland ice surface is up to 2000 m altitude and averaging 1600 m altitude so it's meaningless to compare it with the Arctic Ocean temperature at sea level to find which region is colder (comparing mountains with a valley, totally meaningless in relation to Jet Stream which is up above both of them).

[@lothairlondon]

Stratospheric layer...the jetstream is a dynamic system. please note that as a thermocouple the jetstream becomes more wavey with low solar flux and a weakening magnetosphere in general. The more wavey then the more equatorial warm air is brought north and cold polar air is brought south along steep trajectories meaning very hot and very cold air form steep temperature gradients along convergence lines. there is also a very steep electrical gradient which is why at these boundaries you get mega rainfall accompanied by often electrical storms and sometimes tornadoes. A blocked jetstream pattern is one where the polar oscillation stalls and this has nothing to do with heating or cooling. The science coming out is looking more and more like the jetstream is modulated by space weather....which would make sense as a thermo coupled system. Be interesting to see how the 9 year artic pulse plays into this general system of artic ice......certainly very credible science in terms of a lunisolar cycle.

[@frankov2000]

Wow! Thank you. I wish this sort of knowledge would be explained on something like the national news. It might give the public some idea of the scale and force that we are anthropomorphically meddling with. Subscribed and liked. Many thanks. Do you have something coming up that might explain/theorise as to why we are witnessing the severe weather this 2021 June to August in so many countries and countinents?

[@ramblerandy2397]

Enormously detailed subject, full of variables, which I think you managed to encapsulate. You skimmed over the route taken by the Ocean Conveyor Belt in the Pacific Ocean, but the real importance was to illustrate that the water flows between temperature/pressure/salinity gradients. I have to say that I'd completely forgotten most of this, and you made it understandable to me again. So 👍 from me. This is exactly the sort of level of subject complexity that politicians who don't understand, or don't want to, are so keen to call fake. Yet specialists have this pretty well understood.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Andy. I was really nervous about making this one, because I know it's a contentious issue and I also know that there are a lot of you guys out there who have much greater knowledge of the subject than I do. I'm extremely grateful for your feedback and I'm very glad the content was about right. You're quite right about the Pacific part - it just turned out to be bloody awkward to get the model animation to move from Indian Ocean to Pacific without completely buggering up the flow of the video, so I kind of hoped that the Indian Ocean would serve as a general principle for both. All the best. Dave

[@edbenton5899]

@@JustHaveaThink - I agree that going beyond what you did would begin to get confusing for some. You covered the process sufficiently so just about anyone would get the idea of how it works globally and can grasp what is happening in the other half of the world. Nice job.

[@BenMitro]

@@JustHaveaThink you covered that off with the statement " this week I am going to apply my considerable ignorance and incompetence to the task of understanding The Thermohaline Circulation" and I think you achieved that wonderfully well. I for one, have been elevated to your level of ignorance and incompetence from much lower down in the competence and knowledge state. (thank you!!!). I note that there are a few commentators still showing even more ignorance and incompetence than even I manage to muster...you have a lot of work in front of you. Keep up the great work.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Ed. That's very kind feedback and much appreciated. All the best.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Benny. (I think?) :-)

[@mr-mz4ed]

ty for being knowledgable about this . other such as beckwith dont really take the time to explain much. i dont know how hes even a teacher.

[@robertfallows1054]

Just started watching your channel this week. Good to have a place where the issues/process are presented and discussed. You talked a lot about ocean currents in the Atlantic (also eventually global) but have you or will talk about the Pacific. Seems to me (68 yrs old and living near Chicago) that there has been a change in the normal west to east flow of the jet stream to more of north to south over the Midwest in the last decade. Any thoughts. Thanks.

[@grindupBaker]

The thinking is definitely that a warmer Arctic region has done that. Reason is the Coriolis effect is WEacceleration = f(NSvelocity, latitude) == not == WEvelocity = f(NSvelocity, latitude) so as the huge temperature difference to the bitter-cold Arctic region is lessening the air no longers hangs a hard right when going north so look to new weather patterns throughout the northern hemisphere.

[@samlair3342]

In the 1930s, when scientists were explaining why the warming effects that carbon dioxide emissions would override the expected cooling predicted by Milankovitch, one prescient statement was made: “When the currents through the oceans change” your land will become evermore tropical.

[@LarryCleveland]

Sam Lair he’s been debunked

[@philmoore9829]

Thank you for your wonderful and informative channel. It's always excellent and the production values are splendid. I have a topic that I'm requesting that you cover. That topic is how climate change is effecting phytoplankton populations globally and how phytoplankton health effects the entire ecosystem.

[@dogphlap6749]

+Phil Moore I'd like to second that. In particular the likely affects on oxygen levels in our atmosphere since reduced phytoplankton population should reduce oxygen production but increased ocean temperature increases the release of dissolved oxygen from the ocean into the troposphere. Which affect wins out in the short/long term ?

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Phil. That's a very good subject. I touched on it a little bit in a very early video I did mid way through last year on Ocean Acidification. Here's a link to that one kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3e4dq2pZrd3q9k it's definitely something I can return to though. Thanks again for your support. Always very much appreciated.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Dogphlap. Here's a link that I sent to Phil of an early video I did on Ocean Acidification. kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3e4dq2pZrd3q9k I will certainly return to the subject this year. All the best. Dave

[@dann5480]

LMAO your earlier videos had top class humor i see!

[@MotherNatrsSon]

According to Peter Wadhams the northern "cog" of the conveyor belt is ceasing to function already. It is the point just south of Greenland. It is because of the major amount of ice sheet melt on Greenland adding fresh water to the ocean at the point where it used to be more saline. The ocean currents have already started changing as a result.

[@BalabanStoves]

It is entirely possible to build a mechanical climate machine that will halve the rate of global warming. But unfortunately, “climate activists” are more concerned with making money than solving the climate crisis.

[@christopherellis2663]

The Thermo-Haline Machine 🎰 the Hard Winters of the Fifth Century drove the Goths and the Huns on long migrations. At the same time, less food was produced in the south.

[@mechellekingman7833]

August 21 the conveyer is slowing and fragmented ,.that will mean colder northern hemisphere

[@davethefab6339]

Think I’m off for a lay down too.👍

[@frankh.5378]

What do you think of underwater volcanic activity and its correlation with the belt.

[@grindupBaker]

"underwater volcanic activity". Utterly negligible heat content. It doesn't even get to match the heat the humans make in their power stations and engines. Volcanic is pathetic heat. You coal/oil shill-fuckwits & Russian trolls are also pathetic.

[@timnicholls19]

Does anyone feel his voice is soothing and would be awesome for kids books

[@eddsson]

10k subs?! HOW can you not have more? :o

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hehe. I'm doing my best eddsson :-) We're growing consistently each week though. I will keep banging the drum and the more people get the message and pass it on, the better chance we have of achieving some sort of collective action. Thanks for your support. Very much appreciated. All the best. Dave

[@eddsson]

@@JustHaveaThink I know it's quite minor in comparision to what you manage on your own but I've been sharing the hell out of your stuff. Love it and I wish you all the best!

[@eddsson]

@@JustHaveaThink 11K!

[@TheEternalHermit]

Will shutting down this mechanism that brings huge amounts of heat from the equator to the poles cause the poles to be colder and thereby maybe increase ice and cause more albedo?

[@joechang8696]

There was discussion on building a sea level canal in Nicaragua. The Gulf Stream could then flow through the canal instead of going out through the Florida strait to the North Atlantic.

[@grindupBaker]

Would need to be 50 km wide canal. I recall the Grand Union Canal isn't that wide. We got across it to meet our birds in 1962 when I was 15.

[@blein8988]

Thank you Mr, JHAT! Nice work! Our level of knowledge about climate systems and the amount of data at our fingertips is amazing! The growing group of “educators” is deeply impressive in their understanding of the factors and educational craft. We live in the best of times, in this regard.

[@richdiana3663]

The 6th Mass Extinction is not a good time to be alive.

[@grindupBaker]

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

[@rf-bh3fh]

Has anyone got a idea about the status of AMOC and I mean a recent real measurement.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Robert. I suspect Paul Beckwith may be your man for that information.

[@henrik183614]

I'm a climate researcher in grad school whose research mainly focuses on the arctic and mid-latitudinal linkages, (especially through the stratospheric pathway), and I gotta say that I love your videos. Keep up the good work! Also, AMA if anybody is interested :]

[@grindupBaker]

So have you done any study/research regarding the distribution of air temperatures at various altitudes such as 500 HPa and so on around the Arctic region and that distribution's effect on the Jet Stream ? Obviously, Paul Beckwith's "just knock 17 degrees latitude off" is a kindergarten-level inaccurate over simplification but the concept is interesting as the Arctic region warms.

[@theonionpirate1076]

Have you noticed the early sharp downturn in arctic sea ice? Do you think it’s beginning its decline already?

[@henrik183614]

@@theonionpirate1076 Oh yeah I've seen it. This is explained by the anomalously very high temps in the arctic recently. These temps should let go a little in about a week or so, but it's still looking quite warm even after that. I do think the decline in areal extent has started, however I do also think that there is a chance it could plateau in a week or so, before steadily declining about a week after that. It's not gonna go up however.

[@henrik183614]

@@grindupBaker I am in the midst of doing something like that right now! I'm mostly focusing on the stratosphere/troposphere coupling but tropospheric warming events in the arctic are really important as well, and I will probably try to bring that into the mix of my analysis soon.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Henrik. I'm very flattered that 'proper' climate researchers are also enjoying the videos as well as us lay people. I appreciate your support very much. Good luck with your research program. All the best. Dave

[@DavidPaulNewtonScott]

Just a thought these could form the basis of a fuel free though slow transport system.

[@TheLostBear78]

Living here in Alaska. This has been a shockingly warm and dry March. Looking at the arctic sea ice extent chart it has a very sharp downturn. And if this weather keeps going like this, we might be in record ice teriotorty in very short time.

[@richdiana3663]

It's the melting permafrost and concomitant release of methane that I'm concerned with.

[@TheLostBear78]

@@richdiana3663 Very true, with such warm temps and so little snow cover in so many areas, the ground will warm much quicker and for a longer time this summer.

[@theonionpirate1076]

Kevin J I noticed that sharp downturn as well- it looks like it’s attained a certain steepness and begun its descent roughly a month earlier than it usually does, doesn’t it?

[@TheLostBear78]

@@theonionpirate1076 At best maybe 4 days currently. There is a chance that steepness could maintain, and it could be record shattering, but it's still too early to tell, it is still getting dark at night yet. Still have over a month yet till the sun stops setting for the summer. And this is way early in the season to declare winter over up here. But if this trend continues. It will be very interesting.

[@ClaireRichardsRN]

Good video, and mostly very clear. But it was a little confusing when you went from talking about the collapse of the Gulf Stream to collapse of the AMOC, after saying that the Gulf Stream and AMOC are different... So whether the periodic cycle of AMOC relates to the weakening of the Gulf Stream is unclear.

[@grindupBaker]

Gulf Stream is only a small (surface) part of the AMOC. AMOC lifts a bit of the Indian Ocean on the Saudi Arabia side & also at 58S in the Atlantic.

[@grindupBaker]

Wind-driven North Atlantic Ocean clockwise gyre, not thermohaline circulation (THC), is the cause of most of their special Atlantic Ocean climate moderation (and Gulf Stream surface flow) compared with central/east Canada. so UK/Europe would not get anywhere near as cold in winter as Canada even if THC stopped completely.

[@rf-bh3fh]

The Greenland melt is going full tilt , which corresponds to a great deal of stasis . Move melt leads to slower circulation. The seawater cannot dive when it becomes dilute.

[@Ironic1950]

Greenland, bigger than India, is a bowl, so while the edges may be melting a bit, the majority is accumulating more snow every year and is not in any danger of melting. Ditto the Antarctic; the UK science station in Antarctica is built on stilts, so it can be pumped up above the snowpack that has completely buried the earlier stations. Some floating icepack has broken off, but it doesn't mean Antarctica is melting!

[@saticharlie]

relax : www.thegwpf.com/greenland-ice-sheet-sixth-highest-on-record/

[@CSGATI]

So what about heat from volcanoes?

[@robsin2810]

What sort of measuring equipment did we have in 400AD......

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hmmm. Interesting. I think probably they rely on modern retrospective instrumentation :-)

[@dnomyarnostaw]

You could just Google it "The study looked at sediment historically carried along by the AMOC -- the larger the grains, the stronger the current. It also reconstructed near-surface ocean temperatures at points along the AMOC's journey to gauge how affected these were by current strength." edition.cnn.com/2018/04/12/world/gulf-stream-global-ocean-conveyor-belt-study-intl/index.html

[@corchem]

Tree rings.

[@dnomyarnostaw]

@@corchem What ?? I gave the link to the research. How does the AMOC influence tree rings reliably ?

[@STROONZONY]

Hi, I was wondering how Prof Peter Wadhams was going? cheers

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Gezza. Haven't spoken to him for a while but I know he's chasing some DACCS initiatives in a couple of parts of the world. He's promised to bring a progress update later in the year so I'm hoping to go up and interview him again in Cambridge at some point. All the best. Dave

[@STROONZONY]

@@JustHaveaThink Thanks Dave. Good to hear Peter is in good health then...cheers

[@bouncer2005]

This the chap who predicted an ice-free arctic by 2016 ?

[@grindupBaker]

The concept that if the AMOC (or any surfacedeep circulation) speeds up more heat will be sequestered into the ocean depths is obviously nonsensical. Something about energy does happen but it is at the other end (sounds vaguely scatological) that you show in the Indian Ocean (it's also in North Pacific Ocean). That's where the "store of cold" of the deep ocean (from its descent at Antarctic or Greenland) rises to the surface and this obviously causes some cooling.

[@grindupBaker]

Takes 3,300 years to recirculate the entire deep ocean. ENSO began strengthening 1995 AD. Some big changes started within a few years after that.

[@grindupBaker]

Mister Think says it at 9:25 but not at 8:38, the seasonality, not just average annual temperature, is greatly affected, far more seasonality in central/east Canada, as follows: The average annual temperature in Exeter is 9.7 °C latitude 50.7N The average January temperature in Exeter is 3.9 °C The average annual temperature in North Bay Ontario is 3.8 °C latitude 46.3 N The average January temperature in North Bay Ontario is -13.0 °C Exeter vs North Bay annual average difference 5.9 °C Exeter vs North Bay January average difference 16.9 °C OUCH !!!!! Also, though I didn't show it, the night/day variability increase so can be -34 degrees at night here in December/January on rare occasions & -29 to -31 quite often. North Bay my nearest city. Ouch for me. However, note that Gulf Stream is mostly the North Atlantic Ocean clockwise gyre wind-driven so UK/Europe would get most of their special Atlantic Ocean climate moderation compared with central/east Canada. No Canada fun for you blokes until blighty moves away from the ocean into the continent centre.

[@seribelz]

I hope it changes, wonder how the world would look like

[@SEAQUEST-R]

More heat absorption by the Ocean is impacting Coral survival. Temperature rise in the sea has been cited as the cause of die off. The Ocean is also acidifying, making it hard for carbon based shells to form. Sea micro life, plants and corals contribute up to 70% of the Oxygen we breath. Everything is a feedback loop, not just temperatures and water cycle.

[@xyzsame4081]

1 m/sec = 3,6 km/h - that is walking speed (if you walk medium to fast pace) that is the speed of some deep water current, and the Labrador current sinks with 10 cm/sec = 36 km/h (driving speed within the city if you are not overdoing it - it tends to be 40 - 50 km/h)

[@theonionpirate1076]

Xyz Same think you’ve got your math wrong, 1 m/s should be faster than only 10 cm/s.

[@iarmstrong4377]

I always thought the Thermohalene circulation cycle took 1000 years. Can someone explain why 500 years is mentioned in this video?

[@grindupBaker]

I can: 600 years One cycle of the Atlantic Ocean AMOC, pushed by deep cold water in the Greenland Sea. 1,000 years One cycle of the Antarctic Bottom Water (AABW), pushed by deep cold water around Antarctica, and deeper than the AMOC. 3,300 years The entire global ocean (except Arctic Ocean & the mega-deep tiny bits called "trenches") is turned over once.

[@terenceiutzi4003]

He should go to Newfoundland and watch the ocean currents move the icebergs down the cost! Or do a drift dive off of Cozumel!

[@grindupBaker]

At 4:40 "Bering Strait's too narrow" isn't really the main reason. It's the Bering Strait's too shallow. It's 45 meters deep. It's a paddling pool. It barely exists at all. Obviously, a deep current at 1,000-3,000 meters just sees the Bering Strait as a continent in the way, same as Asia, Alaska et al. Also the flow through Bering Strait is 0.9 Sv INTO the Arctic because Pacific Ocean surface is 1-2 meters (I forget exactly) higher than Atlantic Ocean surface because easterly trade wind takes Atlantic Ocean moisture across South America and dumps it in Pacific Ocean and also because the big part of thermohaline circulation (THC) is constantly lifting the north Pacific Ocean surface as shown in the cartoon in this video. Here's some old quote in my notes, it's for ice but has depths: "The primary site of water export from the Arctic to the Atlantic Ocean is the Fram Strait, which has a sill depth of 2,600 meters The Bering Strait with a sill depth of 45 meters Each of these water layers has distinct salinity and temperature characteristics".

[@larsrosing5033]

I can't seem to get my head around how the oceans can warm up by even a tiny amount, when many lakes around the world are the same temprature as they have always been, shouldn't they be very hot by now if warming is so pronounced!?

[@grindupBaker]

Don't panic because that's just because you're thick. Don't panic, you could consider a career of being ridiculously good looking.

[@rf-bh3fh]

I have a strong feeling it has declined a great deal.

[@grindupBaker]

Probably best for the rest of us to go with scientific analysis rather than going with your strong feelings. However, it's good that you're keeping your feelings fit & strong.

[@nocapbrudda6232]

7:15

[@stephenmason5827]

You mentioned if the Amoc speeds up more heat will be sequestered into the ocean depths I guess that could buy us more time but ultimately the heat and energy imbalance is just further warming the ocean as a whole. The growing fresh water runoff from Greenland and Antarctica will lead to ocean stratification putting a cap on the sea surface slowing or stopping overturning circulation. If the AMOC shut down the UK may cool for a time but the Equator will cook as the heat transfer from the circulation fails. This could also lead to anoxic oceans, deoxygenation as ocean mixing breaks down. Please let me know if my understanding is wrong or you have anything to add🌎👍🏻

[@JustHaveaThink]

Hi Stephen. I think you make very good observations, as always. The bottom line (as I know you are extremely aware) is that we need radical and very quick change if we're going to achieve any mitigation of climate change at all. As you say, there is no way we can rely on our oceans to keep on mopping up after us - they've been quietly dong that for about 150 years and it looks like they've had enough!

[@stephenmason5827]

Just Have a Think Terrible flooding in the US Midwest flooding grain silos and flooding out chemical plants, looks like many farmers will miss the planting season as the floods and clean up continue. Looking forward to your next video regarding BOE Watched something the other day regarding Greenland ice mass and the gravitational effect that has on the surrounding oceans and as Greenland losses mass and gravitational pull how that will change sea lvls around the world while also adding to sea lvl through ice loss. Obviously it's the same with Antarctica the changing Gravitational pull of these melting ice masses is not something I had thought about in regards to sea lvl. When you put all the pieces of the puzzle together regarding the collapsing climate systems and collapsing biosphere it looks more and more grim. Extinction rebellion starts Ernest April 15.....wonder what media coverage they will get 🌎👍🏻 Have a good week👍🏻🌎

[@JustHaveaThink]

Yeah I saw some reports about that as well - I think there are efforts to recalibrate the calculations on the severity of sea level rise based on what they're calling 'bounceback'. It's just one thing after another!

[@alistairmacgregor1456]

Well explained,m but i think researchers are missing a few factors, sunspots help control the wind, the wind and gyres both work in harmongy that controll the conveyer belts, the gyre is the engine, the conveyer is the effect, the gyre is the cause the conveyer is the effect, they all work in harmony, its a chain reaction, the wind gyre conveyer and sun spots, with too high Co2 levesl and methane this cause solar maginifcation and thus hotter air, the microwaves and radio, tv, mobile phone, ionsphere commujication ect, all cause attenuation in water molecules and increase molecular rotation in atoms, added the the fact of electron precipitation weakening the Ozone, taurus and sherman frequency spikes, we have more heat, this heats the top 10 meters, that cause variance in the conveyer cycle, this also causes the fighting plankton to not cycle the same as the top 10 meters is too hot, so there numbers redice along with the fish that feed on them, im adding this to your thwaits glacier video and with what i know, but basically, we need to reduce all microwaves radio use by at least 60% of it will not matter if you compleatly stop all Co2

[@grindupBaker]

"the gyre is the engine, the conveyer is the effect" is totally-incorrect rubbish. Dense water pressure pumps are the engine and this is well known. It's measured and published papers show the analysis results.

[@matwilliams4608]

the sun is putting us in a mini ice age and soon the gulf stream will shut down and i well leaving temp of -30 all the time in the uk , Just look up sunspots

[@grindupBaker]

Thanks, some interesting/informative tidbits in video. The THC driving force description given here commencing 3:00 and by all climate scientists whenever I've heard them mention it, is incorrect. Sir Isaac Newton has a Law that something accelerates if an unbalanced force is applied to it and does not accelerate if an unbalanced force is not applied to it. The deep ocean does not have an exception granted by the Law Of The Sea. Since there is friction (a force) opposing fluid flow and since friction increases with velocity (the idea of "terminal velocity" of a falling object) then "accelerates" can be simplified to "moves" for an easier picture. The THC driving force description given here and by all climate scientists whenever I've heard them mention it, is incorrect because it has cause and effect reversed at the starting location (deep water formation). There is no "deep water formation" but rather the entire column of water drops down else the water departing south (Greenland example) would leave a bloody great hole in the ocean at ~2,500 m depth. ----------------------------------------------- This means, obviously, that the pressure at the NADW depth range must be continuously reducing from the place near Greenland where the column drops all the way along the path it takes to Antarctica and thence onwards to either the north Pacific Ocean or the Indian Ocean. The water would not move otherwise. Water does not randomly move. There is the Coriolis effect and the presence of the Americas (i.e. sea surface height) causing this deep ocean current path to be what it is , not just the temperature/salinity profile above the depth of movement, but primarily it's going to be because average temperature/salinity/height(tallness) of the water above this geodepth (e.g 2,500 m geodepth) is on a decreasing pressure gradient and the water follows that gradient. I say depth range for simplicity but I don't actually mean depth as the distance from the sea surface above. I mean something close within a couple of metres though. I mean depth relative to Earth's centre of gravity (I think from memory it's called a "geoid" but I just now coined a word "geodepth" for it). The distinction is important because changing sea surface height changes pressure (more water above = more pressure) for a depth relative to Earth's centre of gravity but obviously changing sea surface height makes no change to pressure for a depth relative to the sea surface above. ----------------------------------------------- Then since water has departed south from, for example, at latitude 71N longtitude 0.8W in the Greenland Sea at depth range ~1,500 - 2,500 m depth (just an illustrative example) the entire column of water drops down at this place with the highest regional density (temperature/salinity) to that depth. Note that the surface water doesn't "get cold & salty and sink", the entire column of water drops down else the water departing south would leave a bloody great hole in the ocean at ~1,500 - 2,500 m depth, so there's no choice. Since the column of water dropped down its surface is now lower than elsewhere, hence the surface current is simply water running down hill under gravity to this low spot. In this case the route taken is whatever route is down hill but again modified by the Coriolis effect and the presence of land in the way and by prevailing winds that cause the gyres (included is Coriolis Effect), air currents that drive surface water. However, no matter how circuitous and interesting is the surface route caused by winds and land blocks, the water must move in a generally down hill direction from those high sea surface levels (SSLs) in the north Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean where the water is being literally pushed up by the force beneath back to those low sea surface level (SSL) regions around. You have likely seen surface water run down hill and meandering because of obstacles in its way, if its your driveway on a windy day and you wash the car you might even have seen air currents affect the flow as well as your beaten up cracked asphalt driveway. Ocean surface water currents are being driven by precisely the same forces, gravity, wind, obstacles. ----------------------------------------------- Note that land in the way is the same thing as "whatever route is down hill". So if you have a moderately-good science brain and education (university not needed) and you actually think about this you'll realize that I cannot possibly be incorrect unless Sir Isaac Newton's 1st Law is incorrect. The over-simplified "gets cold & salty and sink" is incorrect and with perhaps the optional "forms ice which rejects brine making the water saltier" is still incorrect as a driving force unless the ice departs and is replaced by ocean water because that's describing surface water getting heavier than the water below and thus sinking with the less-dense (warmer or less salty) water below coming up to replace it. That's just water overturning near Greenland (using AMOC/NADW example). This patently-incorrect description in video correctly describes an entirely-different effect that occurs only locally around Antarctica (and likely other places) in which surface water becomes denser than water directly below it and thus the waters interchange places in-situ (I assume with some mixing as they aren't in plastic sacks) in order to restore the always-decreasing density toward the surface (the pycnocline), an operation termed "overturning", but that effect obviously wouldn't drive any deep ocean current with a horizontal component thousand of times as long as the vertical component, such as the thermohaline circulation (THC), only drive an highly-local in-situ. ----------------------------------------------- A specific item made clear by the above obviously-correct logic (per Sir Isaac Newton) is the nonsense here and everywhere and by oceanographers that ice formation rejecting brine and making the surface water just below it get more saline and sink is part of the force that drives the thermohaline circulation (THC). Obviously it is not *unless the ice then departs the region*. This is crucial because ice departing the region takes fresh(ish) water away in precisely the same way as evaporation takes fresh water away, to be replaced by denser, saltier, water. it is only if and when the saltier, denser water arrives (due to sea ice being departed) that a driving force contribution to the THC is made by the ice-formation process. In fact, I bet dollars to doughnuts that this place at latitude 71N longtitude 0.8W in the Greenland Sea where pancake ice forms when a specific strong cold wind blows, causing a deep convective chimney in the Greenland Sea, has some of that pancake ice driven away from that tiny circular region only 15 km diameter and that driving away of ice would then cause additional +salinity density-->weight-->pressure-->force contribution to the THC.

[@innoveightion]

That comment took some time to put together.... Thank you for your clarification.

[@terenceiutzi4003]

He should go to Newfoundland and watch the icebergs traveling south in the ocean currents and do a drift dive of of Cozumel! Then would see how the ocean currents flow!

[@grindupBaker]

At 4:38 "dense water hits the bottom it spreads out" is Incorrect. The dense water punches down to 2500 m depth where the sea bed is 3500 m depth (at coordinates 75.0N 0.8W). Spreading out would be irrelevant to the thermohaline circulation (THC) anyway since it pushes its way horizontally along the decreasing pressure gradient all the way to the Indian Ocean and North Pacific Ocean anyway. It's always above the denser AABW which fills all ocean basins globally below a depth of 4000 m except the Arctic Ocean> Unfortunately, Atlantic Ocean section A16 from either 1970 or (more likely) WOCE profiles starts at 60N but the 75.0N 0.8W is the deep convective chimney in the Greenland Sea in Peter Wadhams paper and his book "A Farewell To Ice" which I have (Peter Wadhams is primarily an Arctic Ocean sea ice expert and he's even English! you people).

[@forestdweller5581]

70 % of our planet is ocean. 70% of your own body is water.....mind blown :)

[@grindupBaker]

Now I don't know whether uou're saying Earth is a body or I'm an ocean.

[@forestdweller5581]

@@grindupBaker If you want to be an ocean, you are an ocean :)

[@jamesbradwood5064]

Don't forget the influence of the Coriolis effect.

[@grindupBaker]

I'll never forget the influence of the Coriolis effect. I awaken at nights screaming.

[@jamesbradwood5064]

@@grindupBaker You see??? That's what I'm talking about people!!!

[@jrdgagnon]

You should have 8,000,000 subscribers, a sign that we won’t make it as a species. Keep up the work.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Bless you Jean-Denis. Very kind words. I will keep offering my messages each week and I will keep promoting all the other climate activist groups as well. Between us we will hopefully start to reach large numbers of people very soon. Thanks for your support. Dave

[@walther7147]

7:00 500 year long Cycle around the planet!

[@owlnationlegal4228]

THE BLUE OCEAN EVENT HAS ALREADY BEGUN given the record temperature anomalies already present in the Arctic in March and April 2019 and as described in the first video at mead2020 (0rg)

[@grindupBaker]

"THE BLUE OCEAN EVENT HAS ALREADY BEGUN". That's correct. It began in 2006 AD and has been ongoing (increasing) for 12 years now. That's why there's no such thing as a Blue-Ocean-Event (BOE), because it's just continuous thing and is already going on. It's a juvenile meaningless catch phrase for the uneducated masses.

[@owlnationlegal4228]

Incorrect. A BOE has a measurable effects and predictable consequences. I wouldn't worry about it. You have months, not years or decades. Enjoy what's left of your life.

[@grindupBaker]

@@owlnationlegal4228 Well of course a BOE has a measurable effects. They've been measured since 2006 AD, that's 13 years now. There's flooding just down the road from here. The consequences are generally predictable in bulk but it needs vast amounts more scientist-hours to pin it down a lot more, for sure many years and likely into decades to get highly-deailed local predictions. Interesting work. Young climate scientists everywhere have big grins about the exciting work to come throughout their careers, their talks all over the Utube.

[@owlnationlegal4228]

An Ice free Arctic in 2019 or 2020 guarantees and abrupt guarantees and abrupt spiking temperatures, more record heat waves, wildfires, droughts and super storms, crop losses already down 20% to 30% worldwide, projected to be worse in 2019 and horrific thereafter, then global famine, riots, collapse and extinction of all life on Earth including humans when skilled labor stops maintaining 1600 nuclear facilities and toxic plants all around the world already leaking, killing have attached, our rivers and oceans. Meanwhile, Plankton biomass is down 50%. Our primary oxygen machine is broken and our backup oxygen machine, the Amazon, is being mowed flat by Brazil's Bolsonaro. You have months, not years let alone decades. Buy wine now while it's still less than $500 a bottle.

[@johnferet8178]

Odds on my watching this video on May 4? About 1/365... but it was weird...

[@bennymarshall1320]

Does it flow down to Anarctica cos thats the bottom of the world?

[@grindupBaker]

Absolutely cobber ! Right down to Antarctica & Australia at the bottom of the world or as Aussies like Scott Morrison would say "Australia at the arse end of the world" because, you know, they're Aussies.

[@bennymarshall1320]

@@grindupBaker Yeah white people don't shine up too good in hot climates.

[@CovertGhoul]

Wallace Smith Broecker - Wikipedia

[@jakefink680]

HUGE question for the channel or anyone who is familiar enough with the science of The Global Ocean Conveyor Belt to affirm or debunk a theory of mine. Energy is a crisis in my opinion because of the amount we consume daily and the effects it is and will continue to have on the environment. So with being said a clean form of energy is a major puzzle we have to solve so as to preserve our own future. So why can't we engineer a method of harnessing the energy that is produced by the natural movement of the Ocean Conveyor Belt?? The Kardashev theory about the evolution of our civilization does imply that we will not become a Type 1 civilization until we are able to harness and put too use the energy of our own planet. I highly doubt that would be achievable through fossil fuels like crude oil. That is how I understand it to be and is why I have become so curious about the Global Oceanic Conveyor Belt. So is this in any way either realistically or theoretically plausible??? A Dyson Sphere is the first thing I would think of when discussing ways to harness said energy from the Ocean Conveyor Belt but of course we don't know how to actually execute the idea and put it to use.

[@grindupBaker]

"So why can't we engineer a method of harnessing the energy that is produced by the natural movement of the Ocean Conveyor Belt??" It's called Ocean Mechanical Energy Conversion (OMEC) or something like that. "why can't we engineer". 876,543 energy making things have been suggested. What's missing is money & land/ocean space to go ahead. Instead of asking silly questions that other people asked thousands of times before you jake fink must: - Become an entrepreneur, start an OMEC company. - Get investors to fund an energy plant in the ocean or just use your own cash. - Get international permissions or take the chance of some country's navy blowing up your plant. - Build the plant in the ocean. - Sell the electricity. - Become a multi-billionaire like Elon Musk & Charlie Koch & Bert Virgin or whatever that English bloke's name was who starred in Superman Returns (Richard Branson that's it). I hope to hear of your multi-billionaireness in a few years. Good luck.

[@grindupBaker]

Global Ocean Circulation: Antarctica . Two DIFFERENT things happen in this region. The surface water driven north as shown "pulls" deep water below south to Antarctica at depths 200m to 800m or thereabouts (so below the 0m-200m, roughly surface water being driven north above by the wind). That's a simple local overturning cycle of 200m-800m warm (0-2 degrees) water coming in, melting 2.3 trillion tonnes of ice per year off the Antarctica ice, freshening, getting "light", rising to surface because it's light, cooled to about -1.8 degrees and driven north (*so it came in at 1.0 degrees, cooled to -1.8 degrees, melting ice, rose to surface and wind drove it north. --------- Separately, the vast high--pressure, cold, salty water pumps (like pile drivers) at locations around Antarctica force water under increased pressure to the sea bed at -0.5 degrees northward up all oceans at a huge flow of 25.8 Sv and travel the sea bed at 0.0 degrees lifting the entire global ocean depth of 5,800 m above them by their high force except that the force is withheld in North Atlantic by the same thing around Greenland (the AMOC force and 17.5 Sv flow) with a Mexican Standoff at the Atlantic equator and this Antarctica AABW denser water then lifting the Greenland AMOC LNADW-UNADW to the surface further south (like a crowbar wedged under it). Arctic Ocean is a tiny paddling pool not an ocean and the 25.8 Sv AABW from the Antarctica vast high--pressure, cold, salty water pumps lifts the rest of the global ocean by about 2.7 metres (9 feet) per year. The permanent thermocline is only 650 m deep and temperature 5.0 degrees at the bottom, 27.0 degrees at the top, the lowest 89% of ocean 650 m down to 5,800 m deep is 0.0 degrees at the bottom and 5.0 degrees at the top so this vast area of "warm water lens" is literally lifted by being wedged up underneath by 2.7 metres per year which entirely replaces it with nice new 5.0 degrees water once per 650/2.7 = 240 years (of course, the sunshine and various mixings warm the water as it rises). That's called Global ThermoHaline Circulation (THC) or "Global Ocean Conveyor" and an old bloke "Wally Broecker" invented it using a giant stirring spoon and got a big bowl of pancake batter dumped on his head when he crossed the Pacific Equator. Serves him right.

[@grindupBaker]

Note that the Atlantic Ocean Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) cartoon at 4:50 showing Atlantic North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) formation is wildly inaccurate according to a scientific paper and book "A Farewell to Ice" by Peter Wadhams. Buy the book, it's like $10. Peter Wadhams measured a water cylinder 30 km across and 2,500 m deep in the Greenland Sea at coordinates 75.045N 0.8W and he's certain of that and he calls it "deep convective chimney in the Greenland Sea". The wildly inaccurate cartoon at 4:50 clearly shows the chimney incorrectly south of Iceland ~1,000 km southwest of where it really is and Peter in his book states outright that his one is what drives the Atlantic Ocean part of thermohaline circulation (THC) around the world and also every place one reads always says there are only 2 descending places, Labrador Sea to the west and this one. It's just a shoddy wildly inaccurate cartoon that even Stefan Rahmsdorff shows because they figure good enough it's just a cartoon, but it isn't good enough at all.

[@plinkbottle]

I am still pondering more basic science than that.. like carbon dioxide is heavier than air, so how does it stay in the upper atmosphere, where it is reported to cause huge global warming at very low concentrations.

[@hooplehead1019]

Yeah, youre clearly still in the basics of AGW denial as your typical rookie denialist "arguments" show. They have been addressed years, even decades ago. skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm And sorry for your loss, as your friends probably were killed by all the CO2 that has hovered only inches above the surface, being heavier than other gases.

[@glike2]

Blue arctic event must be prevented ASAP by arctic targeted SRM Geoengineering. SRM research needs to find a viable way ASAP. Space SRM Geoengineering is safer but costs so much more. Moon base mining and production development can bring space SRM costs down, but at current pace it will be too late. So massively accelerated space development seems wise. Current spending priorities are terrible.

[@shadowdance4666]

The day after tomorrow

[@lothairlondon]

The fact that we have magnetospheric weakening which appears to be non linear at the same time as possibly a 400/1000 year grand solar minimum and the magnetic poles now accelerating might play a role in a coupled ocean. Just like the jetstreams which are thought to be electrically coupled and effected by pertubations in the global electric circuit it is possible that electricity and plasma play a role in the driving of thermo saline pressure system. Also as we see charge separation layers in the atmosphere do we see this in the ocean also? Could plasma in dark mode also help drive the deep ocean currents and keep them from dissipating in terms of salinity and temperature. these ocean currents certainly cant be Coriolis related. We now know the the oceans waters displays many magnetic gyres because they have been mapped by satellite so in a liquid this will be electromagnetism.......so we should be looking towards the scientists that study coupling and electromagnetohydrodynamics....surely....especially as the earth is a dipole with a liquid surface. Until we look into a electromagnetic coupled thermohaline current model I'm sure that half of the science is missing. It's interesting to note the south polar deep ocean current and then map out the deep ocean ridge that circles Antarctica. Much work has been done in looking and the global electric circuit in terms of the geologic topography and how the ocean ridges and major faults are connected to this polar region in a electric Y type circuit. Does this also help in this Antarctic current. Now thinking of the question can we see a relationship to this current as least at the south pole in relation to the plasma gyre of the Aurora Australis in terms of a cross section of the plasma vortex modelled by Marklund convection. On another point the difference of a very salty electrolyte and charge differential to fresh water must play some role. You cant exclude electricity from a chemical or thermodynamic model otherwise you need to make up other stuff. we are seeing more and more in new climate modelling that the atmosphere behaves like a leaky capacitor seeking charge exchange between influences in space weather and ground both long and short term. Also from ground to earths core is connected with us living in a mostly charge neutral layer. Is it possible to measure current (amps) in a deep ocean stream or maybe charge differential from inside the ocean stream to the outside.....we may be surprised what we find as we were when science realised the voltage travelling through the ground along faultlines during quakes or the heating of the F2 layer of the ionisphere during major 6-8 mag earthquakes. Interesting that NASA is making a huge shift into investigating the role of space weather in major earthquakes now and more plasma science in general. There is definitely something lacking in the current models in oceanography and climate science in terms of minor greenhouse gas climate forcing. Not to say co2 has no effect but it seems way over weighted when considering other factors. As you know we are also in a modern comic ray maximum ( which as you know is inversely proportional to solar flux) and the decay through the atmosphere into smaller particles and aerosols which acts as cloud nucleation for H2O the major greenhouse gas...how big is this effect. glaring holes in many models like total solar irradiance only being a slice of the spectrum until that bit we thought did nothing in fact turns out to do much more than we thought. Science is still very much ego's and upholding theories as long as possible until they finally shatter like the slow train wreak we are currently witnessing in BIG BANG theory and exotic dark matter yet we will go on to see Brian Cox preach the gospel for as long as possible. One thing is we are definitely polluting our biosphere in terms of toxins running into the environment....we must agree on this at least. I have to say I do enjoy your shows.

[@randybostic1273]

And whatever happens in the Pacific Ocean, finding it's way through the Bering Strait, impacts the deeper waters of the Canadian Arctic and Atlantic Oceans.* Also, tritium** with it's higher melting point+ and once formed as ice should probably now be considered too. (Question: Does anyone ever check ice for beta emissions from tritium? It would certainly be interesting to understand if there's a causal relationship to some phenomena - such as: "300-foot ice disk spins over vortex in Maine river" kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZKWdKGAmL5miNE) * Arctic Ocean Circulation www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/polar-research/arctic-ocean-circulation/ ** Tritium en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium + "... water made with tritium and having the formula T2O has a melting point of 40°F (4.5°C), compared with 32°F (0°C) for normal water." science.jrank.org/pages/6970/Tritium.html

[@grindupBaker]

+Randy Bostic Pacific Ocean water is a valid point but I pondered & computed it 3 months ago and it's minor when averaged for the Arctic Ocean. it isn't negligible but it's a very minor effect on the whole Arctic Ocean. The flow rate is 0.9 Sv so obviously that's +3.74 w / m**2 of heating if it's applied only to 1,000,000 km**2 (6% only of the whole Arctic Ocean) that the Chukchi Sea is for each 1.0 degrees increase in Pacific Ocean nearish-surface (to 50 m depth) water temperature. It's 1.25 w / m**2 of heating if it's applied only to the Beaufort Gyre region and it's 0.24 w / m**2 of heating if it's applied as an average for the entire Arctic Ocean (for each 1.0 degrees increase in Pacific Ocean nearish-surface water temperature). However, compare those smallish +3.74 w / m**2, 1.25 w / m**2 & 0.24 w / m**2 of heating with the ~100 w / m**2 of heating that's always being sent to the Arctic Ocean from the tropics (more so in Arctic winter though) and always has been, with amount varying a bit, for tens of millions of years plus the +300 w / m**2 that the Sun plus downwelling LW will be using to warm the water areas without ice cover in summer minus the 388 w / m**2 (my initial calculations) that the Arctic Ocean will be sending to space to cool itself. The numbers in the calculations are of order 300-400 w / m**2 so the Pacific Ocean water +3.74 w / m**2, 1.25 w / m**2 & 0.24 w / m**2 are smallish adjustments especially considering that the +1.0 degrees increase in Pacific Ocean nearish-surface water temperature required to cause them would be in itself a massive increase in destructive energy. For that consider that tropical typhoon power is based on a formula "...(T-T)/T..." where T is that tropical Pacific Ocean water temperature and it starts with 26.5 degrees as the lowest temperature that can even make a cyclone form and then goes up from there so 30.5 degrees gives 30.5 - 26.5 = 4.0 degrees of power above the cyclone base line but add 1.0 degrees and it's 31.5 - 26.5 = 5.0 degrees of power above the cyclone base line so it goes up 25%. It's more complicated than just 25% more typhoon power per 1 degree but it does go up fast. That's the source of Jim Hansen's "Storms Of Our Grandchildren". Jim Hansen knows a tad more about all thin stuff than you, Mister Think & all the babbling half wits, believe it or not. ------------------- Your comment about tritium is irrelevant babbling as far as this selection of topics about thermohaline circulation (THC), Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) anomaly & ocean heat content (OHC) anomaly is concerned simply because there's essentially zero tritium anywhere. It was 1 part in each 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 parts before the 1950s atomic bomb tests raised it to 1 part in each 2,000,000,000,000,000 parts but it's since been heading back down to 1 part in each 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 parts. At the radioactive Fukushima water containment pond the tritium level is at 1 part in each 410,000,000,000 parts and they consider that so huge that there's study of it and deciding what to do about it. So, as everybody now sees, the weight of the entire March Arctic sea ice sheet of 30,000,000,000,000,000 kg includes just 15,000/32 (radioactive decay since 1960 AD) = ~500 grammes of ice made with tritium in it, that's spread over 15,600,000 km**2, so that would be all of UK, Europe plus the Balkans, Turkey & Iraq covered in ice 7 feet thick and then somehow sprinkle 1 measuring cup of tritium ice evenly over that. There's no possible effect at all is there ? Best not comment without thinking and researching for 5 minutes or if your brain & education aren't up to it because such comments simply inform people that you are an imbecile babbling away and none of us want that because we like you.

[@randybostic1273]

@@grindupBaker Awesome response! Loved it. Thank you.

[@grindupBaker]

This is a beef I've had for 4 years, not related to global warming. Peter Wadhams is only mentioned because a nice detailed pictorial in his book. It's a beef with scientists. I worked that out in my mind 4 years ago as the only possible explanation before I even knew the place(s) where it was sinking. He keeps saying the clues "waves break it up", "keeps forming more ice", "pancake ice", "strong cold wind". It's the wind you see. Ice rejecting salt and making the water saltier is a red herring because the ice is still there so there's no change in pressure so it can't help at all to drive thermohaline circulation (THC). Ice rejecting salt only helps if the ice departs that place, which leaves a dent in the ocean there, which gets filled immediately by salt water, which makes new ice which loses salt and then departs leaving its salt behind in the water, and so on. It is crucial that the ice must leave so that it takes the light fresh water away. This is why it could not happen if it was a vast solid sheet of ice (it can't leave) or if there wasn't wind (it would hang around and not take its fresh water away). The strong wind (Odden Sea) and the ice being in little pancakes means the fresh water can keep being driven off by wind and new heavy salty water take it place. That's what makes the water column heavy. Also, this business of surface water getting heavy and sinking is rubbish. What actually happens is that the entire column of water to 2500 m deep gets heavier than any other column of water 2500 m deep all the way down the Atlantic Ocean to the place where it surfaces north of Antarctica. It isn't the cold, salty surface water sinking. It's the entire column of water 2500 m tall dropping like a pile driver because it pushed the water at 2500 m south. If it didn't drop then there'd be a big hole in the ocean underneath it where the water went south. That isn't going to be allowed. Not the same thing as "surface water getting cold, salty, heavy and sinking", that one is just water switching with the water below it, not travelling horizontally 15,000 km.

[@grindupBaker]

In the unlikely event that somebody browses past who isn't bone-idle lazy or fucking brain dead then get a bit of background on land/air temperature measurement including its history by listening/viewing for 80 minutes at kzbin.info/www/bejne/fILRpWppr69giZY I've seen others of course but I don't keep good notes because I'm bone-idle lazy. This is the most comprehensive I've heard in a single video.

[@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869]

This guy needs to go into the arctic and learn what cold is.

[@-LightningRod-]

wow good one, we really are just finding out ton's of cool stuff. i wish more people cared, or i guess more people that weren't distracted by other priorities. Pretty exciting actually when you consider what is going to happen when the Arctic Ocean (beaufort) (chuchki) heats up ,potentially this year. the Earth is BURNING ./.. nothing else matters good luck and get ready

[@-LightningRod-]

@Trigger Troll no man can tell you the future I am just relaying facts so wake up

[@-LightningRod-]

@Trigger Troll thats a load of horseshit

[@daverichards1990]

@@-LightningRod- The tax part and that crops do better in warmer weather is true.

[@darrowburke7308]

Ice level are up not down

[@grindupBaker]

level are Ice not down up

[@chadtheprogressivelibertar7787]

Cat videos get more views then climate change videos . Sad 😞

[@paul.etedder2439]

Probably because climate change is a hoax. You Idiots

[@greennights2388]

You're tinted orange - this is not the only one. change the lighting you're fading into the BG.

[@deanfowles3707]

I just wish itd hurry up and kiII us all. It's the waiting that's so awful.

[@grindupBaker]

The AMOC animation at 4:03 is entirely incorrect between Svalbard (west of northern Norway) and the south tip of Greenland. For example, the "RED = SURFACE WATER" is incorrect junk science. You'll find a Dog's Breakfast of varying accuracy of thermohaline circulation (THC) pictorials & animations on the Interwebby and this is one of the poorer ones. I know how it operates in that region because I study from talks & papers from scientists working in their specialties but I've pretty much stopped wasting my time explaining most things because there's no audience in GoogleTubes comments, just a torrent of mostly drivel.