Scientists' Crazy Plan To Refreeze The Arctic
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 07. 2024
- As the mean global temperature continues to rise, the arctic ice caps continue to melt. What are scientist planning to do about it? Here's a hint: it involves 10 million sea water pumps.
What Happens If All The World's Ice Melts? - • What Happens If All Th...
Sign Up For The Seeker Newsletter Here - bit.ly/1UO1PxI
Get 15% off www.domain.com domain names and web hosting when you use coupon code DNEWS at checkout!
Read More:
Scientists Have Announced a Plan to 'Refreeze' the Arctic - and It's Wild
www.sciencealert.com/scientist...
"Desperate times call for desperate measures, and with temperatures near the North Pole hitting an unheard-of 20°C (36°F) warmer than average last year, things in the Arctic are undeniably grim right now. But rather than sit by and watch as the sea ice disappears from the region at an unprecedented rate, scientists have hatched a crazy plan to 'refreeze' the Arctic, by installing some 10 million wind-powered pumps over the ice cap to spray sea water over the surface and replenish the sea ice."
Arctic ice management
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10...
"As the Earth's climate has changed, Arctic sea ice extent has decreased drastically. It is likely that the late-summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as the 2030s. This loss of sea ice represents one of the most severe positive feedbacks in the climate system, as sunlight that would otherwise be reflected by sea ice is absorbed by open ocean. It is unlikely that CO2 levels and mean temperatures can be decreased in time to prevent this loss, so restoring sea ice artificially is an imperative."
How a giant space umbrella could stop global warming
www.bbc.com/future/story/20160...
"The race to find a solution to a rapidly warming world is one of the most pressing challenges facing our planet. One proposal to try to halt this warming is literally out-of-this-world: a giant, space-based sunshade. We're already modifying our climate by accident, so why not do it by deliberate geoengineering? It's a radical idea, and it just might just work. Reducing the amount of light reaching our planet could cool the Earth quickly, even with rising carbon dioxide levels."
____________________
DNews is dedicated to satisfying your curiosity and to bringing you mind-bending stories & perspectives you won't find anywhere else! New videos daily.
Watch More DNews on Seeker www.seeker.com/show/dnews/
Subscribe now! czcams.com/users/subscription_c...
Seeker on Twitter / seeker
Trace Dominguez on Twitter / tracedominguez
DNews on Facebook / discoverynews
DNews on Google+ plus.google.com/u/0/+dnews
Seeker www.seeker.com/
Special thanks to Jules Suzdaltsev for hosting and writing this episode of DNews!
Check Jules out on Twitter: / jules_su - Věda a technologie
Maybe just reducing CO2 emissions is a much more practical solution.
It would be cheaper than this solution, if anything.
Peter Faber but it would only stop it not refreeze it
it would if CO2 were actually the cause of warming
unfortunately PFCs are much more dangerous and CO2 is just a convenient way to tax energy to counterbalance "free" markets. most air conditioners are way worse than fossil fuels could ever be.
Pff, don't be ridiculous. We can't do that. The only way to generate electricity is through using fossil fuels. If there were somehow an alternative we would be using it already.
stopping it all together would work the bet, but seeing as how there's no chance of that, i suppose the majority of the populace dying of in some way i the only way that we can survive as a species.
Yeah, constructing 100 million wind mills and producing hundreds of millions of steel every year will not produce any CO2 right?
lol no shit, on top of the ten other reasons it wont work
lol no shit, let's just let all the plains drown forever and move up the mountains to prevent the high temperatures.
Vatsyayana name 3 legitimate reasons and I will give you a cookie.
Not really.
TheGolfdaily .... They said that It would be a percentage of annual US steel production, it's not like they're adding additional plants for the operation...
If every country contributed 1% of their GDP this would be easily done several times over.
AttentionJunkie that is a great idea.
Yeah, there is no way to get it to actually happen. There is only one option, adapt to a future with melted ice caps, higher sea levels, and everything else that will come with it.
AttentionJunkie exactly wat I was thinking in the vid
I do wish that humanity would collectively put its resources together to stop this climate change from happening. The short term costs of preserving the health of the planet's systems would be less than the long term costs of letting it all go out of control and ruining the stability of climate that humanity has depended on for over 10,000 years.
Instead short sighted thinking will predominate.
AttentionJunkie Then we'll have outraged first world countries who have to pay more.
Just put a giant ice cube in the ocean, like in futurama
haha until Haleys comment runs out of ice!
Generic Commenter That makes just amount of sense...
Generic Commenter Ingenious
Need to get rid of all the psychos that want to control the weather . Look at California the drought and now the floods. Mankind in high places created and caused most of the destruction of the planet. then turn around and charge people in taxes to fix the problem, But where does the money go ? It's just like the taxes they charge at the notor vehicle dept and say it's for roads and such, BUT how many roads are wasted because of lies told. and no one knows where the money goes.
Once and for all!
Easy solution: Build a nuclear bomb that emits a cold frost instead of heat.
(Damn, I'm such a fucking genius. I should have finished school, I probably be a scientist by now.)
Mlu007M Um... you've forgotten about radiation and that animals actually live in the Arctic.
's a joke.
+P..._...P Just use anti-fission.
Mlu007M what about a bomb
But not nuclear... but is filled with liquid nitrogen?
This isn't a Marvel comic, radiation doesn't do whatever you want because you say so.
What were scientists smoking when they came up with this crap?
H4WK69 yes
correction SCIENCES!!!!!
would you look at that, a random on a you tube comment section know better than scientists
classic.
+H4WK69 So you've a cheaper, better solution then? Why do you even think it's far fetched?
No failandia, its common sense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Melted salt water poured on melting ice, try the experiment yourself.
how about planting 10 mil trees in every country with 1 tenth of 7 trilion doller.
better solution.
Trees are don't actually remove carbon from the atmosphere permanently - they only sequester it until they die and decay. You can sequester more by increasing plant biomass but there's limits to what we can do (and it would require millions of km^2 of new forests to keep up with our production - every single year).
We could do artificial trees - big solar or wind plants that suck in air and filter the greenhouse gases (co2, methane, ect) and compress them for long term storage underground. This has the advantage of being a lot more space efficient and can run indefinitely - the only limit is power.
Now if we had huge amounts of power, we could even split the co2 and methane to manufacture petroleum products (plastic, ect), carbon fiber and graphene, and various other things, but this is very very costly in terms of power and would never be economically viable without something like fusion.
If you want to know how plants may be able to stop global warming, google "Azolla Event".
Al-Ikram Chowdory better plan is that we harvest algea which has more carbon mass per unit of algea mass than trees then pump that algea into the oil wells we have been depleating for decades. So all the carbon goes right back where it came from and probably more of it can fit into the natgas resevoirs since gas takes up way more space than liquids.
look up "Managed intensive rotational grazing" basically farming animals the way they naturally graze the Serengeti. removes far more carbon dioxide than trees (and any artificial devices) & there's really no limit to amount you can increase. Anything underground is going to stay there after dying/decaying. Look at the size of roots on grass, that's all carbon & when the animal eats the top of the grass off, the plant sheds all that carbon to access the nutrients it trapped & stored there to grow new shoots, leaving all the carbon behind in the soil.
Basically in this system, the farmer puts a herd of animals into a small paddock, generally around 500 times more animals than would usually graze a paddock that size, leave them there for one day, then move them to a new paddock the same size the next day, doing this for a full year, then back ot the start again.
The mass numbers mean all grass evenly eaten, no picking out good stuff & leaving weeds uneaten to multiply, but also lots of grass gets trampled into mulch & covered in "fertiliser". Animals are removed, new seed now has nutrients & clear space to grow & trimmed plants likewise have dead material removed & are ready to thrive again.
They have a full year to grow nice & big before the process will be repeated, over this time, they're sucking in all that CO2 & storing it in leaves & roots, when animals return, there's now even more grass to eat, too much actually, so more gets trampled into mulch, this raises land level & allows more carbon to be locked into the ground.
There's 5 billion hectares of land that traditionally has been using this system as it's eco-system & we can do it again with farm animals & also produce 4 times the food we currently get. each square kilometre using this system is removing 100 tonnes of carbon dioxide for every 1% increase it gets in soil organic matter.
Farmers who switch to this are making huge profits as a result, it DOES work! but sadly stupid ideas like in this video are getting all the attention & so systems like this can't get the publicity they need to do the job they're capable of
Trees keep the CO2 level in our atmosphere constant, they don’t remove it
its fine Mexico will pay for it
Toyo Masauce Mexico will
Lol
Mexico will pay for everything xD
Racist
Barez Games wooosh
WE ARE DOOMED AND REPUBLICANS AREN'T HELPING
Julian Aguilar didnt see Obama helping either
Julian Aguilar nah they turned the environmental car arround and jammed the gas pedal
Julian Aguilar We have to give him a chance Unfortunately
They did a HELL of a lot more good in the first 20 days than the Deamonrats did in 8 years.
Julian Aguilar 😂😂😂 I don't think anyone has been helping
I like how he just randomly starts sponsering something at the end of a serious problem
Necessary evil to keep the videos going loool
a worthy cost for saving the EARTH
Arifin Aslam it’d be easier to spend the money on companies like Tesla and solar panel technology. Build houses and side buildings with hemp Crete to store half of the buildings weight in carbon. Increase no till and cover cropping ag systems to sequester carbon in the soils that have already lost 5%. Like half of America’s land is farmed. Increasing The carbon in the first six inches and more from 3% to ten percent in all that is a LOT OF CARBON. A farmer named Gabe brown is already doing it for half the price as other producers, but they’re afraid to turn because yields could drop for a few years.
Arifin Aslam oh and STOP EATING MEAT! Just eat plants and maybe wild caught sustainable fish like sardines. Soy milk is just as good as skim milk with the same sugar content. It also doesn’t contain antibiotics and mammalian estrogen.
Arifin Aslam Most ignorant people who only want to seem politically correct instead
of looking at the data do not take into account sun cycles which
scientist are now admitting has more to do with rapid global heating and
intensive storm cycles. Plus, when the sun goes through cooler cycles,
has massively led to major changes into ice ages. But then again, there
is indoctrination and there is science.
@@Dollapfin or we could eat meat so there are less cows
And how much would the production of that steel harm the environment?
The pump idea just won't work. If you look in your own B-roll those puddles on top of the ice are fresh water, if that hasn't frozen you can bet 100% that sea water also wouldn't freeze given the fact it needs a lower temperature to do so. You'd also have to condend with the fact that where you pump the water on to the ice it would rapidly melt the ice given that it must be warmer than it leading to deeper puddles taking even longer to freeze, if at all. I'd bet you'd lose more ice with that plan than you would ever gain.
Firecul42 salt added to ice actually causes the temperature to drop. that's why the idiots that do the challenge that involves holding salted ice to your arm causes burns
I imagined that they weren't dumping the water on top of the ice, but misting it.
Freeworkout Playlistsdotcom you think science hasn't or can't be wrong?
would you look at that, a random on a you tube comment section know better than scientists
classic.
+Firecul42
So what scientific journal is your research paper published in?
this is stunningly similar to the Futurama episode
Easy way - grow plants
It Will take a long time
No we already have found plants that can convert co2 into oxygen. (It does not 100%) but the thing is it is much more efficient than tress. It might cost more but the area it takes up is a fraction of mass planting trees
"Omg, the world is gonna flood, SAVE US!!!"
-That'll be five trillion dollars.
"W-what?"
*earth dead*
Maybe if USA would cut a little on their Military Funding, we could actually fund this and actually have a nice cool future
jman6866 let's spend $.25 of every dollar on the environment!
+Long Forgotten I'd actually prefer that to spending $.25 of every dollar on the military.
What happened to the 2.9 trillion back before 9/11 that disappeared from the pentagon ???
Why are you wanting the usa to pay for it, we havent even done a quarter of what china has done to the environment.
zombiekiller2point9 The earth is for everyone, not only China
Still more realistic than Trump's stupid wall.
Matt Forbes
Still less realistic than Mexico's wall.
Matt Forbes Hmm thats interesting because Trumps wall would cost 12 billion at its highest estimate (which would be 0 if Mexico pays for it but that probably won't happen) and this would cost 5 trillion, hmmm weird because I thought it was more realistic?
Will Anderson Even by Trumps own estimate youre wrong. Bye bye.
Matt Forbes Ok yeah he's a little off it will cost roughly 21.6 billion dollars still more realistic than 3 trillion, also the wall will provide immediate benefits while with this plan all you are doing is postponing the inevitable, you then have to think about maintenance on those pumps every year compared to maintenance on a wall every 5 years or so. So yes the wall is more realistic and possible than freezing the ice caps again. By the way what a great argument "Trumps wall would cost 12 billion at its highest estimate"-Wil "Even by Trumps own estimate you're wrong. Bye bye." what a great rebuttal (sarcasm intended) Also here is my source for the wall estimate .
www.businessinsider.com/trump-mexico-border-wall-cost-way-down-2017-2
its more realistic because a wall will jack shit whereas this would actually do stuff.
I hope this works imagine we destroy the only thing we could live on but no one even give a damn.
Just put this in my hope for the world playlist
With Trump being the president, the budget already went to the wall and the military.
lol usa is so screwed
8warden12 I agree
Mr. Poopchillan We're gonna have to wait another 4-8 years to try and enact any climate change preventatives unfortunately.
It really angers me thinking that stupid Trump stole our hope to restore the Arctic, like seriously it could help so many animals and his stupid wall helps literally no one
Encly him, and some of the Republican Senate Rolling back the stream protection act allowing coal companies to dump their waste into rivers and streams does not help either.
guys we need gru's freeze ray to recreate ice glaciers
what we need is to make a technology that can suck the green house gases out of the ozone like a blimp with a carbon scrubbier attached to it and a pump to suck the green house gases down and put them into some sort of storage container then put it on a space craft and use it on the mission to colonize mars they can use the green house gases to help create an artificial ozone there not only to warm it up but to protect against radiation this would be a much more safe and cost efficient way of doing this plus this will improve the economy by creating a new need for a blimp industry plus we get to see blimps again and who doesn't like blimps
Nerdlin Geeksly we already have those... they're called trees
Josh Conrad not even 10 trees can match the progress of 1 carbon filter
Josh Conrad and grass and moss and everything else
GamerMcGamerGuy l no not a blimp that fly's to space a regular blimp green house gas' arent in space they are high up in our atmosphere aka the sky and i said to put the green hose gas' on a rocket to mars yes it takes months to get there but i don't see you coming up with better solutions
Modren Dimetrodon if you mean gentically engineered trees it would take to long and you wold need to convince others to do so as well if you mean machine trees than its just not economically reasonable every country would prefer to just plant real trees plus theres still the green house gas' high up in the atmosphere that tje trees wont reach and with the space elevator we currently do not have enough resorces on earth to build something like that and theirs a safety issue that no country wants to take the risk on if the cable snaps it comes falling to earth and literally cuts into the earth kinda like a cable slicing someone in two and those one the top half would be stuck
Don't wind turbines generate an insane amount of heat? It feels like whatever ice they prevent from melting from using the pump will just melt again from the extra heat generated.
mizuhonova I assume it's not a wind power turbine but instead a wind based pump similar to an archimedes screw. I may be wrong but it would make more sense
Also not to mention the energy needed to so.
Charle Magne Solar energy is an option. Hell, even a nuclear plant on there would also be possible. It is far cleaner than using fossil fuel. We could use that to extend the earth's life until new technology is discovered that could have a permanent solution
Kewl yeah but nuclear plants are very expensive
Not really. Less than most other forms of power generation.
Terrible idea, wtf!
Cosmic Background Radiation well itd b worth it
Cosmic Background Radiation do you have a better one?
you got any better idea? everyones waiting? thats what i thought
would you look at that, a random on a you tube comment section know better than scientists
classic.
Hell ya i have a better plan the dumping salt water on melting ice, anyone with a brain should, How about create clouds to block the sun, if thats their goal.
BUT the sun isnt the problem idiots, the sun is basically the same as the last millions of years, it the atmosphere that is the issue, shame on you humans!
This is how Snowpiercer starts isn't it?
Wastingsometimehere WOO-HOO!!! Maybe I'll finally get to find out what baby tastes like. (I heard it tastes the best.)
Wastingsometimehere just watched that movie just now, damn.
but at least we dont have to deal with global warming anymore.
I was thinking the same fucking thing!
I was looking for the mention
Uhm... What about changing our ways of life for the better? Instead of these crazy ideas.
Try telling that to the mega-powerful fuckheads doing most of the damage
Most average people aren't actually doing all that much, when you consider how many of us there are
But factories run using cheap and ultimately harmful chemicals and methods in the name of profit, dumping shit in the ocean, all that widely known bullcrap that people try to pin on the average joe when he's not even in control of it, is where the damage is.
Asking a regular person to change their lifestyle for the better, while it's an ultimately well meaning sentiment, is also unfortunately useless.
I do agree with you wholeheartedly that people should go for more eco friendly options, it's often prohibitively expensive, and even if every shmuck did it, it probably wouldn't be enough to make too much of a noticable change
Sorry bout going off, it's a topic close to my heart. Have a nice day/nigh/whatever
We don't change our ways of life. We are insane. Our children will inherit the mess we generated and our crazy ideas to solve it. Good luck for them.
I tried raising awareness for this topic a couple years back and all I got was a vulgar response from a troll.
or maybe just decrease the use of fossil fuel?
and decrease our Life standard? Then we might as well die.
RYU47376 Too late, we have already pumped so much CO2 into the atmosphere that even if we did reduce emissions while it would slow it some we would still be warming
That would stop things from getting worse but the damage is already done.
RYU47376 you start first
just build a wall around the arctic, it'll keep the water out
Phew.
Glad someone's got a plan bc I was meandering about in the kitchen looking for my Fig Newtons and was getting pretty stressed about this...
Aerosols don't necessarily mean "sulphates" or "ozone converting chemicals", they are tiny particulates that reflect light off (In our case). Clouds are natural aerosols and clouds are effective at reducing heat at the ground. The hotter the Earth gets, the more chemical processes get sped up(Most of them are useful). Did you know that If we removed the ozone layer, we would get one in a few moments? The oxygen gas splits up into nascent oxygen to form ozone. Methane is lighter than other gases and is fairly reactive to more dangerous toxicants(Chlorine for example) and gets converted into a more stable compound. Carbon dioxide is a gas which dissolves in alkalis to provide carbonates. That's one of the reason we see carbonates in the sea mostly. CO2 can be combined with hydrogen gas in the presence of nickel oxide to give us fuel which is natural gas. Acidic oxides get drained as rain back to our structures and get converted into their salts. People talk about planting more trees, why not put up solar splitters. Plants don't convert CO2 to O2, they convert It into carbohydrates. But in our case, we do It directly to supply us with a stationary percent of an oxidizer in the atmosphere. Also bear in mind that almost every combustion reaction in our daily lives releases water aswell, thereby increasing the chance of precipitation and aerosols present in the atmosphere.
I'll give you some real D news.
philtrich lmfao
philtrich why u subscribe to vehicle virgins
Or maybe we can try some less expensive and more realistic methods like planting more trees or lowering the emission of greenhouse gases ... Maybe. Just maybe.
You could always use a series of nuclear blasts to create a several hundred meter tsunami to cover the Arctic in seawater. You would however need to build a large reflector to focus each blast. But I bet it would be cheaper.
I feel like that part of the reason why the ice caps are so treasured is because of their beauty and serenity. When you're almost vandalizing the caps with millions of fans, then why even bother keep the ice caps?
omg what is this coming to? yeah we've got the greatest solution to this problem..... Let's just put some big ass snow blowers up there and call it a day.... 😆😂😅😥 Oh my.... people. Yeah we will start by pushing our polluting industries into overdrive just so we can put a shit ton of snow machines up there. I swear, change for how we live, perceive, and thrive is the furthest from everyone's mind I guess. When will people realize that patching the problem with in this case a metaphorical band aid is not resolving any problem. it's just post poning the inevitable. Genuinely though, gave me a few laughs on this one.
Please someone humor me
snow guns is the proper term btw. And those are actually extremely efficient at creating snow, with really low power. I work in the ski industry if you couldn't tell.
Even if we ceased all carbon emissions today the damage has still already been done and the snowball effect will heat up the planet to catastrophic levels within the next century. Already we're looking at thousands of cities and villages lost to the water level rise.
Prattish98 The humans will be extinct if we don't do anything
Indeed, my friend. As I have commented before, this strategy is utter bullshit. A stupid solution. What will be necessary for the production of these pumps? What will fuel these pumps? -- Oh, that's right...more non-renewable energy fuel sources. We are fucking ourselves, knowingly...
Wouldn't it be better to use all that money for fighting global temperature?
I pray it all goes to plan 🙏💙❄️
50 billion? That's cheap! The US military budget is half a trillion! Come on now, who doesn't want to freeze an ocean?
Show this to Trump , he could take this job. Big investment. Many jobs. Good sallery.
Marik D. Hammerhead Red he doesn't care about the environment.
Marik D. Hammerhead Red i bet he would build an ice wall
the republican way is to have a war on global warming instead of taxes after all
Marik D. Hammerhead Red "Salary"
Yep, good celery
what about a "solar umbrella" above the Poles?... to cut down on the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface... seems cheaper that a mechanical solution.
Young Han its called night time. Locations above the arctic and antarctic circle get 24 hour days at certain times of the year and 24 hour nights for the rest of the year.
Scott Schmitz ....then how about all year long... do you only have 6months a year over there?
The ice is reflecting sunlight. If we build solar ambrella above poles the earth will become hotter ---> less ice. Just make all roofs white and it would reflect sunlight just like ice.
jirka veb ... doesn't that just bounce the solar "energy" around our atmosphere too? i thought the earth is a closed system... introduce energy to it, like sunlight, it will heat up..
This isn't really plausible right now due to both the cost of putting material into space and the environmental impact of doing so. Even if we could pay for it, a lot of rockets use hydrocarbon fuels which only adds to warming (RP-1, Methalox, ect).
Now maybe in a couple decades when we start mining asteroids or the moon we could bring back enough material to construct something like that. But we'd have to invest hugely in developing those techs now or it'll be too late.
$5T is really a small price to pay if you ever consider global catastrophic disaster
The thought about such a measure being economical CANNOT and MUST NOT be of any importance at this stage of urgency
I know this was probably a bit of a joke but the 5T dollars is easy. that happens to be the estimated subsidies that we collectively give to the oil industry per year. Here in Canada we give 3B/year and we are no where near the worst. Of course removing the subsidy might make it less cost effective against the greener technologies and this solution doesn't do anything about the acidification of the oceans as a result of higher C02 levels. There is a low cost way to scrub c02 from the atmosphere and make carbon nanotubes as a by product. The inventor estimated that a solar farm 1/10th the size of the sahara desert would produce enough power to get the earth back to pre industrial levels of carbon in ten years. I guess we can skip this and go directly to clawing back the subsidy and building the nanotube factories.BOOM. Climate Change solved!
Vikash Bhalla i love yoh
nuclear winter anyone? No need for anything fancy or stupid like that
Boris Bagryanskiy Hahahahahahahaha!
World spending on war per year = $1.6 trillion. The problem is far from economical. Its getting people to work together.
I usually string together ideas that arent attainable (or backed by hard proof) but a much more theoretical and viable option would be to launch several satellites in stationary orbit, armed with an array of abstractly arranged lasers to create an artificial weather system from above.
Better idea. STOP USING OIL!
stop fracking but we still can use our remaining oil supply because why not? besides earth has no chance when everyone doesn't unite.
I appreciate your interest in the ice and ideas to save it! We need more people caring about that and many other environmental issues! Thanks, John
The issue with this is that just because you created ice, doesn't mean somehow the world got cooler. In fact this might increase how hot the world gets, much quicker if you think about the friction from the air being created. The only good news about this is that it will reflect sunlight, but, since the polar ice caps doing get hit by much sunlight, it really means nothing.
He says the ice caps will be completely melted by 2030 (with horrific consequences, btw), but repeatedly emphasizes costs like they are too high to be realistically considered. If the caps are melting and temperatures are increasing ever faster, no cost should be too high to consider. He's really talking about the end of civilization as we know it, perhaps forever, within the next 13 years!!
Or we could just stop using oil...
oh you mean exactly what we are doing?
nice
We could use a few less F35s and more money spent on saving our god damn planet!
+Sepehr Naserkhaki But what if we need to bomb some goat farmers in Fuckallganistan? How are we supposed to do that with only 578 F35's instead of 581 F35's? KEEP AMERICA SAFE!!! After all, this is the land of the brave and nothing says brave like hiding behind a massive stockpile of lethal weapons. You know, like that crazy guy down the street that owns enough firepower to take over a small nation? When I think of that guy, the first thing I think is "wow, look at how brave he is!" and not "why is he such a chicken shit?". lol.
Sepehr Naserkhaki Because F-35's look cool, ice doesn't fly or bomb children, so why would we spend money on it?
The F35 program officially cost the DOD 1.5Trillion with some estimates saying the actual cost was closer to 2Trillion
The trillion + dollar price tag is for R&D till the end of its 30 year or so lifespan. But yeah, I get your point. A real shame. The fact that China will be spearheading renewable energy resource technology over the U.S. is just embarrassing.
F-35 wouldn't have been so bad if they hadn't tried to start rolling them out before they were done.
Don't blame R&D, blame congress for caring more about funneling money to defense contractors rather than wait for the R&D team to finish.
i'm in brazil, we're in the middle of the winter, here didn't rain in 34 days, excessive 32Deg C. temperature, low humidity, while in the U.S.A. people are experiencing strong hurricanes in wich i don't know how many years we're striking record temperatures, year after year they're higher.
What if we built an "ice factory"?
It'd be a large building with a tank filled with water absorbed from surrounding areas. The water tank would be kept at a constant temperature at or below the freezing point. There'd be large filters to prevent wildlife and debris from being drawn in. After a brief holding period in which the water is given time to solidify, it would be released into the ocean and the process would automatically restart. The water tank of the facility would be located below sea level so the water can flow in with minimal need for pumping mechanisms. The facility itself would be self sustaining (solar powered, local greenhouse) with engineers and mechanics living on site for repairs and adjustments as needed. Is this dumb? Okay, I'll just go to my room and die.
Where the hell is Trace
Cash Barlow for playboy or playgirl? Is playgirl even a thing any more?
OR Turn the lights off and ride a bike
I been talking about this for a long a$$$$$ time!!
I’ve seen scientists lay white sheets on ice and the ice quickly grew over the area where the white sheets were laid.
I have a simple and cheap solution!!! why we couldn't just build floating rafts and encore them in arctic, cover them with aluminium foil and it would just reflect sunlight back in space.... not a solution, but temporary fix
Armands Gulbis it won't work, it would just make it even worse, the atmosphere always accepts large quantities of light. Problem is that instead it is being reflected into space it returns again and heat is trapped
Edin743 you must be reeeaaalllyyy fun at parties.
Just build a wall around it!
I read in the news back a couple years ago about an idea of just using boats in the ocean to vaporize the ocean water to form steam clouds that would help cool down the earth. In the article, they pointed out that normal boats already emit a cloud into the atmosphere and leave a trail of where the boats have been.
I am sure this idea with the boats is less costly... whereas this idea in the video is plain ridiculous and will never happen.
People up north knows that they spread salt on the roads to melt the ice. So what happens to the ice and snow when they spray it with salty sea water? We do know that the ice and snow at the poles is made of fresh water. Don't we?
going vegan could help
we may as well all grow vaginas and start crying.
Eating vegans would help more.
or maybe limiting personal meat consumption
BeniYuki Reaper You can't eat fish foul eggs milk or cheese anymore you are getting fat anyway!
SouthPark333Gaming I like how this guy makes a nice calm comment. and people wanrlt him to die. Classic youtube
Would you rather:
-Spend trillions of dollars to save earth
-spend trillions of dollars to make more money and go to another planet
Both.
Why don't we use nanotechnology to invent a machine which will absorb co2 and convert that into
Oxygen
Damn corporate greed who's attitude is... the hell with the humans and other creatures on this planet
Second Alternative, don't bring muslim immigrants
not sure if a joke or not :D
No, stop getting oil from shitty dictatorships like Saudi Arabia and support ethical oil from places like Canada, they may actually see reason
um you know Syria's only in the situation it's in because US fossil fuel burning caused global warming to devastate their country with massive drought right? If you don't fix global warming you're going to have a hell of a lot more refugees!
Middle Eastern oil actually is more ethical than Canadian, African, Gulf Coast or Russian oil. OPEC never threw hand grenades at Native Americans, OPEC has a better safety record regarding spills, OPEC isnt holding europe hostage, nor is it funding far right politics.
Tengku Victor Von Hansgan Do you live in the US? If so you might be an immigrant.
We're all doomed :(
And that's the cost of doing massive amounts of damage to something.
Get as much liquid nitrogen you can, manually freeze the water up there, then set up half the pumps in the pattern of the jet stream. The other half set up randomly. And start making cars with more recycled materials, and buy all the old cars , give full trade in value for the old cars for new ones, and use that for more steel. Anything steel can be recycled, if you give the right value.
There's a simpler way to solve global warming than massive pumps or chemicals. Massive sheets of white canvas covering a large portion of the Arctic connected to floating tubes anchored to the sea ice. It would reflect light well enough, and allow a layer of water to freeze underneath it. It would require a massive amount of canvas and tubes, but it would be a quick and simple way to rebuild the Arctic ice sheets that would probably be a lot cheaper than any of the methods outlined in the video.
well... it's either we end up having to build homes over 6 meters above rising sea levels or we spend a cutesy 5 trillion dollars on possibly saving the planet, but really, up to them.
When Minnesota has a winter without ice my time on earth will be done.
If we were able to coordinate a planetary-scale effort like this, we wouldn't have to worry about climate change in the first place.
Hey trace and and all you Dnews guys where are you?? that's an old news... thought you might come up with some video on TRAPPIST
pls get good long video on it I really love the way you guys talk and explain about space and all....
I love everyone around the whole wide world, humanity isn't gonna come this far just to fail now, we're stronger and better than this!
Educational!
Super Superb!! Super Superb!! Super Superb!!
Super Thanks for Sharing!!
My question is why would he assume that the US would pay for it all
It's stuff like this that gives climate change deniers fuel to debate. We need to put money in prep for the impact of climate change not stoping it. It's coming and there's no way to stop it.
Why are they counting the cost of making new pumps every year? Shouldn't the pumps at least last a few years each?
How about a solution that's actually doable not fantasy? Look up "Managed intensive rotational grazing". A small variation in the way animals are farmed can create 4 times more food while simultaneously removing 100 tonnes of carbon dioxide per square kilometre where it's implemented. There's 5 billion square kms of grassland on the planet, all of which could be converted with either farm animals or wildlife, but it only needs 1/3rd of that to reduce CO2 levels to pre-industrial levels
Best satire I've seen in a while.
Why not work to desalinate the water in the arctic to make freeze at a higher temperature?
Why not we place large satellite mirrors over the arctic, much like giant space umbrellas, to shade the north pole? Not only can it cut down on pollution, but also use it generate solar power as a side function?
Earth is DOOMED not in a devastating way but as a replenishment . The sweeper will come to sweep the garbage.
Shouldn't they get the materials for free because their saving OUR planet
Spraying the ice with saltwater will lower the melting point of the ice, making it more susceptible to melting in the future. Unless you plan to desalinate the water before spraying it onto the ice, that plan is, in the long term, counterproductive.
Artic ice is an issue for polar bears, but won't help with rising ocean levels. In fact it would cause ocean levels to rise even more. For rising ocean levels, we would need to deal with the Antarctic ice melting issue (and Greenland).
One question noone has really answered is: Why would we want to do this? What's the advantage in having glaciers all over the place? The Earth has, not only survived but flourished, in ages much warmer than the current one. Ok, skiing and outdoors skating are fun, but so is summertime. And crops don't grow well when there's a meter of ice or snow on them. The media loves this AGW panic (more money for them), but why destroy everything just to please the media corporations?
it's sad that we've gotten to the point that we have to seriously consider this
Nothing seems that expensive when you compare it to the US's military spending in a year.
after using those wind mills as pumps we could use it again to produce free electricity for generations ahead
This study was clearly written by scientists who have never tried to operate even one pump in -40 temperatures.
For starters, the water will tend to freeze before it can exit whatever nozzle they use to spray it into the air. There is also the problem of keeping solar panels clear in an area constantly showered with sea slush. They would have to employ a massive fleet of ships, simply to deal with that problem alone.
I could go on, but that would be a waste of thumb power. The first two issues make the plan hopeless.
Oh wait! Let's not forget the Arctic has zero sunlight for several months of the year.
Why are reporters still saying "IT WILL COST!!!! XX AMOUNT OMG OMG OMG"... when you spend billions on warfare... just say "who can build the best ice making machines? is it usa, russia or china?" and let the honor driven competition go full force forward... i bet that china will invest several billion just to be first and largest. Russia will try to outshine both china and usa by any means at their disposal... i hope this works... great video =)
Massive vacuum chamber. Submerge it underwater, pull a vacuum, let the water boil until it freezes. Dump out the giant ice cube and make another. They could make like 20 of these in a day. And if you saw the size of the chambers NASA has you would know these ice cubes would be 3x the size of an average house.
Let's just do everything that has even a 1% chance of working and worry about the costs once we've undone the last 300 years of damage.
i have been saying this for over 5 years finely someone start think tanks all over the world
Imagine if all countries had put their resources together, we would have probably already colonized other planets.