I like the idea of covering glaciers with a huge plastic blanket. We can generate massive amounts of CO2 manufacturing and transporting the blanket.

The blanket will then prevent winter snow from falling on the glacier. In the spring, the new snow can sluff off and melt very quickly on top of the dark surface of the blanket.

Glaciers have been melting and sea level rising steadily for the last 20,000 years. Must have been mammoth flatulence that ended the last ice age.

Monday, October 1, 2007 - Record SH sea ice maximum and NH sea ice minimum
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

The trend is clear. We are headed towards a complete meltdown and an ice age simultaneously. Better raise taxes to head off one or another of these catastrophes.

Patrick don't forget about the increase in avalanches. Putting a blankie on a mountain would create a shear layer that would increase the chance of an avalanche. Not to mention when the snow on top of the blankie melts the water will percolate down to the blankie and increase the speed of run off causing more flooding.

I deal with mitigated wetlands quite often in my job. They are a poor substitute for the real thing. Most of these "wetlands" are nothing more than storm water retention ponds and are full of whatever the runoff caries with it, i.e. garbage, road salt, sand, ect. The best thing would be to protect the few natural wetlands we have left.

BTW is this reported snow melt actual melting of the snow or is it compaction? I know if I wait too long to clear my driveway after a snowfall, especially a wet snow, it compacts and makes removal much more difficult.

Perhaps it's best to move to the equator and balance the two extremes?

We are headed towards a complete meltdown and an ice age simultaneously.

A very serious case of Bipolar disorder. I am very highly likely alarmed and accelerating towards consensus!

Off Topic - Sorry.
But I thought it was interesting.
Kyoto now reduced to silly farce:
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODdkODk2YTNhYzg1Mjg2M2JiMmQwMWYwMjY1ZWNmMDU=

"The Southern Hemisphere sea ice area narrowly surpassed the previous historic maximum of 16.03 million sq. km to 16.17 million". At least someone is mentioning it (see cryosphere today). However, the software "glitch" correction posted previously pertaining to SH data has been removed from the site. What is happening?

Heres something for everyone.

Take a look around your nearest suburb, notice the roofs in particular. I don�t know where you live but one thing is for certain the roofs you are looking at are dark while some are even black in colour, all for aesthetic and fashionable reasons. It makes no sense
If all roofs were white, solar energy would be reflected back into space and houses would be considerably cooler in summer while in winter the change would have little effect.
We have already agreed that melting white ice from the polar caps is accelerating ice melt in those regions and conveniently to combat this we have the same area of cover in man made roofs globally that can be altered with little expense once the cost savings in Air-conditioning have been calculated.
If you are serious about AGW, paint your roof white.
Other real attempts in saving co2 can be made by purchasing oil rights to keep the oil in the ground. For half the royalty price we can now buy Ecuadors oil reserves $350m and save an entire rainforest in the process along with countless lives. Alternatively we could offer the Congolese more than just a few bags of sugar and save their rainforests and then the co2 emitted to build flat pack furniture can be saved.

seriously better suggestions than genetically altered monoculture tree plantations or glacier blankets but every suggestion is as helpful as any other because those who are profiting from the cause of AGW are still the same powers who are doing not-a-thing about it.

Simon,

"For half the royalty price we can now buy Ecuadors oil reserves $350m and save an entire rainforest in the process along with countless lives."

That almost sounds like an Al Gore speach that skirts around the fringes of the actual details to pull at peoples purse and heart-strings.

1) That's $350m per year.

2) ITT Park is located within the ancestral territory of the Waorani and several small native clans are living in voluntary isolation within the project area. You make "countless lives" sound like the country's entire population.

3) It is a small portion of the entire rainforest with a handful of stoneage people, still living according to tribal warfare and being eaten by large snakes and jaguars. Assimilating them into "The Borg" and guaranteeing them a job in the oilfield, would be doing their grandchildren a favour.

4) The government say's that oil revenue is required to meet the development needs of its citizens. These revenues account for around 40% of the federal budget every year. Do you think that $350m per year would go to the 6 million Equadorian citizens that live in poverty? Guess again.

Simon,

"If all roofs were white"

I don't want a white roof. If you want one, then by all means, paint away. What boring, sterile looking neighborhoods we would have.

If you believe in man-made warming, just imagine the amount of added white paint manufacturing, paper labelling, metal and plastic containers, fuel, oil, transportation, storage and warehousing, landfill dumping, labour and the immense electrical power and paper flow logistics that would be involved in that scheme.

The oil, power, transportation and landfill companies and operators would love you.

Please, think before you come up with hair-brained, panic solutions that have no effect on unproven problems.

Just out of interest.
How can wetlands be improved with plastic rafts?
Surely its the lack of water that is killing wet lands along with toxic waste so is dumping bubble wrap on dry land really going to help?
Aside from that, blankets on ice is a really stupid idea if its to be used over millions of sq miles. Planting trees is always a good thing unless the genetic mutants cross breed and stuff up the ecosystem.
The frightening thing is, that these ideas are being taken seriously which indicates how desperate the situation is.
Should we admit that there are no solutions that will allow business as usual and make the difficult decisions?
Who will make those decisions?
Who will vote for higher taxes?
Who wants less variety?
Who will trade the planet for short term benefit?
Who will reap the rewards of support, wealth and power by offering no drastic change in policy?

Steve,

More on AGW bipolar disorder. The North Atlantic is simultaneously getting saltier and less salty - both due to the very solid, settled science of global warming.

"Since the late 1960s, much of the North Atlantic Ocean has become less salty, in part due to increases in fresh water runoff induced by global warming, scientists say."
http://www.livescience.com/environment/050629_fresh_water.html

"The surface waters of the North Atlantic are getting saltier, suggests a new study of records spanning over 50 years. They found that during this time, the layer of water that makes up the top 400 metres has gradually become saltier. The seawater is probably becoming saltier due to global warming, Boyer says."
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12528.html

Patrick Henry,

Perhaps we can start a support group, liberals often join these things, called AGW Anonymous. AGWA.

"Hi, my name is 'blank' and I am an AGW'er. I'm not sure why, but I believe things that certain people or types tell me without needing any proof, even if there are big questions. When a non-AGW'er makes a claim, I don't need to verify their claim, but I feel a strong desire to point out their credentials and make statements about their words not being approved by people that agree with me. I like you if you're like me."

"For some odd reason I get very nervous about temperatures going up ONE degree even though I know it was ONE degree cooler 500 years ago and it was ONE degree warmer a few hundred years before that ONE degree drop. Nervous and angry at people who don't believe the same as I is how I would describe myself."

"I don't call CO2 God, but it is responsible for most phenomenon in the world, especially if it looks natural, has been natural in the past, and can be made to scare people."

See, then we could feel good about ourselves for making a difference. We just have to make sure the counselor uses ambiguous sentences like "There is a high probability that it is very highly likely, within a certain degree of certainty, that GW is caused naturally, and yes folks there is consensus!"

For some odd reason these folks find certainty in ambiguity.

Oh well, just so long as we "care" :)

Steve

Hi Steve,

I think the key issue isn't certainty. If there is a >0% chance that something bad could or ever will happen, we need to massively raise taxes.

Remember that in the mind of a Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (or anyone else attempting to destroy western civilization and murder lots of Infidels) must be allowed to speak freely and often, but global warming skeptics and Christians need to be silenced - as they are the truly dangerous ones.

john d.

You would be correct if the roofs were not already being painted or supplied in all other colours except white. A change in colour to white will not add to the waste levels, waste levels will not alter, paint will still be made and roofs will still be in colour.

White roofs are a way of changing business as usual for a better outcome. White roofs would save household energy bills, cool the planet and still keep your home water tight. Im sure the idea would be taken up slowly amongst the AGW aware, incorporated into new home designs and added to ongoing home maintenance programs.

The downside is that white roofs will eventually identify the skeptics in the suburbs whose roofs will remain stubbornly dark adding an infected look to the suburban skyline that you apparently so much admire.

Saving rainforests could be a two pronged fully affordable instant cap and trade system with huge offset values available from expanding Kyoto inspired markets. The ecosystem saved will continue to adsorb co2 and if calculated the quantity of oil not burnt in the future will be an untapped reserves of immense offset value.

$350 million per year is peanuts on a world market hungry for genuine offsets. The rainforest region once saved in this manner could then be honoured with an AGW Al Gore Award and promoted as an ecological tourist destination. Giving the locals an industry that they can truly benefit from with extra funds to plant more trees to offset holiday flights. The tropical environment would receive recognition as new drugs and compounds are discovered in the newly valued above ground natural asset
Countless lives could include all the life affected in the presently destroyed oil poisoned ecosystem that does not benefit locals. Loss of tribal lands poisoned fresh water and ruined soils will continue to kill people for the foreseeable future, unless a new source of income can be found.

The shortsighted oil plunder is still enough to raise concern. Especially when something for the better can be done to change business as usual in the 3rd world while everyone benefits globally from long term well thought out AGW initiatives.

Simon,

1) Now if you said that all future residential homes would be built underground, with forests planted overtop and white asphalt streets running in front, then you would have something. The paint thing is a problem in the making, whether you wish to believe that or not.

2) That particular portion of rainforest is destined to become a "no intruder zone". Some prominent and vocal lobby groups are trying to pass legislation, as we speak, to ensure that no one, not even scientists, will be allowed to enter the area, allowing the few local tribes total access and ensure no foreign diseases infiltrate to them. No tourism, no Al Gore medal, no tree planting, no discoveries of medicinal plants. Any military coup or political deal in the future could change your investment.

3)The one billion barrels that you wish to leave in the ground amounts to 1/35th of the annual oil consumption of the planet and 1/1,300th of the known oil reserves, not including the Arctic and Antarctic oil fields and those yet to be discovered.

With billions of barrels of new oil being discovered, mined, processed, transported and used, plus a 2% consumption increase by third world countries annually, the offset theory from this drop in the bucket, is a pipe-dream at best.

4) Just ask the folks in Alberta Canada, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, etc., if oil benefits the locals.

5) You mean well, Simon. Don't give up on your dream of a better world. Just don't give up on the world that feeds you and your family.

This system was built over thousands of years and to try to alter it's structure over the next hundred years will have it collapse around our ears.

It's worked just fine for your grandfather, your parents and yourself, up to this point and will work just fine for billions of others that are just beginning to see how it actually works pretty well, when they get to go to work everyday to feed their families and send their kids to school.

Try not to take that away from them just because you may not see it the same way they do. You're family tree has already benefited from the industrial system, now allow them the same opportunities.

"Remember that in the mind of a Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (or anyone else attempting to destroy western civilization and murder lots of Infidels) must be allowed to speak freely and often, but global warming skeptics and Christians need to be silenced - as they are the truly dangerous ones."

Yet another transparent attempt by Patrick at getting his alarmist, fear-mongering, we-need-to-go-to-war-else-Armageddon-will-be-upon-us rhetoric in a global warming blog.

Scaring the public into supporting a preemptive war because danger is 'imminent' is so 2003, Patrick. Get with the times. And stick to the topic.