THE BIG QUESTION OF GLOBAL WARMING? THE PROBLEM OF ICE MELT AND SEA LEVEL RISE!
Which is the turning point from heat entrapment to Solar reflection and blocking? This would reverse Global Warming from an extreme many Degrees Celsius increase to a Global cooling! And would a Global Freezing occur again?
ANSWER: Please refer to the Atmosphere of the Planet VENUS...!!! Yeaow...!
The runaway greenhouse effect, is what can more so happen...!
Venus is the second planet from the Sun, orbiting it every 224.7 Earth days. It has the longest rotation period (243 days) of any planet in the Solar System and rotates in the opposite direction to most other planets. It has no natural satellite. It is named after the Roman goddess of love and beauty. It is the second-brightest natural object in the night sky after the Moon, reaching an apparent magnitude of −4.6, bright enough to cast shadows. Because Venus is an inferior planet from Earth, it never appears to venture far from the Sun; its elongation reaches a maximum of 47.8°.
Venus is a terrestrial planet and is sometimes called Earth's "sister planet" because of their similar size, mass, proximity to the Sun, and bulk composition. It is radically different from Earth in other respects. It has the densest atmosphere of the four terrestrial planets, consisting of more than 96% carbon dioxide. The atmospheric pressure at the planet's surface is 92 times that of Earth, or roughly the pressure found 900 m (3,000 ft) underwater on Earth. Venus is by far the hottest planet in the Solar System, with a mean surface temperature of 735 K (462 °C; 863 °F), even though Mercury is closer to the Sun. Venus is shrouded by an opaque layer of highly reflective clouds of sulfuric acid, preventing its surface from being seen from space in visible light. It may have had water oceans in the past, but these would have vaporized as the temperature rose due to a runaway greenhouse effect. The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind because of the lack of a planetary magnetic field. Venus's surface is a dry desertscape interspersed with slab-like rocks and is periodically resurfaced by volcanism.
Clearly, there are good reasons for concern. Solar geoengineering would likely make the planet drier, potentially disrupting monsoons in places like India and creating drought in parts of the tropics. The technique could help eat away the protective ozone shield of our planet, and it would cause air pollution. It would also do nothing to counteract the problem of ocean acidification, which occurs when the seas absorb high levels of CO2 from the atmosphere.
Some worry that solar geoengineering would hand politicians an easy reason to avoid reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And if the impacts of climate change worsen and nations cannot agree on what scheme to deploy, or at what temperature the planet’s thermostat should be set, then conflict or even war could result as countries unilaterally begin programs to inject sulfates into the atmosphere. "My greatest concern is societal disruption and conflict between countries," says Alan Robock, a climatologist at Rutgers University in New Jersey.
But there are still problems. Putting a million tons of sulfur into the stratosphere each year would probably "contribute to thousands of air pollution deaths a year," Keith acknowledges. Because solar geoengineering doesn’t affect the amount of carbon dioxide in the air, ocean acidification would continue unabated. And sulfates would alter atmospheric chemistry toward formation of ozone-destroying chlorine compounds, which could lead to a moderate increase in skin cancers or ultraviolet damage to plant life. Sulfates would also make the sky a little whiter than usual and sunsets more dramatic, scientists say.
What, Me Worry?
So what should we make of what we hear in the news, and what should we do about it? We are now certain that carbon dioxide concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere have increased and will continue to increase, barring inconceivable changes in our lifestyles. As a result, there will be temperature increases of uncertain amount, and changes in the weather of uncertain nature and extent. Life as we know it will change to a greater or lesser extent, depending upon where we live, but will be more like now than not for a few decades; and less like now than not in the following centuries. Continental and sea ice will retreat and disappear, and sea levels will rise throughout our lifetimes and the lifetimes of our descendants. And there is nothing that we can do to completely prevent this. The question is, can we do anything to reduce these effects and perhaps eventually reverse them?
The "greenhouse effect" is real, and of considerable concern to many people. It is not quite as immediately worrisome as the threat of global warfare and nuclear or biological annihilation, which could end life on Earth within a few weeks, and quite possibly, within the next decade or so. But if you are concerned about the future faced by your children and grandchildren, then perhaps it would be better to do what you can to use less energy, and to convince your representatives to vote for measures which would make it easier for you to use less energy, than to seek ways to burn more and more fossil fuels at a faster and faster rate. Or if it seems too painful to do anything, you could do nothing. For many lifeforms, such as mosquitoes and millipedes, crocodiles and cockroaches, molds and mildews, a warmer, wetter Earth would be marvelous. It just depends upon whom or what you want to inherit the Earth.
Deforestation, and especially the destruction of rainforests, is a hugely significant contributor to climate change. Scientists estimate that forest loss and other changes to the use of land account for around 23% of current man-made CO2 emissions – which equates to 17% of the 100-year warming impact of all current greenhouse-gas emissions.
As children are taught at school, trees and other plants absorb CO2 from the air as they grow. Using energy from the sun, they turn the carbon captured from the CO2 molecules into building blocks for their trunks, branches and foliage. This is all part of the carbon cycle.
A mature forest doesn't necessarily absorb much more CO2 that it releases, however, because when each tree dies and either rots down or is burned, much of its stored carbon is released once again. In other words, in the context of climate change, the most important thing about mature forests is not that they reduce the amount of CO2 in the air but that they are huge reservoirs of stored carbon. If such a forest is burned or cleared then much of that carbon is released back into the atmosphere, adding to atmospheric CO2 levels.
This debate about whether there will be 1 or 2 meters of sea level rise by 2100, however, pales in comparison to the numbers for the long-term outlook. The last time the planet was steadily 2 degrees C warmer than pre-industrial times, some 120,000 years ago, sea levels were 5 to 10 meters higher than today. It’s likely we’ll hit 2 degrees C of warming by 2100, unless we take extreme measures to mitigate emissions. "The bigger concern is the longer term," agrees Scambos. "By the end of this century the rate of change in Greenland will be so high that the next hundred years will be dialed in for significant sea level rise."
And any given city may have to contend with worse. While 70 percent of the world will see local waters rise within 20 percent of the norm, others will see extremes. In China, the Yellow River delta is currently sinking so fast that local sea levels are rising by up to 25 centimeters per year, nearly 100 times the global average. Places that were once covered by kilometers of ice, like northern Canada, are now rebounding upwards — which means local sea levels are actually falling in some parts of Alaska. But that upward-moving land is hinging nearby areas, like the U.S. East Coast, downward by millimeters per year — adding millimeters per year to the local sea level rise there. The U.S. East Coast has another problem too: Climate change is weakening the Gulf Stream current, and that is allowing water to slop back towards shore. Overall, the U.S. East Coast is seeing rates of sea level rise that are 3 to 4 times the global average. The tropics, meanwhile, are seeing extra sea level rise thanks to a strange gravitational effect. As high-latitude ice melts, there is less mass at the poles to pull ocean water towards them; instead, the water slopes more towards the equator.
No matter which way you look at it, the result is cause for concern. "I always tell people if they live under 3 feet above sea level, they should be worried about the next 100 years," says Chambers. "We probably can adapt to a certain extent. The problem is that we’re not planning for it."
...So folks, this Planet is not a completely CLOSED system, and water could evaporate into OUTER SPACE beyond the ATMOSPHERE...!
...NEVER forget the Planet VENUS...! And that humans and Science are biased by Religions(like Jesus will fix everything up), Politics and false Economics, Resources and Money...!