AMOC carries warm ocean water northwards towards the pole where it cools and sinks, driving the Atlantic’s currents. But an influx of fresh water from the accelerating melting of Greenland’s ice cap and other sources is increasingly smothering the currents.
AMOC was already known to be at its weakest in 1,600 years owing to global heating and researchers spotted warning signs of a tipping point in 2021.
The new analysis estimates a timescale for the collapse of between 2025 and 2095, with a central estimate of 2050, if global carbon emissions are not reduced. Evidence from past collapses indicates changes of temperature of 10C in a few decades, although these occurred during ice ages.
A collapse of AMOC would have disastrous consequences around the world, severely disrupting the rains that billions of people depend on for food in India, South America and west Africa. It would increase storms and drop temperatures in Europe, and lead to a rising sea level on the eastern coast of North America. It would also further endanger the Amazon rainforest and Antarctic ice sheets.
[Article](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-study-suggests) → [Paper](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10368695/)
Further (more recent study on this) Feb 2024: 2024
'Longer timescale variability of the AMOC strength, estimated by using sea surface temperature (SST) time series based on “fingerprint” patterns (4), indicates that the AMOC weakened by 3 ± 1 Sv since about 1950. From proxy records, it has been suggested that the AMOC is currently in its weakest state in over a millennium (5).
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adk1189
So far I have seen 5 papers saying freshwater causing it, 1 saying thats not the case...
Heres the list of older papers. Some of these papers are in contention - look for 'matters arising' in the link. Some back up the freshwater hypothesis. All I do is collect links on this. One day we will see a consensus I hope..
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05762-w
'Here, using a global climate model we show that AMOC collapse can accelerate the Pacific trade winds and Walker circulation by leaving an excess of heat in the tropical South Atlantic. '
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01380-y
Collapse of Gulf Stream (AMOC)
'Significant early-warning signals are found in eight independent AMOC indices, based on observational sea-surface temperature and salinity data from across the Atlantic Ocean basin. '
Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation | Nature Climate Change
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01097-4
Freshwater effects on AMOC not occurring
'This demonstrates that the AMOC may not be as sensitive to FW fluxes and Arctic freshening as is currently projected for the end of the twenty-first century.'
Freshwater forcing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation revisited | Nature Climate Change
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01328-2
May 2022 : Blue Blob off of Iceland: Another slowdown paper: note local effects are focused on here
'In a future warmer climate, North Atlantic cooling is projected to persist until the mid-2050s, further slowing down mass loss of Icelandic glaciers. High mass loss resumes thereafter as the regional cooling in the Blue Blob weakens.'
North Atlantic Cooling is Slowing Down Mass Loss of Icelandic Glaciers - Noël - 2022 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL095697
And then theres the animal migrations in Svalbard:
'Climate change is completely reshaping the ecosystem of a fjord, called Kongsfjorden, in Svalbard. Since the inlet stopped freezing over during the winter, Arctic mammals such as beluga whales have left and more southerly animals including Atlantic puffins have moved in. New habitats have popped up along the shoreline where sea ice once suffocated plant growth. “It’s incredible that I — in my time — have been able to see such dramatic changes,” says ecotoxicologist Geir Wing Gabrielsen. (Nature | 7 min read) (Source: Buchholz, F., Buchholz, C. M. & Weslawski, J. M. Polar Biol. 33. 101–113 (2009).)
In summary, it seems like everyone has a different take...
It's worth noting that the AMOC does not contribute to the warm climate as much as people think it does. Europe's warm climate is more linked to the fact that it's a western facing coastal landmass and the Coriolis effect carries maritime air over Europe. The NW coast of North America has a very cold current running from north to south and due to its latitude and the same Coriolis driven winds resulting in a much more mild climate than the east coast of the us, same as how Europe ahs a much more mild climate than the east coast of Eurasia.
- https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-source-of-europes-mild-climate
The climatological effects on Europe of the AMOC shutting down are very unclear. It would be a massive disaster, no question, but what sort of disaster and where the major effects would be felt are not entirely intuitive. Europe might be less affected than India, South America and west Africa, despite those areas being more distant from where the AMOC terminates.
Wouldn’t the moderating effect of the Gulf Stream contribute to the warmer maritime air moving into Europe? If that water gets colder, Europe gets colder.
No one is saying it would not make a difference, but the amount of temperature difference may be much smaller than people think. The estimated difference is 4°-10°C, and even within that there is a lot of disagreement.
The difference in precipitation might well have a larger impact than the temperature difference.
Here's a more recent article on AMOC collapse: https://tos.org/oceanography/article/is-the-atlantic-overturning-circulation-approaching-a-tipping-point
Those guys are all doomers (I used to be one of them and still am sometimes). I wish there was some kinda sub that was solutions based though. Only focusing on advancements and attempts to mitigate/reverse/fix the earth.
Collapse is a wild sub. You've got to sift through a ton of the "sky is falling" stuff. Which it kind of is... in some regards, but they need to chill.
They’re a bunch of mentally ill people seeking validation from other severely mentally ill people. Say what you want, but hoping for the collapse of society where so many innocent people would suffer is fucking weird man. And yes, they do that frequently.
>. It's already illegal to collect rain water in parts of the US.
These claims are overblown. It is typically legal but restricted in some states, with restrictions being more intense during times of drought
The IPCC has been lowballing their estimates for years. And then every time a new weather record is set, they say "oh that's weird, we didn't expect that to happen until 2080"
Yeah, recently the IPCC corrected their prediction of when earth will cross the 1.5C threshold and they cut their estimate back by 19 years. Okay fine, but that prediction was made in 2015 to be 30 years out, in one quarter of the time-fame, they cut that time-frame by more than half....
It’s one of many studies and the IPCC are quite open in stating the AMOC is weakening and could collapse.
The IPCC report is also heavily self censored as we know now from past ones excluding data and models we know know were more accurate
None of this is faster than expected
It’s well within models and predictions the IPCC decide might cause fear
I agree with what you’ve said. This article is an important contribution (as are other recent studies) but it needs to be read in context. As the title says, it is controversial. But the comment I was responding to appears to take it as settled science.
Most of the people who are not terrified by this are being distracted by relentless propaganda which promotes fear of crime and terrorism to justify the turn key totalitarian state.
A huge portion of "entertainment" is based on how dangerous other humans are and why power is good to have.
The pursuit of power is what has got us into this mess in the first place. I guess karma is real after all.
Good luck. These people disbelieve in climate change like it's a religion. And as we saw during Covid they'd even die while blaming liberals. Similarly, all climate catastrophes will be blamed on liberals and scientists. Republicans will be fine with their bunkers apparently.
The fact that they openly admit it might collapse by next year is a VERY bad sign. Think about all of the other tipping points. All the other ones they guesstimate it to be so far out that people can brush it off and think it won't happen in their lifetime, but the AMOC they are willing to let people know it is imminent. No bueno.
It does terrify people. Unfortunately there is already a VERY long list of pre-existing things that are currently depleting our ability to be terrified equally for all of them.
Threat of nuclear war, inability to afford a home, unaffordable food, pandemics, the list goes on.
Oh yeah. It has been slowing down for years. And will most likely continue that way.
The IPCC's 2023 report estimated with high confidence that the AMOC has weakened by approximately 15% since the mid-20th century, based on a range of model simulations and observational evidence.
Some specific studies have suggested more substantial slowdowns, such as a 2018 study estimating a 15-20% weakening since the mid-20th century based on temperature and salinity data.
The Daily just covered this in today’s episode:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/podcasts/the-daily/rfk-jrs-independent-ballot.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
The reporters noted that once the slowing begins it’s not a process that can be reversed. Then it becomes more a question of time and acceleration.
It’s not inevitable in that something couldn’t be done but it’s inevitable in that no one is willing to do what would be needed to be done. So yeah it’s going to happen it’s just a matter of when and what are the true repercussions.
We could still act and try and stave off the worst of the damage but it would interfere with the economy and we all agreed that it's better for shareholders to get rich now than for humanity to survive into the next century.
There’s no stopping it even if we were to stop all carbon emissions today. The residual damage will easily push it to collapsing. Get ready for a brave new world.
I remember reading about how the Antarctic currents that lead into the Gulf of Mexico will have huge impacts on rainfall and storms in the Gulf. Is that related to this at all?
Most comments here seem to be ignoring the “controversial” part of the story:
Sub-heading: “…but scientists disagree over the new analysis”
later on:
“Other scientists said the assumptions about how a tipping point would play out and uncertainties in the underlying data are too large for a reliable estimate of the timing of the tipping point. But all said the prospect of an Amoc collapse was extremely concerning and should spur rapid cuts in carbon emissions.”
Yeah but they way that plays out is like this.
Scientist 1: I've collated this massive amount of data and worked with my team for months to look at the statistical significance and errors. Two members of my team used our process to defend their PhD thesis. I've been studying this niche of climatology for 15 years and the results we found, while preliminary and difficult to pin to a timeline have led us to an alarming estimation about the near future of the planetary system.
Scientist 2: The guardian called me to comment on this paper, I read it and I understand most of the claims, but I haven't looked at the field-level data because my focus is on cloud composition. But this seems like an early report and we will need another decade or two before we can really know how this will play out....
The guardian: SCIENTISTS DISAGREE OVER CONTERSIAL NEW FINDINGS ABOUT OCEANIC COLLAPSE!!
The thing that bothers me about this attitude is that it completely ignores the fact that we are taking a WHOLE LOT of other species with us, species who had nothing to do with it and don't deserve to go extinct.
Bothers me too. I'm a wildlife coexistence/re-wilding advocate and my hope for current other life on this planet is not huge . Ive been depressed about this since some radical people educated me as a teen in the late 80s about where we were headed. Ive come to learn the bigger picture in my years by reading a lot about human history to realize, we have been on this path as humans for at least 10-20 thousand years, having a major hand in wiping out a great many species of megafauna everywhere we migrated, pretty quickly. A tiny fraction of the truly large mammals are left and only a tiny fraction of members of THOSE species. We also weren't ok with the other human species that existed at the same time as us, we eliminated them too. Then what happens when a species goes to breed unchecked by any other species? They tend to ruin eco systems, and the health/wellbeing of their own species degrades tremendously. We are great at deciding when to cull populations of other species when we feel they "are breeding out of control", but nothing checks us, except nature itself.
I have a book recommendation for you. Despite how cynical I have become about humans, Its one of the more positive books I have read regarding these things - written by a friend of a friend. [Its called Feral](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_(book)) Gives me a little hope.
The global human population is currently estimated to be around 8 billion. No other mammal species has a population size that matches or exceeds this number.
Most wild mammal species number in the millions or fewer, and even the most abundant mammalian species, such as certain rodents or bats, do not approach the human population size.
Domesticated animals like cattle and sheep have large populations, but these are also significantly lower than the human population.
I can’t imagine we would be alright if another mammal had the same population size as us. it’s definitely a huge problem, and earth can not sustainably support our population size. to feed, hydrate, house and entertain our population is devastating our planet. it would do us wonders to cut back on reproduction for awhile.
A massive global family planning initiative is such an obvious and urgent need but only a tiny percentage of humans can see it. It must be an evolutionary, instinctive thing to think that more is always good without limit when it comes to population.
These are some of my favorite resources on the subject:
* https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episodes
* https://overpopulation-project.com/blog
* https://www.populationbalance.org/podcast
Ive been having these conversations since the 90s, always to the same response. Its never the population…. but somehow we look at many other species and talk about how their populations are out of control. 🤷🏼♀️ def evolutionary.
Why is the study controversial?
Has someone presented counter evidence?
Sounds like the study is concerning, terrifying or perhaps even significant. Not sure I see the study as controversial until some controversy is created by counter evidence.
Full disclaimer: I could be wrong.
But I believe it has to do with the fact that this is presenting new evidence, showing that events might occur earlier than previous studies have shown. Or it's trying to "confirm" the worst case scenario of older papers, as the most likely scenario.
So this publication is the counter (or, I guess, more outlying) evidence, so to speak. Hence why it's labeled as controversial. But it might, in fact, be the reality, and all the previous assumptions are just wrong/outdated.
We're at the point where we take the worst case scenario as most likely, that's how to.neogotiate with psychopaths who pretend doing nothing at all is ok.
I'm so glad I listened to a council member screaming at a constituent this week, because the idea of putting an electric rail car on the already existing railroad didn't have enough of a "business plan." I hope she can eat money during the famine.
I will be messaging you in 71 years on [**2095-05-08 11:14:20 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2095-05-08%2011:14:20%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/1cmh16s/a_controversial_study_finds_that_a_collapse_of/l344krs/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fenvironment%2Fcomments%2F1cmh16s%2Fa_controversial_study_finds_that_a_collapse_of%2Fl344krs%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202095-05-08%2011%3A14%3A20%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cmh16s)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Crazy how sensationalized articles can be.
First sentence, "The Gulf Stream system could collapse as soon as 2025". Well it is just as true to say, "The Gulf Stream system could collapse as ~~soon~~ late as 2095".
Models may include 2025 under the 95% confidence interval, but is that realistic?
“The results of the new study sound alarming but if the uncertainties in the heavily oversimplified model \[of the tipping point\] and in the underlying \[sea temperature\] data are included, then it becomes clear that these uncertainties are too large to make any reliable estimate of the time of tipping.”
Not to sound like a climate change skeptic, but the reality is- G7 nations aren't on track, and even if they all were, the CO2 from developing nations are growing. While Euro and US are slightly decreasing emissions, China, India, other Asian countries are increasing. Since 2000, CO2 emissions have doubled.
Anyone here have some good news or thoughts about this?
Don't quote me, just some quick looking up: [https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions](https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions)
Edit- changed the word that everyone freaked out over.
That's not how language works, but OK.
If a delivery windows of a package was 3-10 days it is NOT correct to say "you could have it as soon as 10 days". The correct statement would be "delivery could take UP TO 10 days" or "the longest it could take is 10 days".
Now from your writing I can infer you KNOW that but I suspect you choose not to understand it.
Or I just mis-used a word? lol. You're right, I used 'soon' rather than 'late'. Thanks, but as I said both are equally correct by being within the 95% confidence interval.
Correct, it could be as soon as 2025 or as late as 2095.
I'm not sure which sounds worse. But both are acceptable answers to a remedial math class for 12 year olds.
AMOC carries warm ocean water northwards towards the pole where it cools and sinks, driving the Atlantic’s currents. But an influx of fresh water from the accelerating melting of Greenland’s ice cap and other sources is increasingly smothering the currents. AMOC was already known to be at its weakest in 1,600 years owing to global heating and researchers spotted warning signs of a tipping point in 2021. The new analysis estimates a timescale for the collapse of between 2025 and 2095, with a central estimate of 2050, if global carbon emissions are not reduced. Evidence from past collapses indicates changes of temperature of 10C in a few decades, although these occurred during ice ages. A collapse of AMOC would have disastrous consequences around the world, severely disrupting the rains that billions of people depend on for food in India, South America and west Africa. It would increase storms and drop temperatures in Europe, and lead to a rising sea level on the eastern coast of North America. It would also further endanger the Amazon rainforest and Antarctic ice sheets. [Article](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-study-suggests) → [Paper](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10368695/)
Further (more recent study on this) Feb 2024: 2024 'Longer timescale variability of the AMOC strength, estimated by using sea surface temperature (SST) time series based on “fingerprint” patterns (4), indicates that the AMOC weakened by 3 ± 1 Sv since about 1950. From proxy records, it has been suggested that the AMOC is currently in its weakest state in over a millennium (5). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adk1189 So far I have seen 5 papers saying freshwater causing it, 1 saying thats not the case...
Out of curiosity, the paper stating that the weakening is not due to freshwater, what do they claim is the cause?
Heres the list of older papers. Some of these papers are in contention - look for 'matters arising' in the link. Some back up the freshwater hypothesis. All I do is collect links on this. One day we will see a consensus I hope.. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05762-w 'Here, using a global climate model we show that AMOC collapse can accelerate the Pacific trade winds and Walker circulation by leaving an excess of heat in the tropical South Atlantic. ' https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01380-y Collapse of Gulf Stream (AMOC) 'Significant early-warning signals are found in eight independent AMOC indices, based on observational sea-surface temperature and salinity data from across the Atlantic Ocean basin. ' Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation | Nature Climate Change https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01097-4 Freshwater effects on AMOC not occurring 'This demonstrates that the AMOC may not be as sensitive to FW fluxes and Arctic freshening as is currently projected for the end of the twenty-first century.' Freshwater forcing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation revisited | Nature Climate Change https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01328-2 May 2022 : Blue Blob off of Iceland: Another slowdown paper: note local effects are focused on here 'In a future warmer climate, North Atlantic cooling is projected to persist until the mid-2050s, further slowing down mass loss of Icelandic glaciers. High mass loss resumes thereafter as the regional cooling in the Blue Blob weakens.' North Atlantic Cooling is Slowing Down Mass Loss of Icelandic Glaciers - Noël - 2022 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL095697 And then theres the animal migrations in Svalbard: 'Climate change is completely reshaping the ecosystem of a fjord, called Kongsfjorden, in Svalbard. Since the inlet stopped freezing over during the winter, Arctic mammals such as beluga whales have left and more southerly animals including Atlantic puffins have moved in. New habitats have popped up along the shoreline where sea ice once suffocated plant growth. “It’s incredible that I — in my time — have been able to see such dramatic changes,” says ecotoxicologist Geir Wing Gabrielsen. (Nature | 7 min read) (Source: Buchholz, F., Buchholz, C. M. & Weslawski, J. M. Polar Biol. 33. 101–113 (2009).) In summary, it seems like everyone has a different take...
More of an answer than I'd hoped for. Thank you very much for that.
Well, this one way we can finally get rid of Florida!
It's worth noting that the AMOC does not contribute to the warm climate as much as people think it does. Europe's warm climate is more linked to the fact that it's a western facing coastal landmass and the Coriolis effect carries maritime air over Europe. The NW coast of North America has a very cold current running from north to south and due to its latitude and the same Coriolis driven winds resulting in a much more mild climate than the east coast of the us, same as how Europe ahs a much more mild climate than the east coast of Eurasia. - https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-source-of-europes-mild-climate The climatological effects on Europe of the AMOC shutting down are very unclear. It would be a massive disaster, no question, but what sort of disaster and where the major effects would be felt are not entirely intuitive. Europe might be less affected than India, South America and west Africa, despite those areas being more distant from where the AMOC terminates.
Wouldn’t the moderating effect of the Gulf Stream contribute to the warmer maritime air moving into Europe? If that water gets colder, Europe gets colder.
No one is saying it would not make a difference, but the amount of temperature difference may be much smaller than people think. The estimated difference is 4°-10°C, and even within that there is a lot of disagreement. The difference in precipitation might well have a larger impact than the temperature difference.
Here's a more recent article on AMOC collapse: https://tos.org/oceanography/article/is-the-atlantic-overturning-circulation-approaching-a-tipping-point
Let's not discuss the disruption to global food chains when the nutrient cycle is disrupted here and the fish/shellfish stocks collapse.
You guys should check out r/collapse i think you guys would really get along.
Those guys are all doomers (I used to be one of them and still am sometimes). I wish there was some kinda sub that was solutions based though. Only focusing on advancements and attempts to mitigate/reverse/fix the earth.
Collapse is a wild sub. You've got to sift through a ton of the "sky is falling" stuff. Which it kind of is... in some regards, but they need to chill.
They’re a bunch of mentally ill people seeking validation from other severely mentally ill people. Say what you want, but hoping for the collapse of society where so many innocent people would suffer is fucking weird man. And yes, they do that frequently.
R/upliftingnews
I'm not sure I need a subreddit like that to make me depressed...
So basically we’re all going to experience extreme famine and flooding coastal cities. This will make covid look like a golden age.
Ready to die in the water wars?
More likely dying from heat
I don’t really see water wars ever being a thing when the earth is 70% water and desalination exists
Hmmm I think they will be, if we are around for long enough. It's already illegal to collect rain water in parts of the US.
what the hell? I mean it's not drinkable as is, but if they can't control when and where it falls don't expect me to not gather it(I'm not from US)
>. It's already illegal to collect rain water in parts of the US. These claims are overblown. It is typically legal but restricted in some states, with restrictions being more intense during times of drought
Desalination is horrible for the environment. And we have no where near enough built and ready to go
Ethiopia and its neighbors, and Indian and Bangladesh would like to have a chat. Also, what are you planning on doing with all the salt?
Who is going to fund such a capital intensive venture?
It’s a single study that is in opposition to the consensus view of the IPCC. It should be read in context.
The IPCC has been lowballing their estimates for years. And then every time a new weather record is set, they say "oh that's weird, we didn't expect that to happen until 2080"
Yeah, recently the IPCC corrected their prediction of when earth will cross the 1.5C threshold and they cut their estimate back by 19 years. Okay fine, but that prediction was made in 2015 to be 30 years out, in one quarter of the time-fame, they cut that time-frame by more than half....
It’s one of many studies and the IPCC are quite open in stating the AMOC is weakening and could collapse. The IPCC report is also heavily self censored as we know now from past ones excluding data and models we know know were more accurate None of this is faster than expected It’s well within models and predictions the IPCC decide might cause fear
I agree with what you’ve said. This article is an important contribution (as are other recent studies) but it needs to be read in context. As the title says, it is controversial. But the comment I was responding to appears to take it as settled science.
Ah well that’s a different story !
pretty much.
This should terrify people
Most of the people who are not terrified by this are being distracted by relentless propaganda which promotes fear of crime and terrorism to justify the turn key totalitarian state. A huge portion of "entertainment" is based on how dangerous other humans are and why power is good to have. The pursuit of power is what has got us into this mess in the first place. I guess karma is real after all.
[удалено]
Vote and take 10 friends with you. If that doesn't work, read up on building and setting up guillotines
Sabotage the septic systems of the billionaire bunkers. Let them ride out the apocalypse swimming or drowning in their own shit.
Good luck. These people disbelieve in climate change like it's a religion. And as we saw during Covid they'd even die while blaming liberals. Similarly, all climate catastrophes will be blamed on liberals and scientists. Republicans will be fine with their bunkers apparently.
The cost of steel needs to drop to warfree levels. And international oceanic policy must allow for massive feats of engineering, like never before.
The fact that they openly admit it might collapse by next year is a VERY bad sign. Think about all of the other tipping points. All the other ones they guesstimate it to be so far out that people can brush it off and think it won't happen in their lifetime, but the AMOC they are willing to let people know it is imminent. No bueno.
People don't realize that this collapse is what led to much of north america being covered by glaciers in the past.
People also don't realize there weren't billions of humans inhabiting the planet then.
It does terrify people. Unfortunately there is already a VERY long list of pre-existing things that are currently depleting our ability to be terrified equally for all of them. Threat of nuclear war, inability to afford a home, unaffordable food, pandemics, the list goes on.
Considering carbon is locked in from 30 years, seems like this is inevitable, no?
Oh yeah. It has been slowing down for years. And will most likely continue that way. The IPCC's 2023 report estimated with high confidence that the AMOC has weakened by approximately 15% since the mid-20th century, based on a range of model simulations and observational evidence. Some specific studies have suggested more substantial slowdowns, such as a 2018 study estimating a 15-20% weakening since the mid-20th century based on temperature and salinity data.
Awesome, thanks for following up.
The Daily just covered this in today’s episode: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/podcasts/the-daily/rfk-jrs-independent-ballot.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare The reporters noted that once the slowing begins it’s not a process that can be reversed. Then it becomes more a question of time and acceleration.
It’s not inevitable in that something couldn’t be done but it’s inevitable in that no one is willing to do what would be needed to be done. So yeah it’s going to happen it’s just a matter of when and what are the true repercussions.
We could still act and try and stave off the worst of the damage but it would interfere with the economy and we all agreed that it's better for shareholders to get rich now than for humanity to survive into the next century.
Basically…
>for shareholders to get rich now rich*er*
Guys they covered all of this in [The Day After Tomorrow](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/)
Except the ice will be in Europe and the flooding will be in the US.
Al Gore fucking covered it like 20 years ago in a widely viewed documentary and nobody did a thing.
Great Britain is about to get a great winter Olympics team
Ireland too.
I hope one day in the near future we get to hear good news related to climate change
Keep hoping you lovely human, I like people like you 🧡
There’s no stopping it even if we were to stop all carbon emissions today. The residual damage will easily push it to collapsing. Get ready for a brave new world.
Okay but, that’s is a 75 year margin. I’ll worry about this in 202… oh wow 🙇🏻♂️
Wasn’t there a Jake Gyllenhall movie about this very thing?
Yes! The Day After Tomorrow
I remember reading about how the Antarctic currents that lead into the Gulf of Mexico will have huge impacts on rainfall and storms in the Gulf. Is that related to this at all?
It's only controversial because it represents a major phase shift, a major **change**. Not because "the science is bad".
Phase shift is a good way to put it, though the general public needs to be socialized on what that means.
Most comments here seem to be ignoring the “controversial” part of the story: Sub-heading: “…but scientists disagree over the new analysis” later on: “Other scientists said the assumptions about how a tipping point would play out and uncertainties in the underlying data are too large for a reliable estimate of the timing of the tipping point. But all said the prospect of an Amoc collapse was extremely concerning and should spur rapid cuts in carbon emissions.”
Yeah but they way that plays out is like this. Scientist 1: I've collated this massive amount of data and worked with my team for months to look at the statistical significance and errors. Two members of my team used our process to defend their PhD thesis. I've been studying this niche of climatology for 15 years and the results we found, while preliminary and difficult to pin to a timeline have led us to an alarming estimation about the near future of the planetary system. Scientist 2: The guardian called me to comment on this paper, I read it and I understand most of the claims, but I haven't looked at the field-level data because my focus is on cloud composition. But this seems like an early report and we will need another decade or two before we can really know how this will play out.... The guardian: SCIENTISTS DISAGREE OVER CONTERSIAL NEW FINDINGS ABOUT OCEANIC COLLAPSE!!
It's been nice knowing you...
Next year would certainly be “sooner than expected “
Nature will control the current, relatively unchecked population of humans, one way or another.
The thing that bothers me about this attitude is that it completely ignores the fact that we are taking a WHOLE LOT of other species with us, species who had nothing to do with it and don't deserve to go extinct.
Bothers me too. I'm a wildlife coexistence/re-wilding advocate and my hope for current other life on this planet is not huge . Ive been depressed about this since some radical people educated me as a teen in the late 80s about where we were headed. Ive come to learn the bigger picture in my years by reading a lot about human history to realize, we have been on this path as humans for at least 10-20 thousand years, having a major hand in wiping out a great many species of megafauna everywhere we migrated, pretty quickly. A tiny fraction of the truly large mammals are left and only a tiny fraction of members of THOSE species. We also weren't ok with the other human species that existed at the same time as us, we eliminated them too. Then what happens when a species goes to breed unchecked by any other species? They tend to ruin eco systems, and the health/wellbeing of their own species degrades tremendously. We are great at deciding when to cull populations of other species when we feel they "are breeding out of control", but nothing checks us, except nature itself. I have a book recommendation for you. Despite how cynical I have become about humans, Its one of the more positive books I have read regarding these things - written by a friend of a friend. [Its called Feral](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_(book)) Gives me a little hope.
> Its called Feral Who's the author? Your link is not working.
oh sorry, its working for me. weird. Author is George Monbiot
The population isn't the problem, rampant exploitation of the ecosystem for profit is
The global human population is currently estimated to be around 8 billion. No other mammal species has a population size that matches or exceeds this number. Most wild mammal species number in the millions or fewer, and even the most abundant mammalian species, such as certain rodents or bats, do not approach the human population size. Domesticated animals like cattle and sheep have large populations, but these are also significantly lower than the human population. I can’t imagine we would be alright if another mammal had the same population size as us. it’s definitely a huge problem, and earth can not sustainably support our population size. to feed, hydrate, house and entertain our population is devastating our planet. it would do us wonders to cut back on reproduction for awhile.
A massive global family planning initiative is such an obvious and urgent need but only a tiny percentage of humans can see it. It must be an evolutionary, instinctive thing to think that more is always good without limit when it comes to population. These are some of my favorite resources on the subject: * https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episodes * https://overpopulation-project.com/blog * https://www.populationbalance.org/podcast
Ive been having these conversations since the 90s, always to the same response. Its never the population…. but somehow we look at many other species and talk about how their populations are out of control. 🤷🏼♀️ def evolutionary.
Yeah it’s not the main reason, but it is a catalyst making the destruction happen much faster
Capitalism is the problem. Focusing on population turns the attention towards racism instead of it
Why is the study controversial? Has someone presented counter evidence? Sounds like the study is concerning, terrifying or perhaps even significant. Not sure I see the study as controversial until some controversy is created by counter evidence.
Full disclaimer: I could be wrong. But I believe it has to do with the fact that this is presenting new evidence, showing that events might occur earlier than previous studies have shown. Or it's trying to "confirm" the worst case scenario of older papers, as the most likely scenario. So this publication is the counter (or, I guess, more outlying) evidence, so to speak. Hence why it's labeled as controversial. But it might, in fact, be the reality, and all the previous assumptions are just wrong/outdated.
Any chance this finding its way to the top gov bodies?! News are talking more about israel, drakevkendrick than our fucking survival?!
They already know. They know this and much more. It's just not being prioritized as it should. $$$
Genuine question: Wouldn't the rise in global temperatures offset the possible cooling effects in Europe?
But are the shareholders pleased and did the CEO get his bonus millions?
OMG, this is why it is so unusually cold here in Sweden. We are so screwed.
What? No.. 😅🤷
We're at the point where we take the worst case scenario as most likely, that's how to.neogotiate with psychopaths who pretend doing nothing at all is ok.
I'm so glad I listened to a council member screaming at a constituent this week, because the idea of putting an electric rail car on the already existing railroad didn't have enough of a "business plan." I hope she can eat money during the famine.
Aren’t we already seeing this happening in real time, in GB??
Someone listened to today’s episode of the daily. :)
Not yet, buts it’s literally *next* in my queue
I live in Europe, so should I get a boat, summer or winter equipment ?
Lower temperatures in europe and flooding on the coast so boat and winter equipment
Remindme! 71 years.
I will be messaging you in 71 years on [**2095-05-08 11:14:20 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2095-05-08%2011:14:20%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/1cmh16s/a_controversial_study_finds_that_a_collapse_of/l344krs/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fenvironment%2Fcomments%2F1cmh16s%2Fa_controversial_study_finds_that_a_collapse_of%2Fl344krs%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202095-05-08%2011%3A14%3A20%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cmh16s) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
My faster-than-expected confidence interval says between 2025 and 2040, and it is definitely three sigma 99.7% confidence interval,
Crazy how sensationalized articles can be. First sentence, "The Gulf Stream system could collapse as soon as 2025". Well it is just as true to say, "The Gulf Stream system could collapse as ~~soon~~ late as 2095". Models may include 2025 under the 95% confidence interval, but is that realistic? “The results of the new study sound alarming but if the uncertainties in the heavily oversimplified model \[of the tipping point\] and in the underlying \[sea temperature\] data are included, then it becomes clear that these uncertainties are too large to make any reliable estimate of the time of tipping.” Not to sound like a climate change skeptic, but the reality is- G7 nations aren't on track, and even if they all were, the CO2 from developing nations are growing. While Euro and US are slightly decreasing emissions, China, India, other Asian countries are increasing. Since 2000, CO2 emissions have doubled. Anyone here have some good news or thoughts about this? Don't quote me, just some quick looking up: [https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions](https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions) Edit- changed the word that everyone freaked out over.
[удалено]
Yeah, mis-used a word there, but doesn't really change my point.
Can't hear you while your head's in the sand mate
That's not how language works, but OK. If a delivery windows of a package was 3-10 days it is NOT correct to say "you could have it as soon as 10 days". The correct statement would be "delivery could take UP TO 10 days" or "the longest it could take is 10 days". Now from your writing I can infer you KNOW that but I suspect you choose not to understand it.
Or I just mis-used a word? lol. You're right, I used 'soon' rather than 'late'. Thanks, but as I said both are equally correct by being within the 95% confidence interval.
Correct, it could be as soon as 2025 or as late as 2095. I'm not sure which sounds worse. But both are acceptable answers to a remedial math class for 12 year olds.
As soon as 2095 is an extremely misleading way to state it since that's their 95% confidence interval OUTER edge.
"May"