Sentences with phrase «sea currents there»

Not exact matches

Many observers noted that the President had the facts of the current oil situation wrong and that there were no longer record amounts of oil in storage or loaded on ships at sea.

long cost / benefit analysis, which not only include loss of arable land but rather shifting it further towards pools (in my country, unless there is an awful change in sea currents, one could actually expect longer vegetation season)

«Given the severe costs that Trident renewal could require... there is now a strong case for a re-examination of whether alternatives to current continuous - at - sea deterrence (CASD) policy could yield significant financial savings while continuing to meet this agreed objective,» the report's author, Professor Malcolm Chalmers, wrote.

Sensors that have plumbed the depths of Arctic seas since 2002 have found warm currents creeping up from the Atlantic Ocean and helping drive the dramatic retreat of sea ice there over the last decade.

The fall of the temperature of the sea water is sometimes a sign of the proximity of ice, although in regions where there is an intermixture of cold and warm currents going on, as at the junction of the Labrador Current and the Gulf Stream, the temperature of the sea has been known to rise as the ice is approached.

Solar heating could create currents in liquid methane seas on Saturn's largest moon — which could pose a challenge for proposed missions there

But there are many unknowns about the current status of 11 species of marine mammals who depend on Arctic sea ice to live, feed and breed, and about how their fragile habitat will evolve in a warming world.

The effects do not stop there; in the Arabian Sea, the twice - yearly monsoon winds enrich the fishing grounds, as well as setting up currents that are constant enough to be used for navigation.

«There is also evidence that large freshwater inputs could alter ocean currents and affect the normal formation of sea ice.»

The ice formation and offshore winds produce strong currents in these shallow marginal seas, which stir up the sediment and carry the methane produced there into the water column.

On top of those there are smaller, shorter variations due to sea surface currents.

Even if you ignore all the temperature meauserments which you seem to vehimently deny there is still many other sources of evidence associated with this increase such as — ice melt / extreme weather events / sea current changes / habitat changes / CO2 / ice cores / sediment cores.

That is a major change in sea currents, warming, wildlife, coastal erosion, and much less solar energy being bounced back into space by ice that in not there.

In fact, this card is so basic with respect to its perks and advantages that it would otherwise be pretty tough to identify in the current sea of 0 % introductory APR cards that are floating around out there.

There are many beautiful places in the mountains or by the sea where you can live like a celebrity on half or a third of your current expenses.

Although the sea here has a sandy bed, there are places with barely submerged rocks and with the strong currents, it is advisable to take care when swimming and surfing in some areas.

There are other beaches to safely swim with little ones - which one depends on the current wind and sea conditions for your beach day.

Please be aware that there are strong currents generated by the joining of the Sea of Cortez and the Pacific.

The current does the work for you, so there is minimal swimming required, just float on by and be mesmerised by some of the most magical sea life and colourful corals beneath the turquoise seas.

The Night dive was in Wagmag, there was no current and we had a nice a gentle dive, the highlight of the dive was the Satomi pygmy sea horse.

Quite a contrast to notable skeptics such as Joe Bastardi, who continues to suggest that the current downward trend in Arctic sea ice is simple cyclical thing and that there is no ice - free Arctic anywhere in our future whether it be 40 years or 240 years.

Because of the shifting currents beneath the North Pole, the sea ice there is only two to three meters thick.

Admittedly with the loss of Cryosat were are a bit behind the curve, and the response of the thermocline and deep sea currents is problematic at best, there is no question where the heat is going.

Re # 29: «There are numerous examples of cities that have had to deal with rising or lowering sea levels... Current examples include Venice and New Orleans»

There seems to be little exchange in surface waters between the NH and SH (as good as is the case for air currents), see the main sea currents.

Several specialists studying Arctic sea ice told me that there's a good chance that, if current conditions persist, the ice this spring could be in better shape than it has been over the last few years.

Increasing CO2 does increase the greenhouse effect, but there are other factors which determine climate, including solar irradiance, volcanism, albedo, orbital variations, continental drift, mountain building, variations in sea currents, changes in greenhouse gases, even cometary impacts.

In the past few hundred years there have also been lower than today, but overall the current sea level is near the lower limit for the current interglacial.

Believe we agree on technical solutions that the UK faces, now that its N. Sea oil / gas is playing out (even if the current government there does not, according to Tony Brown).

Research indicates that the Arctic had substantially less sea ice during this period compared to present Current desert regions of Central Asia were extensively forested due to higher rainfall, and the warm temperate forest belts in China and Japan were extended northwards West African sediments additionally record the «African Humid Period», an interval between 16,000 and 6,000 years ago when Africa was much wetter due to a strengthening of the African monsoon While there do not appear to have been significant temperature changes at most low latitude sites, other climate changes have been reported.

I read an interesting article from some researchers in NC who had found — locally — that there had been no sea level rise until ~ 1970 (don't hold me to the date) and that the current rate was on the order of 8 - 10 inches / century.

Suffice it to say that there are indications that at least a major part of the current sea ice retreat is due to naturally occurring shifts in weather patterns, rather than simply to Arctic swarming caused by human GHG emissions, as some people apparently believe.

As a result, directly comparing the Sea Surface Temperature data from the early 20th century to the current Sea Surface Temperature data is like «comparing apples and oranges» — there have been too many changes in the data sources for such comparisons to have much meaning.

If fresh submarine groundwater discharge approaches just 7 % of the total SGD, it would not only balance current groundwater recharge, but would steadily raise sea level by an additional 2 mm / year, even if there was no ocean warming and no melting glaciers.

In order to properly understand, what is going on in the Arctic ocean, we first must understand the oceanic oscillation and the currents in this vast ocean, it is interesting to note, Sweden is recalling its ice breaker from the USA Antarctic survey, and there is concern in the sea of Okhotsk — where, for the last couple of years breaking the winter sea ice has been a major problem, colder here, relatively «warmer» there etc..

Finally, at least some of the pollutants we've emitted over the past century will, on our current understanding, stay there for hundreds or thousands of years, leading to long term problems of sea level rise.

Although there is a general consensus among models that rising CO2 will drive warming and continued ice melt into the future, IPCC models failed to predict the current level of rapid sea ice reduction.

2) the feedbacks are not the key driver of Arctic sea ice melting, there is another external force, such as N. Atlantic sea surface temperature and ocean currents, which is dominant and run - away melting was an erroneous interpretation.

And once again, there is nothing unusual in either current sea levels (they have been higher, not that long ago), or sea level rise rates (they are perfectly normal at any time scale) or current temperatures, or current temperature fluctuation rates.

There is no excuse for Noonan's use of data that is 12 years out of date to make claims of current sea level rise.

Increasing Arctic sea ice for a decade should by itself wipe out AGW, C and W, Arctic Sea Ice Blog [Neven «here I am with a gray beard and there is still more ice but just wait and see»...] and scrap the current modesea ice for a decade should by itself wipe out AGW, C and W, Arctic Sea Ice Blog [Neven «here I am with a gray beard and there is still more ice but just wait and see»...] and scrap the current modeSea Ice Blog [Neven «here I am with a gray beard and there is still more ice but just wait and see»...] and scrap the current models.

In addition, there are no guarantees that the current rate will be maintained, since many studies have shown the likelihood of a higher rate of sea level rise as global warming continues.

However you slice it, lolwot, there is a current «pause» (or «standstill») in the warming of the «globally and annually averaged land and sea surface temperature anomaly» (used by IPCC to measure «global warming»), despite unabated human GHG emissions and CO2 levels (Mauna Loa) reaching record levels.

The geochemist Wallace Broecker, to whom we owe a number of the important ideas about abrupt climate change, speculates that there is a chain of causation starting with more far - northern winter sea ice and (because of the ice preventing the winds from stirring up waves and evaporation and salt excess) thereby fewer sinks for the Gulf Stream, which in turn diminishes the big conveyor loop of currents linking the North Atlantic to the Pacific.

cit., 1936/8) refers to Birkeland's work from 1930, assuming that all warming analyses have to begin with the observation of the Spitsbergen phenomenon, because only here the temperature increase was measured in the winter of 1918/19 for the first time (Scherhag, 1939); (a) There were increased Gulf Current temperatures, particularly significant in the Barents - and East Greenland Sea.

Given the potential importance of West Antarctica to future global sea level and our current knowledge of glacier instability, why is there so much uncertainty about its future?

They are also misled to believe that CO2 is polluting the oceans through acidification but there is nothing unnatural or unprecedented about current measurements of ocean water pH and a future rise in pCO2 will likely yield growth benefits to corals and other sea life.»

That has been used to make MWP - like claims about sea ice: «sea ice has been lower in the past; therefore there is nothing remarkable about current sea ice loss.»

«There is medium confidence that the rate of current global mean sea level change is unusually high in the context of the past millennium.»

There is a difference between a model that tries to predict future average temperatures and a model that describes how sea surface temperature changes cause CO2 concentration changes and depend on the current CO2 concentration.