"If you taxed FF at their real cost to society, and invested that money directly into building large-scale renewable energy production and associated transmission infrastructure, the overall effect on the economy would be a net positive." Money is not energy. Renewable energy & it's infrastructure is indeed a worthy goal however one has to ask a few questions. What energy source was used to build all the existing infrastructures society is now accustomed to having? Where will the energy come from to "rebuild" these infrastructures given that renewables are currently only in the 1% range? Where will the materials come from to do this "rebuilding"? IMO, what is happening to the Arctic (catastrophic melting) is nothing more than a preview of what will happen to this social experiment we are living in. The use of FF is destroying the ice via AGW but FF are running out and we have become woefully dependent on them for much too long. The Law of Unintended Consequences seems to fit. To correct either problem requires sufficient time & resources. I would love to be given an explanation as to how either can be salvaged. Woo hoo! Hang on to your hats indeed! Windchaser

Kudos Neven! You ROCK! And I must say that I agree with Pete Williamson and also favour the term "citizen scientist" over the sometimes demeaning "armchair scientist". Just my 2¢ there... IMO one of the strongest points of this blog is the willingness of the commenters to hold themselves to the rule of logic and debate issues without much personal prejudice. When someone is shown to be wrong, they frequently state that they accept being corrected. This is one of the marks of a true scientist... to be in it for the information and what that information means. A good scientist does her/his best to be egoless in their quest for understanding. And then there are the occasional trolls & gish gallopers. Often I see their logic as that displayed in the Monty Python Holy Grail scene: "We found a witch! Lets burn her!" They are worthy of being banned. Windchaser

It it my imagination or does this visible satellite picture show Mjølnir in the clouds? http://weather.gc.ca/data/satellite/hrpt_dfo_nir_100.jpg If this storm acts like the Hammer of Thor on the ice, we will all be buzzing in a few days. Windchaser

I'm sticking with my original .9 million Sq. Km with at least one day being ice free. One good cyclone will IMO cause the Belmont Lake Effect AKA the Great Arctic Flush. We'll see soon enough. Regardless of the exact timing, (in geologic terms a few years is an eye blink) the fact that we are witnessing the death spiral of the Arctic Ice is both depressing and exhilarating at the same time. It sure makes MY head hurt.

@ delormin. Rob was saying that by mass, CH4 has a GH potential effect that is 72 x greater than CO2 but by volume the effect is only 24. The molecular mass of CH4 is 16 and the mass of CO2 is 44 (@ Rob.... Did you make a typo by using 48? ) Since one mole of any gas will have a volume of 22.4 L @ STP, one needs to compare mole volumes and not mass. Rob's fraction of 16/48 (should be 16/44) gets you there. Back to lurking for me. Windchaser