Easily getting us to the edge of what is livable even with advanced technology.

Climate change sounds too neutral. It should've been called climate destruction or such, but the name was picked by Big Oil.

I seem to get downvoted every time I mention this, as apparently people want to forget global warming was ever bolstered by, "look how hot it is" and they would prefer to just now ridicule people for the same errors their side was guilty of for literally decades.

So yes, the event is real. Ridiculing opponents for making the same argument with the same temporary data points isn't winning anything.

The modern sense of "environmental contamination" in common parlance dates largely to the early 1960s:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=pollution&year...

I have never failed to convince anyone in my midwest sphere of influence (midwest, know far right and far left folks) that ‘pollution’ needs to be dealt with.

You can replace ‘climate change’ in an essay with pollution and dramatically simplify changing peoples mind.

The problem was re-framed because western industry mostly stopped belching obvious pollution and that framing of the problem did not resonate with western voters who could see that the rivers and sky were cleaner than they'd ever been. It used to be that smog was a feature of weekly weather in urban areas and if your dog jumped in a river 50mi downstream of a textile factory you'd know what color they were making the day before. By the 90s that kind of stuff was cleaned up a ton.

Not everything you don't like is the result of the evil other guys.

An ice sheet in the southwestern region of Greenland is releasing huge amounts of mercury into nearby rivers. The discovery is worrying as the toxic metal can accumulate in the marine animals that are a key dietary component for local Indigenous communities.

Mercury is a naturally occurring metal found in some rocks. As glaciers slowly flow downhill, they grind up the underlying rocks, potentially releasing mercury into their meltwater.

To find out whether this is occurring in Greenland, Jon Hawkings at Florida State University and his colleagues analysed meltwater flowing from the southwestern margin of the Greenland ice sheet.

Hawkings and his team completed two expeditions to Greenland in 2015 and 2018, collecting water samples from three meltwater rivers that receive substantial amounts of water from the Greenland ice sheet – up to 800 cubic metres per second. The samples were filtered to remove any sediment and kept safe from contamination. Then the researchers analysed the mercury concentration in each one.

“[Mercury concentrations in this region] are at least 10 times higher than in an average river,” says Hawkings. This means the meltwater is as rich in mercury as some highly polluted rivers – except in this case the mercury hasn’t been introduced into the water directly by humans. “Although this mercury isn’t introduced by humans, the ice sheet is melting much faster as a result of climate change,” says Hawkings.

An ice sheet in the southwestern region of Greenland releases huge amounts Quantities of mercury in nearby rivers. The discovery is worrying since the poisonous metal can accumulate in marine animals, which are a key Nutritional component for local indigenous communities.

Mercury is a naturally occurring metal found in some rocks. How Glaciers slowly flow downhill, they grind the rock below, possibly releasing mercury into their meltwater.

To find out if this happens in Greenland, Jon Hawkings at Florida State University and his colleagues analyzed flowing meltwater from the southwestern edge of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Hawkings and his team completed two expeditions to Greenland in 2015 and 2018 water samples from three meltwater rivers that receive significant amounts of water from the Greenland ice sheet - up up to 800 cubic meters per second. The samples were filtered to remove them any sediment and protected from contamination. Then the researchers analyzed the mercury concentration in each.

“[Mercury concentrations in this region] are at least ten times higher than an average river, ”says Hawkings. That is, the meltwater is as rich in mercury as some heavily polluted rivers - except here if the mercury was not brought directly into the water People. “Although this mercury is not introduced by humans, the ice is The sheet metal melts much faster due to climate change, ”says Hawkings.

https://www.spektrum.de/news/schwermetall-quecksilber-in-gro...

As far as I can tell, (1) there's absolutely nothing suspicious about the ML translation into English, and (2) there's no easy or reliable way to find the original article, given only the translation.

This bizarre query can find it (as the 3rd result). I don't think any "natural" query can.

https://www.google.com/search?q="42"+"2015"+"2018"+"Nature+G...

For convenience:

"Melting glaciers in southwest Greenland wash up to 42 tons of mercury per year into the surrounding rivers. That is around ten percent of the total mercury transported by rivers into the ocean worldwide, reports a team led by Jon R. Hawkings from Florida State University in Tallahassee. The poisonous heavy metal presumably comes from the rock at the bottom of the glacier, writes the working group in "Nature Geoscience". In 2015 and 2018, she examined three rivers that carry meltwater from the ice cap to the sea. The mercury concentrations there were at least ten times higher than in an average river - and comparable to waters that were heavily polluted by industry."

"In Greenland, however, humans are only indirectly involved. Measurements of meltwater from the top of the glacier show that the metal did not come from there. That would have indicated that it would have been deposited from the air and thus from technical sources. But the mercury probably comes from the rock under the glacier. Greenland's rock is gradually being crushed by the slowly creeping ice. This process also releases ore deposits, and thus metals such as mercury. However, people are not completely uninvolved. As a result of climate change, Greenland's ice is melting faster and faster, and more meltwater is getting under the glacier and leaching out the crushed ore."

"The finding shows that natural sources of heavy metal could also react sensitively to climate change, writes the Hawkings team. In addition, such sources are much more difficult to reduce than industrial emissions. Mercury is a particularly problematic environmental toxin because it is so toxic and primarily accumulates in the food chain in the form of methylmercury. The mercury from the glacier is particularly dangerous for indigenous communities, where fish and other marine animals make up a high proportion of the food. But in Germany too, fish contains considerable amounts of mercury compounds, primarily tuna, shark and eel. Small children and pregnant women should therefore avoid such fish."

"Whether it takes another 200 or 2000 years largely depends on how quickly the ice sheets melt. Even if global warming were to stop today, sea level would continue to rise."

-- from the same article (2 sentences later)

What we get is every single existing ocean port city (which is a lot of the largest cities) being threatened by more frequent flooding. They're all right at sea level, because that's where you build port cities. Not all of these cities really depend on being ports any more, but that's how they became major population and business centers.

They don't just pick up and move something like that. There's no place you can say, "Oh, they're going to move New York over to X, so I'll buy land there now". Even if they did for some reason decide that it was so bad they had to abandon New York (or Charleston or San Francisco or lots of others), there's no one place that it goes. The whole human geography of it changes.