AMOC Collapse Consequence: Atmospheric CO2 Rise by 83ppm & 7C Arctic Cooling & 6C Antarctic Warming
Posted by paulhenrybeckwith@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 52 comments
Auxiliatorcelsus@reddit
The heat circulation is important. But the nutrient circulation is even more important.
The regular flow of the AMOC has been the foundation for several important ecosystems which have taken 100's of thousands of years to establish.
If the AMOC breaks down. The nutrient-flow stops. The marine ecosystems starve and die.
Expect 90% of all fish-species to vanish. Not to mention the impact this will have on birds and animals who depend on fish.
About 30-40% of global human population is dependent on fish for their survival.
Draw your own conclusions about what will happen.
Certain-Birch153@reddit
Word. And it's not just food, but water too, right? I mean, we're already seeing the start of some of that, feels like.
Certain-Birch153@reddit
Yeah, people focus on the temp changes but the ecosystem collapse from nutrient disruption will hit way harder. We're so screwed.
Auxiliatorcelsus@reddit
Yeah, when people can't feed their kids - that's when unpleasant things start to happen on a global scale.
Mass-migrations on a scale not seen before. Resource wars. Etc. etc...
TheWhalersOnTheMoon@reddit
Counterpoint: this won't happen next quarter, or probably the following quarter, so...business as usual!
Previous-Pomelo-7721@reddit
Truly the most terrifying thing I’ve ever read in my life. Every single human being on earth should be concerned and actively working towards a solution as it is our very lives at stake
Washingtonpinot@reddit
How does the projection for increased Arctic ice align with the increasing predictions of BOE this year?
DirewaysParnuStCroix@reddit
It's ultimately state dependent. That is, it depends on what an AMOC collapse actually looks like in practice. Conventional coupled model simulations are generally much more productive at simulating the physical vertical structure of overturning circulation as opposed to how meridional heat transport functions under a warming climate. A lot of this comes down to the limits of model resolution versus long time step simulations. AMOC reduction experiments tend to simulate centuries, and this limits how high the resolution can be. The issue with this is that lower resolutions result in critical factors being omitted in the simulation, which can significantly alter the plausibility of the simulation. The use of CLIMBER-X by Nian et al. is a whole other story as it's just not remotely good for simulating transient sea ice feedbacks, but even with more capable models such as CESM, there are issues regarding how these simulations handle details such as Atlantic Water and the altantification of the Arctic region. Factors such as AW require much finer model resolutions (usually around 1/12°) to be represented in simulations. So essentially, simulations of AMOC reduction and how this affects temperatures and ice growth will observe significant cold biases as they're not accounting for warming feedbacks.
Washingtonpinot@reddit
I had to read that 3 times, but I think I have the gist. And if I’m correct, you’re (correctly) pointing out that the assumptions in the prevailing models are still assuming that things will be globally cooler…regardless of how dire or extreme it may seem…because they’re (obviously) missing a significant number of additionally contributing warming factors.
Follow up question…so when the AMOC stops and certain areas become a new cold/frozen zone…will that freezing just continue on a curve until the earth’s warming reaches such a point that the area begins to warm, and then continue to thaw until the earth’s surface warms as a whole (more or less)?
DirewaysParnuStCroix@reddit
To be honest, I tend to lean towards not being convinced that any form of significant net cooling is plausible under future warming, regardless of how ocean circulation changes. It's a hypothetical that makes sense in theory but not in practice, and it feels somewhat disingenuous at this point that some insist on doubling down on the "it can still get colder in some places" hypothesis. The trouble is that the bulk of ocean models apply a dubious relation between meridional heat transport and volumetric overturning, so they're effectively inherently biased towards representing the conventional "conveyor belt" analogy which has always postulated that overturning circulation is the primary form of ocean heat transport, of which the atmosphere is a passive recipient. So there's a fundamental bias towards over amplifying cooling signals in AMOC reduction/collapse simulations (which itself is further exacerbated by lacklustre atmospheric coupling). This is further compounded by the fact that most prominent figures in this field remain proponents of Stommel's bifurcation model and Broecker's conveyor belt analogy in theoretical AMOC frameworks, but it's a demonstrably oversimplified approach and beginning to really show its limitations as we gather more direct observations. As an example, Lozier's recent OSNAP data has suggested that Labrador Sea deep water formation is a minor contributor to AMOC variability, which is a significant finding given that the conventional assumption has always been that this was the primary driver of the AMOC. There are multiple similar examples. For the most part, the community has always emphasised that AMOC reduction experiments shouldn't be treated as forecasts or predictions due to structural limitations in the simulation, they're essentially a demonstration of the experiment boundaries. Some will point at cross-model consistency, but this ironically doesn't strengthen the reliability of the output as this generally equates to more standardised experiment framework, which usually results in simplification of variables. I've always found that the net/regional cooling hypothesis is the least productive theory in modern climate change discourse, but it's one of those areas of academia where you'll find that the answer differs depending on who you ask.
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
It does not bode well. Even the very conservative studies showing the AMOC is at risk of failing in the very near future (not 'several decades' as some suggest).
A statistical analysis of multiple CONSERVATIVE models suggests a collapse is 'most likely around 2065 (updated in 2025)', with a 95% confidence interval starting as early as 2037. That's a pretty big discrepancy and none of these models account for positive feedback loops. They can't really, but it's also why we've been witness to the 'sooner than expected' revision to every single model for the last 15+ years.
The studies discussed here do not account for the dramatic after effects of a severe BOE (the first couple will be the 'smoldering before the fire'), which stands a very strong chance of kicking off an unstoppable feedback loop of rapid melting within the East Siberian Arctic Shelf.
This is one of the largest stores of trapped clathrates within the permafrost. The release of which could see rapid rise of global temperatures within just a few years, bringing the viability of outdoor agriculture throughout most of the world into very sharp and immediate focus ..and that's just one of the challenges.
Humans don't do well without food.
Basic_Message_9286@reddit
The amoc won't collapse for decades from now. This won't affect boe for a long time.
Julian_Thorne@reddit
How many years until it collapses?
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
It is imminent.
The disruption has already begun, but it's cumulative and a gradual failure.
So if the question is 'How long until it collapses completely?' Could be a few decades. CONSERVATIVE models suggests a collapse is most likely around 2065 (updated in 2025), with a 95% confidence interval starting as early as 2037.
theincredible92@reddit
Not gonna get anyone to care with years like 2065 as all the politicians of today will be dead by then or close to.
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
Yep.. but most scientists (of all stripes) are successfully conditioned to be extremely conservative with any/all claims, projections, etc. Reputation and credibility are the primary currency within scientific fields, and one's credibility is tied directly to their ability to hold down employment, gain grants, give talks, submit papers, etc, etc.
Point being, there's little point in expecting the most realistic projections to come out of the scientific community. It's much easier, safer, and palatable to claim 'oopsie' by trotting out the ubiquitous 'Sooner than expected' corrections than the more dire projections.
The fact is, even the very best, most advanced models are imprecise and do not (CANNOT) factor for all elements at play within the biosphere. It's simply not possible at this time. Advancements in artificial intelligence are really our best hope for that milestone to be achieved.
Simply put, if the more aggressive projections don't happen, it threatens their career. but more importantly, fuels the entire spectrum of denialism.
One one end, the profoundly dimwitted, willfully ignorant 'flat earther' mentality types.
The populist politicians in the middle who wouldn't dare take the risk of a stance to drive change through regulation within industry, nor asking anything of their voting base.
The avarice-riddled capitalists who seek to exploit the environment to the very edge of survivability for a percentage profit for the shareholders, taking up the other end. Profit takes precedence over survivability, apparently.
All of that being said, there ARE thousands of scientists, PHD's and journalists worldwide attempting to raise the alarm far beyond any of the relatively mild rhetoric and policies you see coming out of ANY government, UN/UNFCCC or even the World Climate Foundation (WCF).
Unfortunately, their voices are just not reaching the center stage ..but ask yourself, what do you think would happen if they were 'given the mic'?
theincredible92@reddit
The unfortunate reality is that no one is going to do shit about climate change. People are far too comfortable. But the cycles of this world are a rollercoaster and we are overdo to come hurling down at a fast speed. The sad reality is, climate change could decimate millions through India, Middle East, and what not. But until it directly impacts western white countries in a major way, no one will care and the society will go business as usual.
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
I have some bad news for you..
Every human on earth could disappear today, in the next hour, and the warming would continue for SEVERAL hundred more years. It's 'baked in'; this is a scientific fact.
As for: "The sad reality is, climate change could decimate millions through India, Middle East, and what not." -make no mistake, it's not a matter of 'could', it's a matter of 'will'.
It's also got nothing to do with 'western white countries'. Those countries / regions can and should be enacting their own mitigation efforts, but they are making their own choices too, with India being the THIRD largest polluter barely behind China and the US and the 'middle east' being the primary source for the primary source of the problem (Oil). The problem is existential for humanity; we are far beyond the utterly facile 'racial' and geopolitical blame game silliness.
The best and most viable actions any country can take are to do with mitigation and survival.
theincredible92@reddit
So when do you personally see things changing in detrimental ways ?
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
Well, we are already seeing things changing in detrimental ways. We're already reaching the key tipping points. After we cross enough thresholds, the decline becomes increasingly rapid and more apparent.
However, the next one is crucial; a Blue Ocean Event (BOE). The clock has been ticking on this for many years and this may be the first year we see one, with a currently projection to occur in September. Once this condition begins, it accelerates warming and accelerates a positive feedback loop of warming in the arctic. This release clathrates/methane trapped in the permafrost, which may RAPIDLY increase warming globally on a scale unseen by humans. The 'Clathrate Gun' hypothesis; dismissed by many as 'unlikely' for far too long. This is, and always has been foolish to dismiss.
To answer your question: "So when do you personally see things changing in detrimental ways ?"
If you mean, when will we see mass crop failure, supply chain disruption, regional starvation, sea levels rising faster than expected, migration out of regions due to the effects of climate, aquifer loss, conflict, exploitation and chaos beyond what we see today, etc?
Within 3-5 years of the first major BOE, and that is conservative.
If we were to see a mass of methane released suddenly into the atmosphere, the global temperature could rise to near 8 degrees Celsius 'overnight'. This makes all but a very few regions on earth sustainable for human life, and even then for a non-specific amount of time. Most of humanity would be wiped out, mostly through starvation.
FactorBusy6427@reddit
As shown in Fig 2e from the paper, it looks like the net effect of that AMOC collapse almost perfectly cancels out global warming in the US.
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
We're saved!!
If only if it weren't for that pesky 'bipolar convection seesaw', which will lead to rapid melting and sea level rise, MASSIVE carbon (AKA 'the carbon bomb') release, driving heat up on a scale humans have never seen nor have any mechanism to survive in the population numbers we see today. Industrial, outdoor agriculture and animal farming would essentially be finished. The scale of starvation would be unimaginable within just a few years.
Good thing we still have the oceans to live off of! All marine life would effectively starve. The halt of the "conveyor belt" would stop the global flow of nutrients. This would lead to the disappearance of up to 90% of fish species, devastating the 30–40% of the human population that relies on them.
FactorBusy6427@reddit
I believe all that. And It seems plausible that phytoplankton and trees both will eventually cross tipping points where they stop producing oxygen ultimately leading to mass asphyxiation of all air breathing life forms. However, these effects aren't going to occur in my lifetime.
I was previously anticipating that thawing permafrost in the ESAS would release so much methane so fast that it would result in unsurvibable wet bulb heat waves across the US within the next 10-15 years, but it seems that the AMOC collapse is going to delay those effects beyond my lifetime, which honestly does feel like a relief.
It seems plausible that climate chaos could wreak havoc on industrial agriculture in the near term, but at least there's a chance of surviving that by growing food locally in climate controlled greenhouses...
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
Don't know why you were downvoted.
I think it may have been due to this '..but at least there's a chance of surviving that by growing food locally in climate controlled greenhouses...' -This is not sustainable for all but a relative few.
Have a look into Controlled-Environment Agriculture (CEA) and vertical farming. The limitations on what can be sustained at scale (even with heavy investment to build out more infrastructure) are extremely limited in comparison to what is available today.
While its very energy intensive in comparison to outdoor farming, the real limitations are in the crop diversity and caloric gap associated with what can be grown in those controlled environments. Do I think we can overcome many of those challenges with enough focused effort? Yes, but not fast enough to feed billions.
Most of the world's food is grown in just a few core 'breadbasket') regions on earth -i.e. Brazil, Midwestern US, China, Ukraine, etc. Certainly more than one of these would begin to fail (ALL would be impacted) due to an unprecedented rapid rise in temperature through disruption (AMOC failure, Clathrate release, etc), it's unlikely we'd see the world band together to feed itself. No, we would see massive spikes in prices, entire regions with extreme shortages, unprecedented starvation and die-offs for years to come.
PlausiblyCoincident@reddit
I still don't buy the massive cooling in the Arctic bringing back massive amounts of sea ice. Even here in the most recent study form March, it says that the 450ppm CO2 temperatures in the region fall by 7C from their equilibrium. Assuming this is true and that the Artic has warmed 3-4 times faster than the global average and that by the time the AMOC fully collapses we will likely be in in an equilibrium of 550+pmm CO2 and therefore at an equilibrium temperature of 8C+ from preindustrial, Arctic temperatures aren't likely to be below pre-industrial norms for potentially tens of thousands of years if not millions of years. All of that means that a few hundred years after an AMOC collapse when temperatures and CO2 emissions reach an equilibrium, Northern Europe is probably not going to be much colder than it was around 1970 to 2020.
I also have questions with the modeling at a fundamental level. Part of the freshwater forcing comes from the melting of the Greenland ice sheet. As the Arctic temperatures cool, melting is less so freshwater forcing is less whereas the modeling in these papers keep a constant freshwater forcing for thousands of years. This one also starts from a world in a CO2/temperature equilibrium, which we are definitely not at. Obviously, modeling has limits and the nature of publishing scientific work means cutting out assumptions and factors, but I haven't seen any explanation or discussion yet of how a dynamic freshwater forcing and our current CO2/temperature lag would (or would not) differ from these simplified models so we can better understand what that type of system interaction looks like.
DirewaysParnuStCroix@reddit
Pretty much. Nian et al. use the CLIMBER-X model due to its ability to simulate much longer timescales (up to 10kyr in this case) at a much faster pace compared to GCMs. While this is useful for identifying long term biogeochemical responses and establishing deep water equilibrium, it comes at the cost of resolution. The 5° resolution used by the atmospheric model is exceptionally low, and there are significant issues regarding how the SISIM ice model produces highly implausible sea ice feedbacks. Essentially, the model will significantly overestimate how much of a northern hemisphere cooling feedback is plausible.
screendoorblinds@reddit
Those are good questions, and think you'd be interested in /u/direwaysparnustcroix (dire - apologies for the direct tag, I assume you'll find this thread either way though! Will remove if you'd like) who has done some thorough research on this and has left many comments going into academic depth about a lot of what you discuss here. Thought you may find their past insights helpful!
gmuslera@reddit
Will the increase of sea ice in the north create a global temperature negative feedback loop? The albedo in big enough surface will change, and in the north most of it will be over sea instead of over land in the south.
I know that CO2 will keep increasing and weather patterns will be a mess, but may that give a rest on the always increasing global average temperature (on which we will go up a notch with the incoming El Niño) for approaches that we discarded in the other scenario?
Useful_Divide7154@reddit
Honestly we should be more worried about extreme weather events than the change in average global temperature. That’s what causes the real damage.
I wonder what the outcome would be if we get a blue ocean event repeating for many years, allowing the arctic to rapidly heat up, and then after that the AMOC collapses. That could be a potential worst case scenario since the blue ocean event is a strong feedback loop that could counteract the arctic cooling effect of AMOC collapse.
gmuslera@reddit
We don’t see directly the changes in global yearly temperature averages. what we see are the extreme weather events, and they see to get extremer as the sudden changes of those global temperature averages, as it doesn’t go evenly everywhere. Also, extreme events are local, but the breaking of weather patterns goes global, and without regular weather agriculture gets harder, and that is something we see, and get impacted by, too.
Rancid_Bear_Meat@reddit
There will be no respite on land. The weather will spiral further into chaos, temperatures will swing wildly at increasingly rapid rates, growing seasons will be utterly disrupted, survival will become increasingly challenged throughout the world, the 'stable regions' will be fought over.
paulhenrybeckwith@reddit (OP)
AMOC Collapse Consequence: Atmospheric CO2 Rise by 83 ppm & 7C Arctic Cooling & 6C Antarctic Warming
I often call the slowing and potential collapse of the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation) ocean current system the “Mother of ALL Tipping Points” since the AMOC is central to the way heat moves around the planet, and is in vitally connected to atmospheric circulation patterns.
A new, just released peer reviewed scientific paper models some of the consequences of an AMOC collapse to the OFF state.
Basically:
Atmospheric CO2 levels would rise between 47 to 83 ppm
Arctic Regions between 60 degrees N and the North Pole would cool by 7 C
Clearly this would cause huge growth of Arctic sea ice and expansion of ice sheets on Greenland. We reached an Arctic sea ice minimum way back in 2012, so does our situation mean a slowing already of the AMOC?
Antarctic Regions between 60 degrees S and the South Pole would increase by 6 C
Essentially, we would be living on a completely different planet. Jet streams would completely change in behavior and location, rainfall patterns, temperatures, humidity, and everything else would go ape shite and our global crops would collapse. Very few humans left.
I do not know about you, but we need to deploy my three-legged-barstool to stop this from happening. How can we possibly risk this?
Please share this vital information far and wide and see my previous hopeful video on how we can draw down huge amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere if we have half a brain.
Cheers, and help me spread my findings to other earthlings and non-earthlings:)
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel. As well as my website, and YouTube, you can find me on Patreon, Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit (multiple climate channels within), Quora, TikTok, Discord, Mastodon, Twitch, Vimeo, Bluesky, TruthSocial, Threads, Substack, Tumblr,...
References and Links:
Peer-reviewed scientific paper in Nature Communications: Earth and Environment Title: Collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation would lead to substantial oceanic carbon release and additional global warming Link: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-026-03427-w
Abstract The potential collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could profoundly impact regional and global climates, yet its effects on the carbon cycle and subsequently global temperature remain seriously underexplored. Here we quantify carbon cycle responses across different background global warming levels using a fast Earth system model. We find that Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse increases atmospheric carbon dioxide by 47–83 ppm carbon dioxide, leading to around 0.2 °C of additional global warming at higher carbon dioxide background levels after offsetting ocean-dynamics-driven cooling. Despite the modest global warming effect, regional temperature anomalies are pronounced: Arctic temperatures cool by ~ 7 °C (60 °N–90 °N), while Antarctic temperatures warm by ~ 6 °C (60 °S–90 °S). This latter response originates from deep convection triggered in the Southern Ocean, which ventilates deep carbon-rich waters. Such long term equilibrium responses reveal key physical and carbon-cycle mechanisms and highlight substantial regional climate risks associated with an Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse.
National Snow and Ice Data Center: https://nsidc.org/home
NSIDC Sea Ice: https://nsidc.org/data/search#keywords=sea+ice/sortKeys=score,,desc/facetFilters=%257B%257D/pageNumber=1/itemsPerPage=25
NSIDC Sea Ice Today: https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today
Sea Ice Graphing tool for both the Arctic and Antarctica https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today/sea-ice-tools/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel. As well as my website, and YouTube, you can find me on Patreon, Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit (multiple climate channels within), Quora, TikTok, Discord, Mastodon, Twitch, Vimeo, Bluesky, TruthSocial, Threads, Substack, Tumblr,...
Acceptable-Bell142@reddit
So Europa by Tuesday, rather than Venus, for those of us in Europe?
Bandits101@reddit
“……How can we possibly risk this?” We already did and now there is no longer anything to risk. Due to FF use and triggered positive feedbacks the Earth has been storing billions of atomic bombs equivalent of excess heat for a couple of hundred years.
There’s absolutely, positively no way any human engineering can be constructed to dissipate the heat. If humans were wiped off the earth this minute, climate changing events will continue to unfold until natural processes and time (lots of time) take their course.
The sudden pulse of GHG’s added to the atmosphere in the space of a geological second, will have climate altering consequences far beyond our perception. Mainly because humans won’t be around to record it.
emp_sanfords_hardhat@reddit
Easy fix - just keep flooding earth's orbit with satellites until it blocks out the sun for a while.
Key-Practice-8788@reddit
Kessler enters the chat.
Long-Euphoric-Life@reddit
Its so terrifyingly true - water is an amazing heat capacitor (great for storing heat) and is really hard to cool after it heats up. Better for it to remain at a reasonable temperature. We are very screwed.
Wrong-Branch5953@reddit
Poignant comment
Washingtonpinot@reddit
Damn, those last two lines slap in more ways than one.
Konradleijon@reddit
Cute puppy
CannyGardener@reddit
Such a weird juxtaposition...
Konradleijon@reddit
Why does it seems no one cares
waffledestroyer@reddit
World war 3, economic collapse, AI issues, loneliness epidemic, algorithmic echo chambers and then climate change ... too many things to be worried about, I think many just want it all to be over already.
MavinMarv@reddit
And that’s just the tip of the massive collapse iceberg.
BadgerKomodo@reddit
That is absolutely catastrophic.
Disastrous-Swim7406@reddit
Is this like a decades long collapse or will it happen over the course of a few years? Humans have such a hard time worrying about things that take decades or centuries to play out.
breinbanaan@reddit
Horrible news
farfrompukenjc@reddit
+3c in ten years the feedback loop’s have started and it’s all downhill from here.
eliquy@reddit
Or by 2050 at the latest
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378025000469
metalreflectslime@reddit
Thanks.
HomoExtinctisus@reddit
Seize the time, Maribor!
StatementBot@reddit
The following submission statement was provided by /u/paulhenrybeckwith:
AMOC Collapse Consequence: Atmospheric CO2 Rise by 83 ppm & 7C Arctic Cooling & 6C Antarctic Warming
I often call the slowing and potential collapse of the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation) ocean current system the “Mother of ALL Tipping Points” since the AMOC is central to the way heat moves around the planet, and is in vitally connected to atmospheric circulation patterns.
A new, just released peer reviewed scientific paper models some of the consequences of an AMOC collapse to the OFF state.
Basically:
Atmospheric CO2 levels would rise between 47 to 83 ppm
Arctic Regions between 60 degrees N and the North Pole would cool by 7 C
Clearly this would cause huge growth of Arctic sea ice and expansion of ice sheets on Greenland. We reached an Arctic sea ice minimum way back in 2012, so does our situation mean a slowing already of the AMOC?
Antarctic Regions between 60 degrees S and the South Pole would increase by 6 C
Essentially, we would be living on a completely different planet. Jet streams would completely change in behavior and location, rainfall patterns, temperatures, humidity, and everything else would go ape shite and our global crops would collapse. Very few humans left.
I do not know about you, but we need to deploy my three-legged-barstool to stop this from happening. How can we possibly risk this?
Please share this vital information far and wide and see my previous hopeful video on how we can draw down huge amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere if we have half a brain.
Cheers, and help me spread my findings to other earthlings and non-earthlings:)
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel. As well as my website, and YouTube, you can find me on Patreon, Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit (multiple climate channels within), Quora, TikTok, Discord, Mastodon, Twitch, Vimeo, Bluesky, TruthSocial, Threads, Substack, Tumblr,...
References and Links:
Peer-reviewed scientific paper in Nature Communications: Earth and Environment Title: Collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation would lead to substantial oceanic carbon release and additional global warming Link: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-026-03427-w
Abstract The potential collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could profoundly impact regional and global climates, yet its effects on the carbon cycle and subsequently global temperature remain seriously underexplored. Here we quantify carbon cycle responses across different background global warming levels using a fast Earth system model. We find that Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse increases atmospheric carbon dioxide by 47–83 ppm carbon dioxide, leading to around 0.2 °C of additional global warming at higher carbon dioxide background levels after offsetting ocean-dynamics-driven cooling. Despite the modest global warming effect, regional temperature anomalies are pronounced: Arctic temperatures cool by ~ 7 °C (60 °N–90 °N), while Antarctic temperatures warm by ~ 6 °C (60 °S–90 °S). This latter response originates from deep convection triggered in the Southern Ocean, which ventilates deep carbon-rich waters. Such long term equilibrium responses reveal key physical and carbon-cycle mechanisms and highlight substantial regional climate risks associated with an Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation collapse.
National Snow and Ice Data Center: https://nsidc.org/home
NSIDC Sea Ice: https://nsidc.org/data/search#keywords=sea+ice/sortKeys=score,,desc/facetFilters=%257B%257D/pageNumber=1/itemsPerPage=25
NSIDC Sea Ice Today: https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today
Sea Ice Graphing tool for both the Arctic and Antarctica https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today/sea-ice-tools/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel. As well as my website, and YouTube, you can find me on Patreon, Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit (multiple climate channels within), Quora, TikTok, Discord, Mastodon, Twitch, Vimeo, Bluesky, TruthSocial, Threads, Substack, Tumblr,...
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1sluxas/amoc_collapse_consequence_atmospheric_co2_rise_by/og9iu4d/