Isn’t calling AMOC “the primary source of warmth for northern Europe” wildly overstated?

ahartmetz 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It would be correct if it said "Abnormally high temperatures for the latitude". Most of Europe would be 10 °C colder or so without. We'd be really screwed over here.

▲

Ekaros 11 hours ago | parent [-]

So how much coal we need to burn to compensate that 10C?

	▲	jurgenburgen 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		So much that the rest of the planet dies and most of the world is underwater.

▲

jaapz 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really, look at what's on the same latitude in Amerika as northern europe. Then compare their climates.

	▲	wongarsu 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The comparison only really works for the West coast though. The East coast is dominated by continental climate carried over from the interior by the prevailing winds. Meanwhile Europe is surrounded by water on three sides, plus the Baltic and North Sea in the middle. Just having this much water nearby (plus prevailing winds coming from an ocean) moderates temperature swings a lot
	▲	card_zero 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah, I was doing a variation on this recently (wondering about the same question). Reversing the latitude of the island of Jersey ("extreme weather is rare due to the island's mild climate") takes you to the Kerguelen Islands ("snow throughout the year as well as rain"). But the contrast there is to do with the Azores High and the Roaring Forties. Local climates are complicated.