Arctic Updates

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Jan 03, 2011 12:25 am

There Once Was An Island: Te Henua E NNoho

Three people in a unique Pacific Island community face the first devastating effects of climate change, including a terrifying flood. Will they decide to stay with their island home or move to a new and unfamiliar land, leaving their culture and language behind forever?

http://www.thereoncewasanisland.com/

User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Jeff » Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:52 am

Nunavut January 04, 2011 - 6:55 pm
South Baffin swelters in winter heat wave
“It doesn't show any signs of abating”
CHRIS WINDEYER

A bag of ice cubes left on New Year’s Eve near an Iqaluit apartment’s front door was melting Jan. 4, as temperatures around South Baffin reached record highs as much as 20 degrees above normal.

Iqaluit set new records with temperatures rising to +1.2 C Jan. 3 breaking the record of —1.7 C set in 1970, said Yvonne Bilan-Wallace, a meteorologist with Environment Canada.

Jan. 4 saw another new record for the capital with a high of +1.5 C, breaking the old mark of —1.1 C set in 1969.

“The normal around this time of year is around -22C,” she said. “So yeah, you’re way above normal.”

...

Bilan-Wallace said Environment Canada is still issuing marine forecasts for the Hudson Strait because temperatures in the area have been so warm.

Normally, such forecasts would end in November or December.

She said Nunavut’s unusually mild winter is connected to an especially cold winter plaguing parts of Western Europe, which British newspapers have dubbed “Arctic” even though temperatures there dipped to only —13 C at their coldest and more generally hovered around the freezing mark.

Bilan-Wallace said warm air and storms that normally head east past Atlantic Canada and on toward Europe are instead turning North and heading toward Baffin Island.

“It started in November… and it’s continued through the early part of this winter now and it doesn’t show any signs of abating,” she said.

...


http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/a ... heat_wave/
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:14 pm

Don't think this, from November past, has been posted. Many embedded links at source as well as its accompanying graphics excluded here:

A stunning year in climate science reveals that human civilization is on the precipice

The first anniversary of 'Climategate', Part 1: The media blows the story of the century
November 15, 2010

This week marks the one-year anniversary of what the anti-science crowd successfully labeled ‘Climategate’. The media will be doing countless retrospectives, most of which will be wasted ink, like the Guardian’s piece — focusing on climate scientists at the expense of climate science, which is precisely the kind of miscoverage that has been going on for the whole year!

I’ll save that my media critiques for Part 2, since I think that Climategate’s biggest impact was probably on the media, continuing their downward trend of focusing on style over substance, of missing the story of the century, if not the millennia.

The last year or so has seen more scientific papers and presentations that raise the genuine prospect of catastrophe (if we stay on our current emissions path) that I can recall seeing in any other year.

Perhaps the media would have ignored that science anyway, but Climategate appears to be a key reason “less than 10 percent of the news articles written about last year’s climate summit in Copenhagen dealt primarily with the science of climate change, a study showed on Monday.”

But for those interested in the real climate science story of the past year, let’s review a couple dozen studies of the most important findings. Any one of these would be cause for action — and combined they vindicate the final sentence of Elizabeth Kolbert’s Field Notes from a Catastrophe: “It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself, but that is what we are now in the process of doing.”

1. Nature: “Global warming blamed for 40% decline in the ocean’s phytoplankton”: “Microscopic life crucial to the marine food chain is dying out. The consequences could be catastrophic.”

If confirmed, it may represent the single most important finding of the year in climate science. Seth Borenstein of the AP explains, “plant plankton found in the world’s oceans are crucial to much of life on Earth. They are the foundation of the bountiful marine food web, produce half the world’s oxygen and suck up harmful carbon dioxide.” Boris Worm, a marine biologist and co-author of the study said, “We found that temperature had the best power to explain the changes.” He noted, “If this holds up, something really serious is underway and has been underway for decades. I’ve been trying to think of a biological change that’s bigger than this and I can’t think of one.”

2. Science: Vast East Siberian Arctic Shelf methane stores destabilizing and venting: NSF issues world a wake-up call: “Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.”

Methane release from the not-so-perma-frost is the most dangerous amplifying feedback in the entire carbon cycle. This research finds a key “lid” on “the large sub-sea permafrost carbon reservoir” near Eastern Siberia “is clearly perforated, and sedimentary CH4 [methane] is escaping to the atmosphere.”

The permafrost permamelt contains a staggering “1.5 trillion tons of frozen carbon, about twice as much carbon as contained in the atmosphere,” much of which would be released as methane. Methane is is 25 times as potent a heat-trapping gas as CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but 72 times as potent over 20 years!

The carbon is locked in a freezer in the part of the planet warming up the fastest (see “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss“). Half the land-based permafrost would vanish by mid-century on our current emissions path (see “Tundra, Part 2: The point of no return” and below). No climate model currently incorporates the amplifying feedback from methane released by a defrosting tundra.

The NSF is normally a very staid organization. If they are worried, everybody should be.

It is increasingly clear that if the world strays significantly above 450 ppm atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide for any length of time, we will find it unimaginably difficult to stop short of 800 to 1000 ppm.

3. Must-read NCAR analysis warns we risk multiple, devastating global droughts even on moderate emissions path.

Dust-Bowlification may be the impact of human-caused climate change that hits the most people by mid-century, as the figure below suggests (“a reading of -4 or below is considered extreme drought”):

(Graphic: 2060 -2069)

The PDSI in the Great Plains during the Dust Bowl apparently spiked very briefly to -6, but otherwise rarely exceeded -3 for the decade (see here). The National Center for Atmospheric Research notes “By the end of the century, many populated areas, including parts of the United States, could face readings in the range of -8 to -10, and much of the Mediterranean could fall to -15 to -20. Such readings would be almost unprecedented.”

4. Nature Geoscience study: Oceans are acidifying 10 times faster today than 55 million years ago when a mass extinction of marine species occurred and “Geological Society: Acidifying oceans spell marine biological meltdown “by end of century” — Co-author: “Unless we curb carbon emissions we risk mass extinctions, degrading coastal waters and encouraging outbreaks of toxic jellyfish and algae.”

Marine life and all who depend on it, including humans are at grave risk from unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases. This can’t be stopped with geo-engineering and there is no plausible strategy for undoing it.

Ocean acidification may well be the most under-reported of all the catastrophic climate impacts we are risking.

5. Sea levels may rise 3 times faster than IPCC estimated, could hit 6 feet by 2100 [see figure] and these related findings and studies:

* Satellite data stunner: “Our data suggest that EAST Antarctica is losing mass…. Antarctica may soon be contributing significantly more to global sea-level rise.”
* Nature: “Dynamic thinning of Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheet ocean margins is more sensitive, pervasive, enduring and important than previously realized.”
* New study of Greenland under “more realistic forcings” concludes “collapse of the ice-sheet was found to occur between 400 and 560 ppm” of CO2
* Climate researcher: “It is my assessment that we have had the strongest melting since they started measuring the temperature in Greenland in 1873.”
* Science: CO2 levels haven’t been this high for 15 million years, when it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher — “We have shown that this dramatic rise in sea level is associated with an increase in CO2 levels of about 100 ppm.”

(Graphic: Sea Level Change 1950-2100)

For more on SLR, see Coastal studies experts: “For coastal management purposes, a [sea level] rise of 7 feet (2 meters) should be utilized for planning major infrastructure”

6. Royal Society: “There are very strong indications that the current rate of species extinctions far exceeds anything in the fossil record.”

This is from a special issue of 16 articles in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (Biological Science), “Biological diversity in a changing world,”– which notes “Never before has a single species driven such profound changes to the habitats, composition and climate of the planet.”

7. Science: Drought drives decade-long decline in plant growth

The NASA news release explains the importance of the work by researchers Maosheng Zhao and Steven Running,:

“These results are extraordinarily significant because they show that the global net effect of climatic warming on the productivity of terrestrial vegetation need not be positive — as was documented for the 1980’s and 1990’s,” said Diane Wickland, of NASA Headquarters and manager of NASA’s Terrestrial Ecology research program….

“This is a pretty serious warning that warmer temperatures are not going to endlessly improve plant growth,” Running said….

“The potential that future warming would cause additional declines does not bode well for the ability of the biosphere to support multiple societal demands for agricultural production, fiber needs, and increasingly, biofuel production,” Zhao said.

Precisely.

UPDATE: A commenter notes that questions about the statistics used in this paper have been raised here. It does look to me like the authors should have put in more of a disclaimer about statistical uncertainty. I viewed (and still view) the original results as credible because they’re consistent with the findings of the Global Carbon Project — see slide 26 here, which is based on this 2009 Nature Geoscience article. See also “Nature on stunning new climate feedback: Beetle tree kill releases more carbon than fires.” The bottom line is that this study joins others in raising the serious warning that, contrary to the popular view, a world of ever increasing carbon dioxide may not lead to increased vegetation and may in fact lead to a decreased land sink. That would be particularly true if the NCAR drought projection comes true.

8. Nature review of 20 years of field studies finds soils emitting more CO2 as planet warms

A biogeochemist quoted by Nature explained that “perhaps [the] most likely explanation is that increasing temperatures have increased rates of decomposition of soil organic matter, which has increased the flow of CO2. If true, this is an important finding: that a positive feedback to climate change is already occurring at a detectable level in soils.”

Another major study in the February 2010 issue of the journal Ecology by Finnish researchers, “Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon fractions in boreal forest soil,” had a similar conclusion. The Finnish Environment Institute, which led the study, explained the results in a release, “Soil contributes to climate warming more than expected”

9. Global Warming: Future Temperatures Could Exceed Livable Limits, Researchers Find.

There were so many important climate science findings this year I didn’t get to write on all of them. This one in particular was misunderstood:

Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

The study notes that even a 12°F warming would be dangerous for many. In fact, we could well see these deadly temperatures in the next century or century and a half over large parts of the globe on a very plausible emissions path.

10. UK Met Office: Catastrophic climate change, 13-18°F over most of U.S. and 27°F in the Arctic, could happen in 50 years, but “we do have time to stop it if we cut greenhouse gas emissions soon.”

Right before Climategate broke, scientists were increasingly starting to realize that humanity might well ignore the increasingly strong evidence that we needed to take action. They even held a conference on “4°C and beyond” just weeks before the scandal broke. Some of the top climate modelers in the world finally did a “plausible worst case scenario,” as Dr Richard Betts, Head of Climate Impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, put it in a terrific and terrifying talk (audio here, PPT here).

This is the “plausible worst case scenario” for 2060 from the UK Met Office that occurs in 10% of model runs of high emissions with the carbon cycle feedbacks [temperature in degrees Celsius, multiple by 1.8 for Fahrenheit]:

(Graphic: described immediately above)

As the Met Office notes here, “In some areas warming could be significantly higher (10 degrees [C = 15F] or more)”:

* The Arctic could warm by up to 15.2 °C [27.4 °F] for a high-emissions scenario, enhanced by melting of snow and ice causing more of the Sun’s radiation to be absorbed.
* For Africa, the western and southern regions are expected to experience both large warming (up to 10 °C [18 °F]) and drying.
* Some land areas could warm by seven degrees [12.6 F] or more.
* Rainfall could decrease by 20% or more in some areas, although there is a spread in the magnitude of drying. All computer models indicate reductions in rainfall over western and southern Africa, Central America, the Mediterranean and parts of coastal Australia.
* In other areas, such as India, rainfall could increase by 20% or more. Higher rainfall increases the risk of river flooding.

In fact, though, this is ‘only’ the 5.4°C case, and if it doesn’t happen in the 2060s (which it probably won’t), it is merely the business as usual projection (!) for 2100 (see “M.I.T. doubles its 2095 warming projection to 10°F — with 866 ppm and Arctic warming of 20°F“).

CONCLUSION: Unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases threaten multiple catastrophes, any one of which justifies action. Together, they represent the gravest threat to humanity imaginable. The fact that the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media ignored the overwhelming majority of these studies and devoted a large fraction of its climate ‘ink’ in the last 12 months to what was essentially a non-story is arguably the single greatest failing of the science media this year.

I didn’t have space here to report on the many studies that bolstered the case for our understanding that recent warming has been unequivocal and that humans are the primary cause. But indeed the case is so strong that this year, even the normally staid U.S. National Academy of Sciences labeled as “settled facts” that “the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.”

http://climateprogress.org/2010/11/15/year-in-climate-science-climategate/
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Jeff » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:33 pm

The sun rises two days early in Greenland, sparking fears that global warming is accelerating

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 8:52 PM on 13th January 2011

The sun over Greenland has risen two days early, baffling scientists and sparking fears that Arctic icecaps are melting faster than previously thought.

Experts say the summer sun should have risen over the Archtic nation's most westerly town, Ilulissat, today.

But for the first time in history they say it began creeping over the horizon at around 1pm last Tuesday.

...

Thomas Posch, of the Institute for Astronomy of the University of Vienna, said that a local change of the horizon due to Greenland's melting icecaps was 'by far the most obvious explanation'.

He said as the ice sinks, so to does the horizon, creating the illusion that the sun has risen early.

...



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ds-newsxml
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:04 am

That's very interesting, Jeff. Think this has anything to do with the shifting magnetic poles?

2 days of addition solar heat is not insignificant, but does it balance out by shortening sunlight by 2 days six months from now?
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby norton ash » Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:27 am

That's very interesting, Jeff. Think this has anything to do with the shifting magnetic poles?

2 days of addition solar heat is not insignificant, but does it balance out by shortening sunlight by 2 days six months from now?


Wrong track, Iam... the sunrise is visible two days early because there's so much less ice in the whole Greenland massif to the east, making for a longer, flatter horizon. This is still earth-shakingly significant, but it has nothing to do with the poles or a change in celestial clockwork.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby tazmic » Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:51 am

"Arctic icecaps are melting faster than previously thought" == "climate change is accelerating"

stunning.
"It ever was, and is, and shall be, ever-living fire, in measures being kindled and in measures going out." - Heraclitus

"There aren't enough small numbers to meet the many demands made of them." - Strong Law of Small Numbers
User avatar
tazmic
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:11 am

Norton, that's hard for me to accept, though it could be so. I have no Idea what the terrains is in this area (western Greenland) or how high the mountains are to the east, or how high the glaciers were. If I recall correctly, line of sight across a flat plain is only 15 miles due to the earth's curvature. That's not correct. it's only 2.89 mi.

A horizon increases in distance proportionally to ones elevation, right? Two days sooner?

From the Wiki link:
* For an observer standing on the ground with h = 1.70 metres (5 ft 7 in) (average eye-level height), the horizon is at a distance of 4.7 kilometres (2.9 mi).
* For an observer standing on a hill or tower of 100 metres (330 ft) in height, the horizon is at a distance of 36 kilometres (22 mi).
* For an observer standing at the top of the Burj Khalifa (828 metres (2,717 ft) in height), the horizon is at a distance of 103.75 kilometres (64.47 mi).

Seems to me that the only thing that could cause the horizon to appear two days early would be a shift in the earth's axis, not a melted glacier of a few thousand feet in height.

By two days seems to me to be extraordinary and beyond reasonable explanation.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Ben D » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:21 am

Yes Iamwhomiam, I would think you are correct, but wouldn't the sun make its first reappearance over the southern horizon?
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:54 am

Yes, Ben, I think the sunlight would travel with the earth's rotation from south-east and eventually reaching the north-west. Greenland lies on a North-South alignment and is fairly bisected by the 45th meridian.

Now for the woo aspect of Man-Made global warming which has nothing to do with emissions:

Consider his for a moment... What if HAARP is the primary cause of our warming atmosphere? What if the purpose of doing this, heating our planet, is to expose immense areas now or recently covered by snow, ice and glaciers in order to exploit the mineral wealth lying buried beneath?

It's well known that we've nearly exhausted most of our known mineral deposits and in order to continue consumerism we will need to locate and extract needed minerals from previously untapped deposits.

Just supposin'
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Jeff » Wed Jan 19, 2011 2:33 am

Loss of Reflectivity in the Arctic Doubles Estimate of Climate Models

ScienceDaily (Jan. 18, 2011) — A new analysis of the Northern Hemisphere's "albedo feedback" over a 30-year period concludes that the region's loss of reflectivity due to snow and sea ice decline is more than double what state-of-the-art climate models estimate.

The findings are important, researchers say, because they suggest that Arctic warming amplified by the loss of reflectivity could be even more significant than previously thought.

...

"The cryosphere isn't cooling the Earth as much as it did 30 years ago, and climate model simulations do not reproduce this recent effect," said Karen Shell, an Oregon State University atmospheric scientist and one of the authors of the study. "Though we don't necessarily attribute this to global warming, it is interesting to note that none of the climate models used for the 2007 International Panel on Climate Change report showed a decrease of this magnitude."

...

As part of the study, Shell, lead author Mark Flanner of the University of Michigan, and their colleagues compared Northern Hemisphere cryosphere changes between 1979 and 2008 in 18 different climate models to changes in actual snow, ice and reflectivity measurements of the same period. They determined that mean radiative forcing -- or the amount of energy reflected into the atmosphere -- ranged from 4.6 to 2.2 watts per meter squared.

During the 30-year study period, cryosphere cooling declined by 0.45 watts per meter squared. The authors attribute that decline equally to loss of snow and sea ice.

...


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 123519.htm
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:09 am

Iamwhomiam wrote:Yes, Ben, I think the sunlight would travel with the earth's rotation from south-east and eventually reaching the north-west. Greenland lies on a North-South alignment and is fairly bisected by the 45th meridian.

Now for the woo aspect of Man-Made global warming which has nothing to do with emissions:

Consider his for a moment... What if HAARP is the primary cause of our warming atmosphere? What if the purpose of doing this, heating our planet, is to expose immense areas now or recently covered by snow, ice and glaciers in order to exploit the mineral wealth lying buried beneath?

It's well known that we've nearly exhausted most of our known mineral deposits and in order to continue consumerism we will need to locate and extract needed minerals from previously untapped deposits.

Just supposin'


Do you know how much energy that would take?

No of course not, neither do I but I got to the point where about a third of the way thru trying to figure it out where I realised there just ain't that much energy available to HAARP.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:35 pm

I dunno, Joe. They tell us their arrays broadcast in the 3 million watt range, but I've been told it's actually in the giga-watt range. Either way, that's a huge amount of power, and the lower figure is known to heat the ionosphere, and that's only from one array. We know there several such facilities located around the world, so I don't think the possibility is beyond reason. And if they can deliver that power to a remote location Aleutian location, well...
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby Gnomad » Wed Jan 19, 2011 5:48 pm

The amount of energy from the sun to earth is 340 watts per square meter. A gigawatt is 1 000 000 000 watts, which would be equivalent to sun-delivered energy over the area of 2.94 square kilometers. Not a very big area. So even if the power was several gigawatts, its puny in comparison.
I can believe they can locally affect weather, but heating the whole atmosphere sounds implausible. What would the energy source be, for example. Earth surface is 510 072 000 km2.

The total amount of energy from the sun to earth would be something like 174 petawatts, ie. 174 quadrillion watts, 174 000 000 000 000 000 watts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_energy_budget

Also see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(power)
2.074 GW – tech: peak power generation of Hoover Dam
8.21 GW – tech: capacity of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, the world's largest nuclear power plant.
la nuit de tous approche
Gnomad
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Arctic Updates

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:01 pm

.

Gnomad, hi yo. I liked "penguin" better but I understand if you wanted to change... Penguin & Finland, maybe there's no need to serve the cliche (not a biological one, since there are no penguins in Finland, but the IT one).

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 171 guests