TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
WELCOME TO REALITY TRIVIA
earth
it ain't flat, just endangered by the foolish and the greedy!
AUGUST 2022
"The modern conservative [and, I would say, the human supremacist] is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
—John Kenneth Galbraith
The Myth of Human Supremacy by Derrick Jensen (Seven Stories Press, 2016):
headlines ~ ENVIRONMENT and climate change
*EARTH IS SPINNING FASTER THAN IT SHOULD BE AND NO ONE IS SURE WHY
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Wait, We Can Mine Valuable Metals Using Shrubbery?
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*A SLOWING CURRENT SYSTEM IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN SPELLS TROUBLE FOR EARTH
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Forest the size of France regrown worldwide over 20 years, study finds
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*ATLANTIC OCEAN CIRCULATION AT WEAKEST IN A MILLENNIUM, SAY SCIENTISTS
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Fifth of countries at risk of ecosystem collapse, analysis finds
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Satellite images show rapid growth of glacial lakes worldwide
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*A methane leak in Antarctica provides new insight into how methane-eating microbes evolve (ARTICLE BELOW)
*North Atlantic right whales now officially 'one step from extinction'
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*World has six months to avert climate crisis, says energy expert
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Russia says ‘years’ needed to clean up Arctic spill
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Lockdowns trigger dramatic fall in global carbon emissions
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*One billion people will live in insufferable heat within 50 years – study
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Ocean plastic was choking Chile’s shores. Now it’s in Patagonia’s hats
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Global warming to cause ‘catastrophic’ species loss: study
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Polar ice caps melting six times faster than in 1990s
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*NEW SPECIES FOUND IN EARTH'S DEEPEST TRENCH HAS PLASTIC IN ITS BODY—SO SCIENTISTS HAVE NAMED IT EURYTHENES (ARTICLE BELOW)
*STUDY: AIR POLLUTION SHORTENS LIVES BY AVERAGE OF 2.9 YEARS, CAUSES 8.8 MILLION EARLY DEATHS A YEAR(ARTICLE BELOW)
*World's beaches disappearing due to climate crisis – study
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*The world is failing to ensure children have a 'liveable planet', report finds
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*HALF-A-MILLION INSECT SPECIES FACE EXTINCTION: SCIENTISTS
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Scientists fear the ‘doomsday glacier’ is in even more trouble than we feared
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Relative of extinct tortoise located in Galapagos
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Tropical Forests Are Losing the Ability to Absorb CO2, Study Says
(excerpt BELOW)
*Race to exploit the world’s seabed set to wreak havoc on marine life
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Study finds shock rise in levels of potent greenhouse gas
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Ocean temperatures hit record high as rate of heating accelerates
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Statistic of the decade: The massive deforestation of the Amazon
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Last Surviving Sumatran Rhino in Malaysia Dies
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Regenerative, Organic Agriculture is Essential to Fighting Climate Change
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Scientists Say a Quarter of Pigs Around the World Could Die of Swine Fever
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*SEA 'BOILING' WITH METHANE DISCOVERED IN SIBERIA: 'NO ONE HAS EVER RECORDED ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE'(ARTICLE BELOW)
*Names and Locations of the Top 100 People Killing the Planet
(ARTICLE BELOW)
*SCIENTISTS HAVE KNOWN BURNING COAL WARMS THE CLIMATE FOR A LONG TIME. THIS 1912 HEADLINE PROVES IT.(ARTICLE BELOW)
*The Anthropocene epoch: scientists declare dawn of human-influenced age(excerpt below)
*earth funnies(at the end)
Earth is spinning faster than it should be and no one is sure why
The planet recorded two of its shortest days in recent history. What is going on?
By NICOLE KARLIS - salon
PUBLISHED AUGUST 5, 2022 4:00PM (EDT)
If the days feel like they get shorter as you get older, you may not be imagining it.
On June 29, 2022, the Earth made one full rotation that took 1.59 milliseconds less than the average day length of 86,400 seconds, or 24 hours. While a 1.59 millisecond shortening might not seem like much, it is part of a larger and peculiar trend.
Indeed, on July 26, 2022, another new record was nearly set when the Earth finished its day 1.50 milliseconds shorter than usual, as reported by The Guardian and the time-tracking website Time and Date. Time and Date notes that the year 2020 had the highest number of short days since scientists started using atomic clocks to take daily measurements in the 1960s. Scientists first started to notice the trend in 2016.
While the length of an average day may vary slightly in the short-term, in the long-term the length of the day has been increasing since the Earth-moon system was formed. That's because over time, the force of gravity has moved energy from the Earth — via the tides — to the Moon, pushing it slightly further away from us. Meanwhile, because the two bodies are in tidal lock — meaning the Moon's rate of rotation and revolution are equivalent such that we only ever see one of its sides — physics dictates that the Earth's day must lengthen if the two bodies are to remain in tidal lock as the moon moves further away. Billions of years ago, the Moon was much closer and the length of Earth's day much shorter.
While scientists know that the Earth's days are shortening on a short-term scale, a definitive reason as to why remains unclear— along with the effect it might have on how we as humans track time.
"The rotation rate of Earth is a complicated business. It has to do with exchange of angular momentum between Earth and the atmosphere and the effects of the ocean and the effect of the moon," Judah Levine, a physicist in the time and frequency division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, told Discover Magazine. "You're not able to predict what's going to happen very far in the future."
But Fred Watson, Australia's astronomer-at-large, told ABC News in Australia that if nothing is done to stop it, "you are going to gradually get the seasons out of step with the calendar."
"When you start looking at the real nitty gritty, you realize that Earth is not just a solid ball that is spinning," Watson said. "It's got liquid on the inside, it's got liquid on the outside, and it's got an atmosphere and all of these things slosh around a bit."
Matt King from University of Tasmania described the trend to ABC News Australia as "certainly odd."
"Clearly something has changed, and changed in a way we haven't seen since the beginning of precise radio astronomy in the 1970s," King said.
Could it be related to extreme weather patterns? As reported by The Guardian, NASA has reported that Earth's spin can slow stronger winds in El Niño years and can slow down the planet's spin. Likewise, the melting of ice caps moves matter around on Earth and thus can change the rate of spin.
While this minor time-suck has little affect on our everyday life, some scientists have called for the introduction of a negative "leap second," which would subtract one second from a day to keep the world on track for the atomic time system, if the trend continues. Since 1972, leap seconds have been added every fews years. The last one was added in 2016.
"It's quite possible that a negative leap second will be needed if the Earth's rotation rate increases further, but it's too early to say if this is likely to happen," physicist Peter Whibberley of the National Physics Laboratory in the U.K., told The Telegraph. "There are also international discussions taking place about the future of leap seconds, and it's also possible that the need for a negative leap second might push the decision towards ending leap seconds for good."
On June 29, 2022, the Earth made one full rotation that took 1.59 milliseconds less than the average day length of 86,400 seconds, or 24 hours. While a 1.59 millisecond shortening might not seem like much, it is part of a larger and peculiar trend.
Indeed, on July 26, 2022, another new record was nearly set when the Earth finished its day 1.50 milliseconds shorter than usual, as reported by The Guardian and the time-tracking website Time and Date. Time and Date notes that the year 2020 had the highest number of short days since scientists started using atomic clocks to take daily measurements in the 1960s. Scientists first started to notice the trend in 2016.
While the length of an average day may vary slightly in the short-term, in the long-term the length of the day has been increasing since the Earth-moon system was formed. That's because over time, the force of gravity has moved energy from the Earth — via the tides — to the Moon, pushing it slightly further away from us. Meanwhile, because the two bodies are in tidal lock — meaning the Moon's rate of rotation and revolution are equivalent such that we only ever see one of its sides — physics dictates that the Earth's day must lengthen if the two bodies are to remain in tidal lock as the moon moves further away. Billions of years ago, the Moon was much closer and the length of Earth's day much shorter.
While scientists know that the Earth's days are shortening on a short-term scale, a definitive reason as to why remains unclear— along with the effect it might have on how we as humans track time.
"The rotation rate of Earth is a complicated business. It has to do with exchange of angular momentum between Earth and the atmosphere and the effects of the ocean and the effect of the moon," Judah Levine, a physicist in the time and frequency division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, told Discover Magazine. "You're not able to predict what's going to happen very far in the future."
But Fred Watson, Australia's astronomer-at-large, told ABC News in Australia that if nothing is done to stop it, "you are going to gradually get the seasons out of step with the calendar."
"When you start looking at the real nitty gritty, you realize that Earth is not just a solid ball that is spinning," Watson said. "It's got liquid on the inside, it's got liquid on the outside, and it's got an atmosphere and all of these things slosh around a bit."
Matt King from University of Tasmania described the trend to ABC News Australia as "certainly odd."
"Clearly something has changed, and changed in a way we haven't seen since the beginning of precise radio astronomy in the 1970s," King said.
Could it be related to extreme weather patterns? As reported by The Guardian, NASA has reported that Earth's spin can slow stronger winds in El Niño years and can slow down the planet's spin. Likewise, the melting of ice caps moves matter around on Earth and thus can change the rate of spin.
While this minor time-suck has little affect on our everyday life, some scientists have called for the introduction of a negative "leap second," which would subtract one second from a day to keep the world on track for the atomic time system, if the trend continues. Since 1972, leap seconds have been added every fews years. The last one was added in 2016.
"It's quite possible that a negative leap second will be needed if the Earth's rotation rate increases further, but it's too early to say if this is likely to happen," physicist Peter Whibberley of the National Physics Laboratory in the U.K., told The Telegraph. "There are also international discussions taking place about the future of leap seconds, and it's also possible that the need for a negative leap second might push the decision towards ending leap seconds for good."
ENVIRONMENT
Wait, We Can Mine Valuable Metals Using Shrubbery?
“Phytomining” is a greener way to get commodities like nickel, cobalt, thallium, and selenium.
SANDY MILNE - MOTHER JONES
AUGUST 9, 2021
Malaysia’s Kinabalu Park, which surrounds Mount Kinabalu, the 20th-largest peak in the world, is home to a nickel mine like none other. In lieu of heavy machinery, plumes of sulfur dioxide, or rivers red with runoff, you’ll find four acres of a leafy-green shrub, tended to since 2015 by local villagers. Once or twice per year, they shave off about a foot of growth from the 20-foot-tall plants. Then, they burn that crop to produce an ashy “bio-ore” that is up to 25 percent nickel by weight.
Producing metal by growing plants, or phytomining, has long been tipped as an alternative, environmentally-sustainable way to reshape—if not replace—the mining industry. Of 320,000 recognized plant species, only around 700 are so-called “hyperaccumulators,” like Kinabalu’s P. rufuschaneyi. Over time, they suck the soil dry of metals like nickel, zinc, cobalt, and even gold.
While two-thirds of nickel is used to make stainless steel, the metal is also snapped up by producers of everything from kitchenware to mobile phones, medical equipment to power generation. Zinc, on the other hand, is essential for churning out paints, rubber, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, plastics, inks, soaps, and batteries. And, as supplies of these hard-to-find metals dry up around the world, demand remains as strong as ever.
The idea of phytomining was first put forth in 1983 by an agronomist at the US Department of Agriculture named Rufus L. Chaney. Other research groups before the Malaysia team have shown that the solar-powered and carbon-neutral metal extraction process works in practice—a key step to winning over mining industry investors, who have insisted on field trials of several acres to show proof of principle. The most recent data out of Kinabalu Park, a UNESCO-listed heritage site located on the island of Borneo, is finally turning industry heads, as they show the scales have tipped in favor of phytomining’s commercial viability.
“We can now demonstrate that metal farms can produce between 170 to 280 pounds per acre annually,” said Antony van der Ent, a senior research fellow at Australia’s University of Queensland whose thesis work spurred the Malaysia trial. At the midpoint of that range, a farmer would net a cool $3,800 per acre of nickel at today’s prices--which, van der Ent added, is “on par with some of the best-performing agricultural crops on fertile soils, while operating costs are similar.”
Take, for instance, palm oil – a crop as notorious for its profitability as its role in driving deforestation in Asia and Africa. Farmers planting oil palm trees, prior to the pandemic, stood to clear 3.12 tons of crude oil annually on average--or $2,710 in today’s prices. For farmers in Malaysia and Indonesia, where 90 percent of the world’s palm oil is grown, nickel farming might just prove a more attractive option.
“At this stage, phytomining can go full-scale for nickel immediately, while phytomining for cobalt, thallium, and selenium is within reach,” van der Ent said.
While van der Ent’s team has won over some in the mining industry, adoption of phytomining isn’t yet on the fast track. That’s despite the Malaysia plot and other examples suggesting that while plants are of course less capital intensive and more environmentally friendly than traditional mining, they are also more efficient. Still, in an industry that van der Ent characterizes as resistant to change, phytomining’s immediate future could be more as a complement to traditional mining than its replacement.
Several Indonesian nickel mining companies are now looking to partner with van der Ent’s Malaysia team. “We have lined up several industry partners who’ve agreed to implement trials in Indonesia,” he said. “But due to COVID, this development is currently on hold.”
When travel restrictions are lifted and borders open up, van der Ent hopes to show that there are a number of advantages to phytomining that traditional mining simply can’t offer. “There is an abundance of unconventional ores that could be unlocked through phytomining,” he said. One example is soil abundant in tropical regions that typically contain 0.5 to 1 percent nickel by weight, which is below the cut-off where a company could profitably implement conventional strip mining.
Strip mining takes place in thick layers of soil containing more than 1 percent nickel by weight that occur in places like Brazil, Cuba, Indonesia, the Philippines, and New Caledonia, the French territory in the South Pacific. This process involves removing a layer of soil or rock, referred to as overburden, before mining that seam for the target metal. And it comes at great environmental cost. Because nickel is difficult to extract, the process calls for heavy machinery that runs on diesel and generates carbon, as well as large, acid-leaching installations needed to separate the metal from its ore.
Those nickel-rich soils, however, are becoming increasingly scarce—and it might well be that an undersupply eventually drives more and more companies to embrace phytomining. That, and the fact that bio-ore contains 20 to 30 percent nickel by weight, and is also more compact and cheaper to transport than typical ores—which hover around the one to three percent mark by weight.
Still, regardless of how the Indonesia partnerships eventually go, it’s unlikely that major mining companies will swap out strip mines for shrubbery overnight. That’s why phytoremediation, a spin-off technology which complements mining rather than replacing it, might just be the thin end of the wedge.
Currently, as strip mining happens, the surrounding topsoil becomes littered with toxic metal tailings. This layer typically has to be dug out, carted off, and sold to landfills, often at great cost to the mine operator. In the case of coal extraction, the cost of rehabilitation, for strip-mined land, averages $71,000 per acre. In the EU alone, there are an estimated 130 million acres in need of clean up. It’s a hefty bill for mining companies—and that’s if they choose to foot it at all. High-profile inquiries in Indonesia, Australia, and the US show mining companies are all too often willing to shirk rehab responsibilities.
Producing metal by growing plants, or phytomining, has long been tipped as an alternative, environmentally-sustainable way to reshape—if not replace—the mining industry. Of 320,000 recognized plant species, only around 700 are so-called “hyperaccumulators,” like Kinabalu’s P. rufuschaneyi. Over time, they suck the soil dry of metals like nickel, zinc, cobalt, and even gold.
While two-thirds of nickel is used to make stainless steel, the metal is also snapped up by producers of everything from kitchenware to mobile phones, medical equipment to power generation. Zinc, on the other hand, is essential for churning out paints, rubber, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, plastics, inks, soaps, and batteries. And, as supplies of these hard-to-find metals dry up around the world, demand remains as strong as ever.
The idea of phytomining was first put forth in 1983 by an agronomist at the US Department of Agriculture named Rufus L. Chaney. Other research groups before the Malaysia team have shown that the solar-powered and carbon-neutral metal extraction process works in practice—a key step to winning over mining industry investors, who have insisted on field trials of several acres to show proof of principle. The most recent data out of Kinabalu Park, a UNESCO-listed heritage site located on the island of Borneo, is finally turning industry heads, as they show the scales have tipped in favor of phytomining’s commercial viability.
“We can now demonstrate that metal farms can produce between 170 to 280 pounds per acre annually,” said Antony van der Ent, a senior research fellow at Australia’s University of Queensland whose thesis work spurred the Malaysia trial. At the midpoint of that range, a farmer would net a cool $3,800 per acre of nickel at today’s prices--which, van der Ent added, is “on par with some of the best-performing agricultural crops on fertile soils, while operating costs are similar.”
Take, for instance, palm oil – a crop as notorious for its profitability as its role in driving deforestation in Asia and Africa. Farmers planting oil palm trees, prior to the pandemic, stood to clear 3.12 tons of crude oil annually on average--or $2,710 in today’s prices. For farmers in Malaysia and Indonesia, where 90 percent of the world’s palm oil is grown, nickel farming might just prove a more attractive option.
“At this stage, phytomining can go full-scale for nickel immediately, while phytomining for cobalt, thallium, and selenium is within reach,” van der Ent said.
While van der Ent’s team has won over some in the mining industry, adoption of phytomining isn’t yet on the fast track. That’s despite the Malaysia plot and other examples suggesting that while plants are of course less capital intensive and more environmentally friendly than traditional mining, they are also more efficient. Still, in an industry that van der Ent characterizes as resistant to change, phytomining’s immediate future could be more as a complement to traditional mining than its replacement.
Several Indonesian nickel mining companies are now looking to partner with van der Ent’s Malaysia team. “We have lined up several industry partners who’ve agreed to implement trials in Indonesia,” he said. “But due to COVID, this development is currently on hold.”
When travel restrictions are lifted and borders open up, van der Ent hopes to show that there are a number of advantages to phytomining that traditional mining simply can’t offer. “There is an abundance of unconventional ores that could be unlocked through phytomining,” he said. One example is soil abundant in tropical regions that typically contain 0.5 to 1 percent nickel by weight, which is below the cut-off where a company could profitably implement conventional strip mining.
Strip mining takes place in thick layers of soil containing more than 1 percent nickel by weight that occur in places like Brazil, Cuba, Indonesia, the Philippines, and New Caledonia, the French territory in the South Pacific. This process involves removing a layer of soil or rock, referred to as overburden, before mining that seam for the target metal. And it comes at great environmental cost. Because nickel is difficult to extract, the process calls for heavy machinery that runs on diesel and generates carbon, as well as large, acid-leaching installations needed to separate the metal from its ore.
Those nickel-rich soils, however, are becoming increasingly scarce—and it might well be that an undersupply eventually drives more and more companies to embrace phytomining. That, and the fact that bio-ore contains 20 to 30 percent nickel by weight, and is also more compact and cheaper to transport than typical ores—which hover around the one to three percent mark by weight.
Still, regardless of how the Indonesia partnerships eventually go, it’s unlikely that major mining companies will swap out strip mines for shrubbery overnight. That’s why phytoremediation, a spin-off technology which complements mining rather than replacing it, might just be the thin end of the wedge.
Currently, as strip mining happens, the surrounding topsoil becomes littered with toxic metal tailings. This layer typically has to be dug out, carted off, and sold to landfills, often at great cost to the mine operator. In the case of coal extraction, the cost of rehabilitation, for strip-mined land, averages $71,000 per acre. In the EU alone, there are an estimated 130 million acres in need of clean up. It’s a hefty bill for mining companies—and that’s if they choose to foot it at all. High-profile inquiries in Indonesia, Australia, and the US show mining companies are all too often willing to shirk rehab responsibilities.
A slowing current system in the Atlantic Ocean spells trouble for Earth
The potential disruption of an Atlantic current system marks a "big gamble at planetary scale"
By MATTHEW ROZSA - salon
PUBLISHED JUNE 5, 2021 2:00PM (EDT)
It was a seamless synthesis of science and art, expanding the frontiers of human knowledge while being eerily beautiful at the same time. That was the response when, in the 1960s, professor Henry Stommel, a pioneering oceanographer, introduced a model to his colleagues that explained the motions of ocean waters. Decades later, Dr. Michael E. Mann, a distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Penn State University, still marvels at what he describes as the "elegant" nature of Stommel's model.
"It consisted of two boxes, a cold fresh box at high latitudes and a warm salty box at low latitudes, to represent the North Atlantic ocean," Mann told Salon by email. "He showed that this simple model predicted an overturning 'thermohaline' circulation — a circulation driven by contrasts in ocean water density due to both temperature and salinity, each of which influence water density."
Thus, armed with a model so simple that it can be solved with algebra, scientists now understood the ocean currents in the Atlantic.
This is how scientists figured out what is called the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, or "AMOC" for short. When it comes to the motion of the ocean, AMOC is essentially a complex system of conveyor belts. The first belt contains warm water that flows north, where it cools, evaporates and increases the salinity of the ocean water. That water then cools, sinks and flows south, creating a second major belt. These currents are connected to each other by regions in the Nordic Sea, Labrador Sea and Southern Ocean, keeping sea levels down on the United States' eastern seaboard and warming up the weather in Europe.
This current system connects many different pieces of life on Earth: tides, hurricanes, sea levels, ocean life, salinity, fisheries, water pollution, temperatures, weather — all are affected by this current system. A sudden shift in how the Atlantic current system works would drastically change life on Earth.
Yet the more we learn about ocean currents, the more we have cause for alarm. A February study published in the journal Nature Geoscience reconstructed the history of the current going back 1,600 years and found that circulation is weaker now than at any other point in that span. They identified the most likely culprit as global warming. With the Greenland Ice Sheet and Arctic ice melting as the planet heats up, and rain and snow levels increasing, the water flowing north loses much of its salinity and density. This causes the water to flow south more slowly and weakens AMOC overall.
More recently, another study in the journal Nature Geoscience that identified the important role played by winds in causing changes in ocean circulation. As lead author Dr. Yavor Kostov of the University of Exeter said in a press release, scientists have struggled to understand the variability in AMOC because there are so many variables that have an effect on it. He noted that after learning that winds influenced circulation in both sub-tropical and sub-polar locations, scientists concluded that "as the climate continues to change, more efforts should be concentrated on monitoring those winds — especially in key regions on continental boundaries and the eastern coast of Greenland — and understanding what drives changes in them."
The obvious question, then, is: what will happen if climate change continues to weaken AMOC?
"This won't lead to another ice age (like 'The Day After Tomorrow,' which is a caricature of the science), but it may well threaten fish populations and lead to accelerated sea level rise along the U.S. east coast," Mann told Salon. "This is furthermore a reminder that there are surprises in the greenhouse, and often they are unwelcome ones. If we want to avoid more and more of these unwelcome surprises, we need to bring carbon emissions down dramatically in the years ahead."
Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, told Salon by email that if AMOC stopped moving heat northwards, the topical Atlantic would get much warmer. That in turn would lead to more frequent and devastating hurricanes, even as Iceland and parts of Europe cool immensely.
"AMOC acts as a relief valve for the Atlantic heat buildup in the tropics," Trenberth explained. "In the Pacific there is no equivalent and the relief valve is ENSO," which stands for "El Niño and the Southern Oscillation."
Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science's Department of Global Ecology, said that it is ultimately impossible to predict with certainty what will happen if AMOC slows down — but that it is very unlikely to be good.
"For me, it is not so much about the direct impacts of this particular change, which I think are highly uncertain, but rather if we are impacting major parts of planetary-scale processes and knocking them out of the range that they operated in (and we adapted to) over the entirety of human history, it is a pretty safe bet that we can anticipate some fairly nasty unknown unknowns," Caldeira wrote to Salon. "That may be just indefensible bias that cannot be rigorously supported, but I for one am not up for big gambles at planetary scale."
"It consisted of two boxes, a cold fresh box at high latitudes and a warm salty box at low latitudes, to represent the North Atlantic ocean," Mann told Salon by email. "He showed that this simple model predicted an overturning 'thermohaline' circulation — a circulation driven by contrasts in ocean water density due to both temperature and salinity, each of which influence water density."
Thus, armed with a model so simple that it can be solved with algebra, scientists now understood the ocean currents in the Atlantic.
This is how scientists figured out what is called the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, or "AMOC" for short. When it comes to the motion of the ocean, AMOC is essentially a complex system of conveyor belts. The first belt contains warm water that flows north, where it cools, evaporates and increases the salinity of the ocean water. That water then cools, sinks and flows south, creating a second major belt. These currents are connected to each other by regions in the Nordic Sea, Labrador Sea and Southern Ocean, keeping sea levels down on the United States' eastern seaboard and warming up the weather in Europe.
This current system connects many different pieces of life on Earth: tides, hurricanes, sea levels, ocean life, salinity, fisheries, water pollution, temperatures, weather — all are affected by this current system. A sudden shift in how the Atlantic current system works would drastically change life on Earth.
Yet the more we learn about ocean currents, the more we have cause for alarm. A February study published in the journal Nature Geoscience reconstructed the history of the current going back 1,600 years and found that circulation is weaker now than at any other point in that span. They identified the most likely culprit as global warming. With the Greenland Ice Sheet and Arctic ice melting as the planet heats up, and rain and snow levels increasing, the water flowing north loses much of its salinity and density. This causes the water to flow south more slowly and weakens AMOC overall.
More recently, another study in the journal Nature Geoscience that identified the important role played by winds in causing changes in ocean circulation. As lead author Dr. Yavor Kostov of the University of Exeter said in a press release, scientists have struggled to understand the variability in AMOC because there are so many variables that have an effect on it. He noted that after learning that winds influenced circulation in both sub-tropical and sub-polar locations, scientists concluded that "as the climate continues to change, more efforts should be concentrated on monitoring those winds — especially in key regions on continental boundaries and the eastern coast of Greenland — and understanding what drives changes in them."
The obvious question, then, is: what will happen if climate change continues to weaken AMOC?
"This won't lead to another ice age (like 'The Day After Tomorrow,' which is a caricature of the science), but it may well threaten fish populations and lead to accelerated sea level rise along the U.S. east coast," Mann told Salon. "This is furthermore a reminder that there are surprises in the greenhouse, and often they are unwelcome ones. If we want to avoid more and more of these unwelcome surprises, we need to bring carbon emissions down dramatically in the years ahead."
Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, told Salon by email that if AMOC stopped moving heat northwards, the topical Atlantic would get much warmer. That in turn would lead to more frequent and devastating hurricanes, even as Iceland and parts of Europe cool immensely.
"AMOC acts as a relief valve for the Atlantic heat buildup in the tropics," Trenberth explained. "In the Pacific there is no equivalent and the relief valve is ENSO," which stands for "El Niño and the Southern Oscillation."
Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science's Department of Global Ecology, said that it is ultimately impossible to predict with certainty what will happen if AMOC slows down — but that it is very unlikely to be good.
"For me, it is not so much about the direct impacts of this particular change, which I think are highly uncertain, but rather if we are impacting major parts of planetary-scale processes and knocking them out of the range that they operated in (and we adapted to) over the entirety of human history, it is a pretty safe bet that we can anticipate some fairly nasty unknown unknowns," Caldeira wrote to Salon. "That may be just indefensible bias that cannot be rigorously supported, but I for one am not up for big gambles at planetary scale."
Forest the size of France regrown worldwide over 20 years, study finds
Nearly 59m hectares of forests have regrown since 2000, showing that regeneration in some places is paying off
Oliver Milman in New York
the guardian
Tue 11 May 2021 11.13 EDT
An area of forest the size of France has regrown around the world over the past 20 years, showing that regeneration in some places is paying off, a new analysis has found.
Nearly 59m hectares of forests have regrown since 2000, the research found, providing the potential to soak up and store 5.9 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide – more than the annual emissions of the entire US.
The two-year study, conducted via satellite imaging data and on-ground surveys across dozens of countries, identified areas of regrowth in the Atlantic forest in Brazil, where an area the size of the Netherlands has rebounded since 2000 due to conservation efforts and altered industry practices.
Another regrowth area is found in the boreal forests of Mongolia, where 1.2m hectares of forest have regenerated in two decades due to the work of conservationists and the Mongolian government. Forests also made a comeback in parts of central Africa and Canada.
However, the world is still experiencing an overall loss of forests “at a terrifying rate”, the researchers warned, with deforestation occurring much faster than restoration schemes.
Over a similar period outlined in the regrowth study, which was led by WWF as part of the Trillion Trees project, 386m hectares of tree cover were lost worldwide, around seven times the area of regenerated forest.
Previous studies have estimated that an area of forest as large as the UK is being lost each year, largely for timber or to make way for agriculture, such deforestation posing huge threats to wildlife and efforts to contain the climate crisis.
Deforestation spiked sharply last year, with losses concentrated in the vital rainforests in tropical areas.
Trees are being felled and burned at a rapid rate in the Amazon, with more than 430,000 acres already lost in 2021. Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president, has come under increasing international pressure over such deforestation.
“The science is clear – if we are to avoid dangerous climate change and turn around the loss of nature, we must both halt deforestation and restore natural forests,” said William Baldwin-Cantello, director of nature-based solutions at WWF.
“We’ve known for a long time that natural forest regeneration is often cheaper, richer in carbon and better for biodiversity than actively planted forests, and this research tells us where and why regeneration is happening, and how we can recreate those conditions elsewhere.
“But we can’t take this regeneration for granted – deforestation still claims millions of hectares every year, vastly more than is regenerated.”
Nearly 59m hectares of forests have regrown since 2000, the research found, providing the potential to soak up and store 5.9 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide – more than the annual emissions of the entire US.
The two-year study, conducted via satellite imaging data and on-ground surveys across dozens of countries, identified areas of regrowth in the Atlantic forest in Brazil, where an area the size of the Netherlands has rebounded since 2000 due to conservation efforts and altered industry practices.
Another regrowth area is found in the boreal forests of Mongolia, where 1.2m hectares of forest have regenerated in two decades due to the work of conservationists and the Mongolian government. Forests also made a comeback in parts of central Africa and Canada.
However, the world is still experiencing an overall loss of forests “at a terrifying rate”, the researchers warned, with deforestation occurring much faster than restoration schemes.
Over a similar period outlined in the regrowth study, which was led by WWF as part of the Trillion Trees project, 386m hectares of tree cover were lost worldwide, around seven times the area of regenerated forest.
Previous studies have estimated that an area of forest as large as the UK is being lost each year, largely for timber or to make way for agriculture, such deforestation posing huge threats to wildlife and efforts to contain the climate crisis.
Deforestation spiked sharply last year, with losses concentrated in the vital rainforests in tropical areas.
Trees are being felled and burned at a rapid rate in the Amazon, with more than 430,000 acres already lost in 2021. Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president, has come under increasing international pressure over such deforestation.
“The science is clear – if we are to avoid dangerous climate change and turn around the loss of nature, we must both halt deforestation and restore natural forests,” said William Baldwin-Cantello, director of nature-based solutions at WWF.
“We’ve known for a long time that natural forest regeneration is often cheaper, richer in carbon and better for biodiversity than actively planted forests, and this research tells us where and why regeneration is happening, and how we can recreate those conditions elsewhere.
“But we can’t take this regeneration for granted – deforestation still claims millions of hectares every year, vastly more than is regenerated.”
THE MOVIE 'DAY AFTER TOMORROW' WAS RIGHT!!!
Atlantic Ocean circulation at weakest in a millennium, say scientists
Decline in system underpinning Gulf Stream could lead to more extreme weather in Europe and higher sea levels on US east coast
Fiona Harvey Environment correspondent
THE GUARDIAN
Thu 25 Feb 2021 11.00 EST
The Atlantic Ocean circulation that underpins the Gulf Stream, the weather system that brings warm and mild weather to Europe, is at its weakest in more than a millennium, and climate breakdown is the probable cause, according to new data.
Further weakening of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could result in more storms battering the UK, more intense winters and an increase in damaging heatwaves and droughts across Europe.
Scientists predict that the AMOC will weaken further if global heating continues, and could reduce by about 34% to 45% by the end of this century, which could bring us close to a “tipping point” at which the system could become irrevocably unstable. A weakened Gulf Stream would also raise sea levels on the Atlantic coast of the US, with potentially disastrous consequences.
Stefan Rahmstorf, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, who co-authored the study published on Thursday in Nature Geoscience, told the Guardian that a weakening AMOC would increase the number and severity of storms hitting Britain, and bring more heatwaves to Europe.
He said the circulation had already slowed by about 15%, and the impacts were being seen. “In 20 to 30 years it is likely to weaken further, and that will inevitably influence our weather, so we would see an increase in storms and heatwaves in Europe, and sea level rises on the east coast of the US,” he said.
Rahmstorf and scientists from Maynooth University in Ireland and University College London in the UK concluded that the current weakening had not been seen over at least the last 1,000 years, after studying sediments, Greenland ice cores and other proxy data that revealed past weather patterns over that time. The AMOC has only been measured directly since 2004.
The AMOC is one of the world’s biggest ocean circulation systems, carrying warm surface water from the Gulf of Mexico towards the north Atlantic, where it cools and becomes saltier until it sinks north of Iceland, which in turn pulls more warm water from the Caribbean. This circulation is accompanied by winds that also help to bring mild and wet weather to Ireland, the UK and other parts of western Europe.
Scientists have long predicted a weakening of the AMOC as a result of global heating, and have raised concerns that it could collapse altogether. The new study found that any such point was likely to be decades away, but that continued high greenhouse gas emissions would bring it closer.
---
The AMOC is a large part of the Gulf Stream, often described as the “conveyor belt” that brings warm water from the equator. But the bigger weather system would not break down entirely if the ocean circulation became unstable, because winds also play a key role. The circulation has broken down before, in different circumstances, for instance at the end of the last ice age.
The Gulf Stream is separate from the jet stream that has helped to bring extreme weather to the northern hemisphere in recent weeks, though like the jet stream it is also affected by the rising temperatures in the Arctic. Normally, the very cold temperatures over the Arctic create a polar vortex that keeps a steady jet stream of air currents keeping that cold air in place. But higher temperatures over the Arctic have resulted in a weak and wandering jet stream, which has helped cold weather to spread much further south in some cases, while bringing warmer weather further north in others, contributing to the extremes in weather seen in the UK, Europe and the US in recent weeks.
Similarly, the Gulf Stream is affected by the melting of Arctic ice, which dumps large quantities of cold water to the south of Greenland, disrupting the flow of the AMOC. The impacts of variations in the Gulf Stream are seen over much longer periods than variations in the jet stream, but will also bring more extreme weather as the climate warms.
---
“While the AMOC won’t collapse any time soon, the authors warn that the current could become unstable by the end of this century if warming continues unabated,” he said. “It has already been increasing the risk for stronger hurricanes at the US east coast due to warmer ocean waters, as well as potentially altering circulation patterns over western Europe.”
Further weakening of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could result in more storms battering the UK, more intense winters and an increase in damaging heatwaves and droughts across Europe.
Scientists predict that the AMOC will weaken further if global heating continues, and could reduce by about 34% to 45% by the end of this century, which could bring us close to a “tipping point” at which the system could become irrevocably unstable. A weakened Gulf Stream would also raise sea levels on the Atlantic coast of the US, with potentially disastrous consequences.
Stefan Rahmstorf, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, who co-authored the study published on Thursday in Nature Geoscience, told the Guardian that a weakening AMOC would increase the number and severity of storms hitting Britain, and bring more heatwaves to Europe.
He said the circulation had already slowed by about 15%, and the impacts were being seen. “In 20 to 30 years it is likely to weaken further, and that will inevitably influence our weather, so we would see an increase in storms and heatwaves in Europe, and sea level rises on the east coast of the US,” he said.
Rahmstorf and scientists from Maynooth University in Ireland and University College London in the UK concluded that the current weakening had not been seen over at least the last 1,000 years, after studying sediments, Greenland ice cores and other proxy data that revealed past weather patterns over that time. The AMOC has only been measured directly since 2004.
The AMOC is one of the world’s biggest ocean circulation systems, carrying warm surface water from the Gulf of Mexico towards the north Atlantic, where it cools and becomes saltier until it sinks north of Iceland, which in turn pulls more warm water from the Caribbean. This circulation is accompanied by winds that also help to bring mild and wet weather to Ireland, the UK and other parts of western Europe.
Scientists have long predicted a weakening of the AMOC as a result of global heating, and have raised concerns that it could collapse altogether. The new study found that any such point was likely to be decades away, but that continued high greenhouse gas emissions would bring it closer.
---
The AMOC is a large part of the Gulf Stream, often described as the “conveyor belt” that brings warm water from the equator. But the bigger weather system would not break down entirely if the ocean circulation became unstable, because winds also play a key role. The circulation has broken down before, in different circumstances, for instance at the end of the last ice age.
The Gulf Stream is separate from the jet stream that has helped to bring extreme weather to the northern hemisphere in recent weeks, though like the jet stream it is also affected by the rising temperatures in the Arctic. Normally, the very cold temperatures over the Arctic create a polar vortex that keeps a steady jet stream of air currents keeping that cold air in place. But higher temperatures over the Arctic have resulted in a weak and wandering jet stream, which has helped cold weather to spread much further south in some cases, while bringing warmer weather further north in others, contributing to the extremes in weather seen in the UK, Europe and the US in recent weeks.
Similarly, the Gulf Stream is affected by the melting of Arctic ice, which dumps large quantities of cold water to the south of Greenland, disrupting the flow of the AMOC. The impacts of variations in the Gulf Stream are seen over much longer periods than variations in the jet stream, but will also bring more extreme weather as the climate warms.
---
“While the AMOC won’t collapse any time soon, the authors warn that the current could become unstable by the end of this century if warming continues unabated,” he said. “It has already been increasing the risk for stronger hurricanes at the US east coast due to warmer ocean waters, as well as potentially altering circulation patterns over western Europe.”
Biodiversity
Fifth of countries at risk of ecosystem collapse, analysis finds
Trillions of dollars of GDP depend on biodiversity, according to Swiss Re report
Damian Carrington Environment editor
the guardian
Mon 12 Oct 2020 05.12 EDT
One-fifth of the world’s countries are at risk of their ecosystems collapsing because of the destruction of wildlife and their habitats, according to an analysis by the insurance firm Swiss Re.
Natural “services” such as food, clean water and air, and flood protection have already been damaged by human activity.
More than half of global GDP – $42tn (£32tn) – depends on high-functioning biodiversity, according to the report, but the risk of tipping points is growing.
Countries including Australia, Israel and South Africa rank near the top of Swiss Re’s index of risk to biodiversity and ecosystem services, with India, Spain and Belgium also highlighted. Countries with fragile ecosystems and large farming sectors, such as Pakistan and Nigeria, are also flagged up.
Countries including Brazil and Indonesia had large areas of intact ecosystems but had a strong economic dependence on natural resources, which showed the importance of protecting their wild places, Swiss Re said.
“A staggering fifth of countries globally are at risk of their ecosystems collapsing due to a decline in biodiversity and related beneficial services,” said Swiss Re, one of the world’s biggest reinsurers and a linchpin of the global insurance industry.
“If the ecosystem service decline goes on [in countries at risk], you would see then scarcities unfolding even more strongly, up to tipping points,” said Oliver Schelske, lead author of the research.
Jeffrey Bohn, Swiss Re’s chief research officer, said: “This is the first index to our knowledge that pulls together indicators of biodiversity and ecosystems to cross-compare around the world, and then specifically link back to the economies of those locations.”
The index was designed to help insurers assess ecosystem risks when setting premiums for businesses but Bohn said it could have a wider use as it “allows businesses and governments to factor biodiversity and ecosystems into their economic decision-making”.
The UN revealed in September that the world’s governments failed to meet a single target to stem biodiversity losses in the last decade, while leading scientists warned in 2019 that humans were in jeopardy from the accelerating decline of the Earth’s natural life-support systems. More than 60 national leaders recently pledged to end the destruction.
The Swiss Re index is built on 10 key ecosystem services identified by the world’s scientists and uses scientific data to map the state of these services at a resolution of one square kilometre across the world’s land. The services include provision of clean water and air, food, timber, pollination, fertile soil, erosion control, and coastal protection, as well as a measure of habitat intactness.
Those countries with more than 30% of their area found to have fragile ecosystems were deemed to be at risk of those ecosystems collapsing. Just one in seven countries had intact ecosystems covering more than 30% of their country area.
Among the G20 leading economies, South Africa and Australia were seen as being most at risk, with China 7th, the US 9th and the UK 16th.
Alexander Pfaff, a professor of public policy, economics and environment at Duke University in the US, said: “Societies, from local to global, can do much better when we not only acknowledge the importance of contributions from nature – as this index is doing – but also take that into account in our actions, private and public.”
Pfaff said it was important to note that the economic impacts of the degradation of nature began well before ecosystem collapse, adding: “Naming a problem may well be half the solution, [but] the other half is taking action.”
Swiss Re said developing and developed countries were at risk from biodiversity loss. Water scarcity, for example, could damage manufacturing sectors, properties and supply chains.
Bohn said about 75% of global assets were not insured, partly because of insufficient data. He said the index could help quantify risks such as crops losses and flooding.
Natural “services” such as food, clean water and air, and flood protection have already been damaged by human activity.
More than half of global GDP – $42tn (£32tn) – depends on high-functioning biodiversity, according to the report, but the risk of tipping points is growing.
Countries including Australia, Israel and South Africa rank near the top of Swiss Re’s index of risk to biodiversity and ecosystem services, with India, Spain and Belgium also highlighted. Countries with fragile ecosystems and large farming sectors, such as Pakistan and Nigeria, are also flagged up.
Countries including Brazil and Indonesia had large areas of intact ecosystems but had a strong economic dependence on natural resources, which showed the importance of protecting their wild places, Swiss Re said.
“A staggering fifth of countries globally are at risk of their ecosystems collapsing due to a decline in biodiversity and related beneficial services,” said Swiss Re, one of the world’s biggest reinsurers and a linchpin of the global insurance industry.
“If the ecosystem service decline goes on [in countries at risk], you would see then scarcities unfolding even more strongly, up to tipping points,” said Oliver Schelske, lead author of the research.
Jeffrey Bohn, Swiss Re’s chief research officer, said: “This is the first index to our knowledge that pulls together indicators of biodiversity and ecosystems to cross-compare around the world, and then specifically link back to the economies of those locations.”
The index was designed to help insurers assess ecosystem risks when setting premiums for businesses but Bohn said it could have a wider use as it “allows businesses and governments to factor biodiversity and ecosystems into their economic decision-making”.
The UN revealed in September that the world’s governments failed to meet a single target to stem biodiversity losses in the last decade, while leading scientists warned in 2019 that humans were in jeopardy from the accelerating decline of the Earth’s natural life-support systems. More than 60 national leaders recently pledged to end the destruction.
The Swiss Re index is built on 10 key ecosystem services identified by the world’s scientists and uses scientific data to map the state of these services at a resolution of one square kilometre across the world’s land. The services include provision of clean water and air, food, timber, pollination, fertile soil, erosion control, and coastal protection, as well as a measure of habitat intactness.
Those countries with more than 30% of their area found to have fragile ecosystems were deemed to be at risk of those ecosystems collapsing. Just one in seven countries had intact ecosystems covering more than 30% of their country area.
Among the G20 leading economies, South Africa and Australia were seen as being most at risk, with China 7th, the US 9th and the UK 16th.
Alexander Pfaff, a professor of public policy, economics and environment at Duke University in the US, said: “Societies, from local to global, can do much better when we not only acknowledge the importance of contributions from nature – as this index is doing – but also take that into account in our actions, private and public.”
Pfaff said it was important to note that the economic impacts of the degradation of nature began well before ecosystem collapse, adding: “Naming a problem may well be half the solution, [but] the other half is taking action.”
Swiss Re said developing and developed countries were at risk from biodiversity loss. Water scarcity, for example, could damage manufacturing sectors, properties and supply chains.
Bohn said about 75% of global assets were not insured, partly because of insufficient data. He said the index could help quantify risks such as crops losses and flooding.
Satellite images show rapid growth of glacial lakes worldwide
Number of glacial lakes rose by 53% in 1990-2018 to reveal impact of increased meltwater
Ian Sample Science editor
the guardian
Mon 31 Aug 2020 11.00 EDT
Glacial lakes have grown rapidly around the world in recent decades, according to satellite images that reveal the impact of increased meltwater draining off retreating glaciers.
Scientists analysed more than quarter of a million satellite images to assess how lakes formed by melting glaciers have been affected by global heating and other processes.
The images show the number of glacial lakes rose by 53% between 1990 and 2018, expanding the amount of the Earth the lakes cover by about 51%. According to the survey, 14,394 glacial lakes spread over nearly 9,000 square km of the planet’s surface.
Based on the figures, the researchers estimate the volume of the world’s glacial lakes grew by 48% over the same period and now hold 156.5 cubic km of water.
“Our findings show how quickly Earth surface systems are responding to climate change, and the global nature of this,” said Stephan Harrison, a professor of climate and environmental change at Exeter University. “More importantly, our results help to fill a gap in the science because, until now, it was not known how much water was held in the world’s glacial lakes.”
Glacial lakes are an important source of fresh water for many of the world’s poorest people, particularly in the mountains of Asia and parts of South America. But the lakes also present a growing threat from outburst floods that can tear down villages, wash away roads and destroy pipelines and other infrastructure.
The fastest-growing lakes are in Scandinavia, Iceland and Russia, which more than doubled in area over the study period. Because many of the lakes are relatively small, the rise in volume is not substantial on a global level.
Elsewhere, such as in Patagonia and Alaska, glacial lakes grew more slowly, at about 80%, but many of the lakes in these regions are vast, making the absolute increase in water volume huge.
According to the report, published in Nature Climate Change, three of the largest Patagonian lakes grew at a much slower rate, but still reached 3,582 square km in 2018, up 27 square km since 1990.
In other regions, the picture was more variable. In the north of Greenland, glacial lakes were growing rapidly, in line with global heating being more extreme in the Arctic. In south-west Greenland, some glacial lakes had shrunk, but often this was because they had already drained.
Though meltwater is crucial for many communities living in valleys beneath glaciers, sudden outbursts from glacial lakes can be devastating. Writing in the journal, the scientists highlight particular threats to hydroelectric power plants in the Himalayas; the Trans-Alaska pipeline, which traverses mountains hosting glacial lakes; major roadways such as the Karakoram highway between China and Pakistan, a corridor that carries billions of dollars of goods annually.
“As lakes get bigger there is more water in them to drain quickly and produce glacial lake outburst floods,” Harrison said. “These are a real hazard in many valleys connected to retreating glaciers in parts of the Himalayas and Andes, for example.
“Such glacial lake outburst floods, or GLOFs, have killed tens of thousands of people over the past century and destroyed valuable infrastructure such as hydroelectric power schemes. However, this is a complex issue. Some lakes become less vulnerable to GLOF triggers as they get bigger, but the more water that is available will tend to make the GLOF worse if one occurs.”
Scientists analysed more than quarter of a million satellite images to assess how lakes formed by melting glaciers have been affected by global heating and other processes.
The images show the number of glacial lakes rose by 53% between 1990 and 2018, expanding the amount of the Earth the lakes cover by about 51%. According to the survey, 14,394 glacial lakes spread over nearly 9,000 square km of the planet’s surface.
Based on the figures, the researchers estimate the volume of the world’s glacial lakes grew by 48% over the same period and now hold 156.5 cubic km of water.
“Our findings show how quickly Earth surface systems are responding to climate change, and the global nature of this,” said Stephan Harrison, a professor of climate and environmental change at Exeter University. “More importantly, our results help to fill a gap in the science because, until now, it was not known how much water was held in the world’s glacial lakes.”
Glacial lakes are an important source of fresh water for many of the world’s poorest people, particularly in the mountains of Asia and parts of South America. But the lakes also present a growing threat from outburst floods that can tear down villages, wash away roads and destroy pipelines and other infrastructure.
The fastest-growing lakes are in Scandinavia, Iceland and Russia, which more than doubled in area over the study period. Because many of the lakes are relatively small, the rise in volume is not substantial on a global level.
Elsewhere, such as in Patagonia and Alaska, glacial lakes grew more slowly, at about 80%, but many of the lakes in these regions are vast, making the absolute increase in water volume huge.
According to the report, published in Nature Climate Change, three of the largest Patagonian lakes grew at a much slower rate, but still reached 3,582 square km in 2018, up 27 square km since 1990.
In other regions, the picture was more variable. In the north of Greenland, glacial lakes were growing rapidly, in line with global heating being more extreme in the Arctic. In south-west Greenland, some glacial lakes had shrunk, but often this was because they had already drained.
Though meltwater is crucial for many communities living in valleys beneath glaciers, sudden outbursts from glacial lakes can be devastating. Writing in the journal, the scientists highlight particular threats to hydroelectric power plants in the Himalayas; the Trans-Alaska pipeline, which traverses mountains hosting glacial lakes; major roadways such as the Karakoram highway between China and Pakistan, a corridor that carries billions of dollars of goods annually.
“As lakes get bigger there is more water in them to drain quickly and produce glacial lake outburst floods,” Harrison said. “These are a real hazard in many valleys connected to retreating glaciers in parts of the Himalayas and Andes, for example.
“Such glacial lake outburst floods, or GLOFs, have killed tens of thousands of people over the past century and destroyed valuable infrastructure such as hydroelectric power schemes. However, this is a complex issue. Some lakes become less vulnerable to GLOF triggers as they get bigger, but the more water that is available will tend to make the GLOF worse if one occurs.”
A methane leak in Antarctica provides new insight into how methane-eating microbes evolve
These ocean-dwelling methane-hungry microbes are one of Earth's great hopes for mitigating global warming
MATTHEW ROZSA - salon
JULY 24, 2020 10:11PM (UTC)
Deep underwater in the Ross Sea off the coast of Antarctica, scientists have discovered a new active leak of methane, a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide. The discovery marked the first time that scientists were able to directly observe a new underwater methane seep, and see how methane-eating microbial life in its proximity evolved over a five-year span.
In a study published in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a research team led by Oregon State University oceanographer Dr. Andrew Thurber explained that the methane gas leak was first discovered in 2011 off Antarctic shores. Antarctica is believed to have as much as a quarter of the planet's ocean-based methane trapped in permafrost and on the continental shelves.
Just as micro-organisms like fungi breed like crazy in the presence of a food source in our homes — say, an open soda can or jam jar left out in the open — methane-eating microbes are present in small numbers spread throughout Earth's oceans, and only multiply precipitously when they find a prominent "food" source like a methane seep. Indeed, the scientists note that by 2016, methane-consuming micro-organisms began appearing by the leak and consuming a small portion of the gas, though not enough to offset the methane venting.
In the case of this Ross Sea methane seep, researchers sought to quantify the "response rate" of the microbial community over time — in other words, how fast these microbes took up residence around the seep, and how much methane they took in before it could reach the atmosphere. Five years after the seep's formation, researchers noted that the microbial mat "had not yet formed a sufficient filter to mitigate the release of methane from the sediment."
The discovery is particularly interesting in that the chronology of these kinds of phenomena is not well-understood; prior to this paper, it was unknown how long microbial life would take to filter methane in a similar methane seep. The researchers said that five years after the seep's forming, the microbes were still in an "early successional stage."
"This study provides the first report of the evolution of a seep system from a non-seep environment, and reveals that the rate of microbial succession may have an unrealized impact on greenhouse gas emission from marine methane reservoirs," they wrote.
The presence of methane increases the amount of heat trapped in the atmosphere. From a warming perspective, it is preferably that microbes consume the methane first and produce carbon dioxide — which is still a greenhouse gas, though not nearly as potent as methane, which absorbs 25 times more heat in the atmosphere compared to carbon dioxide.
"Our results suggest that the accuracy of future global climate models may be improved by considering the time it will take for microbial communities to respond to novel methane input," the authors write.
Salon reached out to a pair of climatologists for their thoughts on the study. The common observation, which was made in the study itself, is that the methane leak itself did not appear to have occurred strictly because of global warming, though that is a scenario that scientists are actively concerned about.
"This study really just demonstrates a potential pathway by which Antarctic marine methane can escape to the atmosphere," Dr. Michael E. Mann, a distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Penn State University, told Salon by email. "It doesn't demonstrate that climate change has lead to any increase in methane emissions. Relevant to this latter point is a study that just came out a week showing that methane increases in the atmosphere are due to natural gas extraction ('fracking') and livestock methane emissions. There is no evidence that 'methane feedbacks' are contributing to rising methane, at least not presently."
Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a a Distinguished Senior Scientist in the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, made a similar point in an email to Salon.
"Methane concentrations in the atmosphere have increased prominently in the past few years, and a significant source is from leaky fracking installations and the resulting fugitive emissions," Trenberth explained. After reviewing the economics of fracking during the coronavirus pandemic — and in particular how some of the industry has gone bust — Trenberth responded to the paper by writing that it "illuminates largely natural processes in the southern ocean. Carbon of various sorts (wood, sea weed, etc) decays and forms either carbon dioxide (if aerobic) or methane (if anaerobic and immersed in water). Certain different kinds of bacteria flourish under both conditions. My understanding is that a lot of methane from depth in the ocean is absorbed rather than emitted into the atmosphere. That would be a key question."
He added, "What surprises me about this article is that the southern oceans are far from friendly to work in. There are strong winds and huge waves, and how they can even accomplish this work would be of interest. . . . Are their results biased as a result? In any case, evidently rich and new biogeochemistry has been discovered and can only help understanding and modeling."
In a study published in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a research team led by Oregon State University oceanographer Dr. Andrew Thurber explained that the methane gas leak was first discovered in 2011 off Antarctic shores. Antarctica is believed to have as much as a quarter of the planet's ocean-based methane trapped in permafrost and on the continental shelves.
Just as micro-organisms like fungi breed like crazy in the presence of a food source in our homes — say, an open soda can or jam jar left out in the open — methane-eating microbes are present in small numbers spread throughout Earth's oceans, and only multiply precipitously when they find a prominent "food" source like a methane seep. Indeed, the scientists note that by 2016, methane-consuming micro-organisms began appearing by the leak and consuming a small portion of the gas, though not enough to offset the methane venting.
In the case of this Ross Sea methane seep, researchers sought to quantify the "response rate" of the microbial community over time — in other words, how fast these microbes took up residence around the seep, and how much methane they took in before it could reach the atmosphere. Five years after the seep's formation, researchers noted that the microbial mat "had not yet formed a sufficient filter to mitigate the release of methane from the sediment."
The discovery is particularly interesting in that the chronology of these kinds of phenomena is not well-understood; prior to this paper, it was unknown how long microbial life would take to filter methane in a similar methane seep. The researchers said that five years after the seep's forming, the microbes were still in an "early successional stage."
"This study provides the first report of the evolution of a seep system from a non-seep environment, and reveals that the rate of microbial succession may have an unrealized impact on greenhouse gas emission from marine methane reservoirs," they wrote.
The presence of methane increases the amount of heat trapped in the atmosphere. From a warming perspective, it is preferably that microbes consume the methane first and produce carbon dioxide — which is still a greenhouse gas, though not nearly as potent as methane, which absorbs 25 times more heat in the atmosphere compared to carbon dioxide.
"Our results suggest that the accuracy of future global climate models may be improved by considering the time it will take for microbial communities to respond to novel methane input," the authors write.
Salon reached out to a pair of climatologists for their thoughts on the study. The common observation, which was made in the study itself, is that the methane leak itself did not appear to have occurred strictly because of global warming, though that is a scenario that scientists are actively concerned about.
"This study really just demonstrates a potential pathway by which Antarctic marine methane can escape to the atmosphere," Dr. Michael E. Mann, a distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Penn State University, told Salon by email. "It doesn't demonstrate that climate change has lead to any increase in methane emissions. Relevant to this latter point is a study that just came out a week showing that methane increases in the atmosphere are due to natural gas extraction ('fracking') and livestock methane emissions. There is no evidence that 'methane feedbacks' are contributing to rising methane, at least not presently."
Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a a Distinguished Senior Scientist in the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, made a similar point in an email to Salon.
"Methane concentrations in the atmosphere have increased prominently in the past few years, and a significant source is from leaky fracking installations and the resulting fugitive emissions," Trenberth explained. After reviewing the economics of fracking during the coronavirus pandemic — and in particular how some of the industry has gone bust — Trenberth responded to the paper by writing that it "illuminates largely natural processes in the southern ocean. Carbon of various sorts (wood, sea weed, etc) decays and forms either carbon dioxide (if aerobic) or methane (if anaerobic and immersed in water). Certain different kinds of bacteria flourish under both conditions. My understanding is that a lot of methane from depth in the ocean is absorbed rather than emitted into the atmosphere. That would be a key question."
He added, "What surprises me about this article is that the southern oceans are far from friendly to work in. There are strong winds and huge waves, and how they can even accomplish this work would be of interest. . . . Are their results biased as a result? In any case, evidently rich and new biogeochemistry has been discovered and can only help understanding and modeling."
greed, stupidity, and incompetence on display, again!!!
North Atlantic right whales now officially 'one step from extinction'
International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s Red List changes ocean giants’ status to ‘critically endangered’
Claudia Geib
the guardian
Thu 16 Jul 2020 06.00 EDT
With their population still struggling to recover from over three centuries of whaling, the North Atlantic right whale is now just “one step from extinction”, according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The IUCN last week moved the whale’s status on their Red List from “endangered” to “critically endangered” – the last stop before the species is considered extinct in the wild.
The status change reflects the fact that fewer than 250 mature individuals probably remain in a population of roughly 400. While grim, scientists and conservationists expressed hope that this move may help speed up protections for these dwindling giants.
“As scientists, we’ve been working for many years under the idea that North Atlantic right whales are critically endangered,” said David Wiley, research coordinator for the Stellwagen Bank national marine sanctuary in Massachusetts. “The good thing about this new designation is it does bring them back front and center. Hopefully that will bring them up to the top of political consciousness.”
Moira Brown, senior scientist at the Canadian Whale Institute, who has been working on right whales for over 30 years, said: “For an organization like the IUCN, which weighs a lot of information when they make these changes, to shift the right whale’s status – it brings international recognition. It’s an added layer of: we’re not just blowing smoke here, this animal is really in trouble.”
Often found leisurely filtering plankton at the ocean surface, the right whale species was once highly targeted by whalers: their slow speed made them easy to hunt, and they float when killed, thanks to thick blubber.
That slow surface feeding today leads to these whales being struck by boat propellers or becoming fatally snarled in fishing gear. According to the IUCN, of the 30 deaths or serious injuries to North Atlantic right whales recorded between 2012 and 2016, 26 were caused by fishing gear entanglement.
As a result, many scientists support stricter regulations on the fishing industry, a topic that draws concern from fishing communities: new regulations could mean fishermen must bear the cost of upgrading gear, and they are often concerned that these changes will also reduce their catch. The National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2019 attempt to reduce gear in the water led the Maine Lobstermen’s Association to back out of regional protective measures.
“I think it’s sometimes portrayed as: you have whales, or you can have fishing,” said Amy Knowlton, a senior scientist at the New England Aquarium. “What we’re trying to say is you can still fish if you can do it in a safer way for the whales.”
Knowlton noted that the growing entanglement problem may be partially due to stronger ropes adopted in the 1990s, making it harder for whales to break free. She is now encouraging fishermen to use lines with a weaker breaking strength.
Climate change also plays a big role. Since 1990, the North Atlantic right whale’s primary feeding ground, the Gulf of Maine, has warmed three times faster than the rest of the world’s oceans.
The US and Canadian governments enforce seasonal boat speed limits in areas that right whales frequent. But the whales are changing their usual haunts as they seek cooler waters, taking them into places without these speed limits. Warming waters also make it harder for right whales to find food, which could explain their unusually low birth rate.
Additionally, climate change has caused a lobster boom in northern New England and eastern Canada, which has brought more fishing gear into the whale’s habitat.
There is cause to celebrate small victories for right whales, like the birth of 10 calves this season. But these victories often come hand-in-hand with heartbreak: in June, one of those calves was discovered dead of a ship strike off New Jersey.
Overall, researchers are keenly aware that time is not on the whales’ side, as deaths outpace the speed of regulatory action.
“It’s a very slow process, and keeping the public engaged and keeping funding going is tough when you know you’re not going to see results for 20 years,” said Wiley. “That’s not unique to right whales, but we’re living at the moment in time that things either get better or continue to get worse.”
He added: “The fact that our activity is driving them to extinction is something that isn’t acceptable for us as human beings. We’re better than that.”
The status change reflects the fact that fewer than 250 mature individuals probably remain in a population of roughly 400. While grim, scientists and conservationists expressed hope that this move may help speed up protections for these dwindling giants.
“As scientists, we’ve been working for many years under the idea that North Atlantic right whales are critically endangered,” said David Wiley, research coordinator for the Stellwagen Bank national marine sanctuary in Massachusetts. “The good thing about this new designation is it does bring them back front and center. Hopefully that will bring them up to the top of political consciousness.”
Moira Brown, senior scientist at the Canadian Whale Institute, who has been working on right whales for over 30 years, said: “For an organization like the IUCN, which weighs a lot of information when they make these changes, to shift the right whale’s status – it brings international recognition. It’s an added layer of: we’re not just blowing smoke here, this animal is really in trouble.”
Often found leisurely filtering plankton at the ocean surface, the right whale species was once highly targeted by whalers: their slow speed made them easy to hunt, and they float when killed, thanks to thick blubber.
That slow surface feeding today leads to these whales being struck by boat propellers or becoming fatally snarled in fishing gear. According to the IUCN, of the 30 deaths or serious injuries to North Atlantic right whales recorded between 2012 and 2016, 26 were caused by fishing gear entanglement.
As a result, many scientists support stricter regulations on the fishing industry, a topic that draws concern from fishing communities: new regulations could mean fishermen must bear the cost of upgrading gear, and they are often concerned that these changes will also reduce their catch. The National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2019 attempt to reduce gear in the water led the Maine Lobstermen’s Association to back out of regional protective measures.
“I think it’s sometimes portrayed as: you have whales, or you can have fishing,” said Amy Knowlton, a senior scientist at the New England Aquarium. “What we’re trying to say is you can still fish if you can do it in a safer way for the whales.”
Knowlton noted that the growing entanglement problem may be partially due to stronger ropes adopted in the 1990s, making it harder for whales to break free. She is now encouraging fishermen to use lines with a weaker breaking strength.
Climate change also plays a big role. Since 1990, the North Atlantic right whale’s primary feeding ground, the Gulf of Maine, has warmed three times faster than the rest of the world’s oceans.
The US and Canadian governments enforce seasonal boat speed limits in areas that right whales frequent. But the whales are changing their usual haunts as they seek cooler waters, taking them into places without these speed limits. Warming waters also make it harder for right whales to find food, which could explain their unusually low birth rate.
Additionally, climate change has caused a lobster boom in northern New England and eastern Canada, which has brought more fishing gear into the whale’s habitat.
There is cause to celebrate small victories for right whales, like the birth of 10 calves this season. But these victories often come hand-in-hand with heartbreak: in June, one of those calves was discovered dead of a ship strike off New Jersey.
Overall, researchers are keenly aware that time is not on the whales’ side, as deaths outpace the speed of regulatory action.
“It’s a very slow process, and keeping the public engaged and keeping funding going is tough when you know you’re not going to see results for 20 years,” said Wiley. “That’s not unique to right whales, but we’re living at the moment in time that things either get better or continue to get worse.”
He added: “The fact that our activity is driving them to extinction is something that isn’t acceptable for us as human beings. We’re better than that.”
Climate change
World has six months to avert climate crisis, says energy expert
International Energy Agency chief warns of need to prevent post-lockdown surge in emissions
Fiona Harvey Environment correspondent
the guardian
Thu 18 Jun 2020 00.00 EDT
The world has only six months in which to change the course of the climate crisis and prevent a post-lockdown rebound in greenhouse gas emissions that would overwhelm efforts to stave off climate catastrophe, one of the world’s foremost energy experts has warned.
“This year is the last time we have, if we are not to see a carbon rebound,” said Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency.
Governments are planning to spend $9tn (£7.2tn) globally in the next few months on rescuing their economies from the coronavirus crisis, the IEA has calculated. The stimulus packages created this year will determine the shape of the global economy for the next three years, according to Birol, and within that time emissions must start to fall sharply and permanently, or climate targets will be out of reach.
“The next three years will determine the course of the next 30 years and beyond,” Birol told the Guardian. “If we do not [take action] we will surely see a rebound in emissions. If emissions rebound, it is very difficult to see how they will be brought down in future. This is why we are urging governments to have sustainable recovery packages.”
Carbon dioxide emissions plunged by a global average of 17% in April, compared with last year, but have since surged again to within about 5% of last year’s levels.
In a report published on Thursday, the IEA – the world’s gold standard for energy analysis - set out the first global blueprint for a green recovery, focusing on reforms to energy generation and consumption. Wind and solar power should be a top focus, the report advised, alongside energy efficiency improvements to buildings and industries, and the modernisation of electricity grids.
Creating jobs must be the priority for countries where millions have been thrown into unemployment by the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdowns. The IEA’s analysis shows that targeting green jobs – such as retrofitting buildings to make them more energy efficient, putting up solar panels and constructing wind farms – is more effective than pouring money into the high-carbon economy.
Sam Fankhauser, executive director of the Grantham Research Institute on climate change at the London School of Economics, who was not involved in the report, said: “Building efficiency ticks all the recovery boxes – shovel-ready, employment intensive, a high economic multiplier, and is absolutely key for zero carbon [as it is] a hard-to-treat sector, and has big social benefits, in the form of lower fuel bills.”
He warned that governments must not try to “preserve existing jobs in formaldehyde” through furlough schemes and other efforts to keep people in employment, but provide retraining and other opportunities for people to “move into the jobs of the future”.
Calls for a green recovery globally have now come from experts, economists, health professionals, educators, climate campaigners and politicians. While some governments are poised to take action – for instance, the EU has pledged to make its European green deal the centrepiece of its recovery – the money spent so far has tended to prop up the high-carbon economy.
At least $33bn has been directed towards airlines, with few or no green strings attached, according to the campaigning group Transport and Environment. According to analyst company Bloomberg New Energy Finance, more than half a trillion dollars worldwide – $509bn – is to be poured into high-carbon industries, with no conditions to ensure they reduce their carbon output.
Only about $12.3bn of the spending announced by late last month was set to go towards low-carbon industries, and a further $18.5bn into high-carbon industries provided they achieve climate targets.
In the first tranches of spending, governments “had an excuse” for failing to funnel money to carbon-cutting industries, said Birol, because they were reacting to a sudden and unexpected crisis. “The first recovery plans were more aimed at creating firewalls round the economy,” he explained.
But governments were still targeting high-carbon investment, Birol warned. He pointed to IEA research showing that by the end of May the amount invested in coal-fired power plants in Asia had accelerated compared with last year. “There are already signs of a rebound [in emissions],” he said.
Climate campaigners called on ministers to heed the IEA report and set out green recovery plans. Jamie Peters, campaigns director at Friends of the Earth, said: “A post-Covid world must be a fair one. It will only be equitable if the government prioritises health, wellbeing and opportunity for all parts of society. As if the case was not compelling enough in a dangerously heating planet, it is even more urgent post-Covid.”
Putting the IEA’s recommendations into action would boost the economy, added Rosie Rogers, head of green recovery at Greenpeace UK. “Government putting money behind sustainable solutions really is an economic no-brainer. It can see us build a recovery that both tackles the climate emergency and improves people’s lives through cleaner air and lower bills.”
Investors were also keen to put private sector money into a green recovery, alongside government stimulus spending, said Stephanie Pfeifer, chief executive of the Institutional Investor Group on Climate Change, representing funds and asset managers with $26tn in assets. “The IEA has shown [a green recovery] is not only desirable, but economically astute. Investors are fully committed to playing their part in this process.”
“This year is the last time we have, if we are not to see a carbon rebound,” said Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency.
Governments are planning to spend $9tn (£7.2tn) globally in the next few months on rescuing their economies from the coronavirus crisis, the IEA has calculated. The stimulus packages created this year will determine the shape of the global economy for the next three years, according to Birol, and within that time emissions must start to fall sharply and permanently, or climate targets will be out of reach.
“The next three years will determine the course of the next 30 years and beyond,” Birol told the Guardian. “If we do not [take action] we will surely see a rebound in emissions. If emissions rebound, it is very difficult to see how they will be brought down in future. This is why we are urging governments to have sustainable recovery packages.”
Carbon dioxide emissions plunged by a global average of 17% in April, compared with last year, but have since surged again to within about 5% of last year’s levels.
In a report published on Thursday, the IEA – the world’s gold standard for energy analysis - set out the first global blueprint for a green recovery, focusing on reforms to energy generation and consumption. Wind and solar power should be a top focus, the report advised, alongside energy efficiency improvements to buildings and industries, and the modernisation of electricity grids.
Creating jobs must be the priority for countries where millions have been thrown into unemployment by the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdowns. The IEA’s analysis shows that targeting green jobs – such as retrofitting buildings to make them more energy efficient, putting up solar panels and constructing wind farms – is more effective than pouring money into the high-carbon economy.
Sam Fankhauser, executive director of the Grantham Research Institute on climate change at the London School of Economics, who was not involved in the report, said: “Building efficiency ticks all the recovery boxes – shovel-ready, employment intensive, a high economic multiplier, and is absolutely key for zero carbon [as it is] a hard-to-treat sector, and has big social benefits, in the form of lower fuel bills.”
He warned that governments must not try to “preserve existing jobs in formaldehyde” through furlough schemes and other efforts to keep people in employment, but provide retraining and other opportunities for people to “move into the jobs of the future”.
Calls for a green recovery globally have now come from experts, economists, health professionals, educators, climate campaigners and politicians. While some governments are poised to take action – for instance, the EU has pledged to make its European green deal the centrepiece of its recovery – the money spent so far has tended to prop up the high-carbon economy.
At least $33bn has been directed towards airlines, with few or no green strings attached, according to the campaigning group Transport and Environment. According to analyst company Bloomberg New Energy Finance, more than half a trillion dollars worldwide – $509bn – is to be poured into high-carbon industries, with no conditions to ensure they reduce their carbon output.
Only about $12.3bn of the spending announced by late last month was set to go towards low-carbon industries, and a further $18.5bn into high-carbon industries provided they achieve climate targets.
In the first tranches of spending, governments “had an excuse” for failing to funnel money to carbon-cutting industries, said Birol, because they were reacting to a sudden and unexpected crisis. “The first recovery plans were more aimed at creating firewalls round the economy,” he explained.
But governments were still targeting high-carbon investment, Birol warned. He pointed to IEA research showing that by the end of May the amount invested in coal-fired power plants in Asia had accelerated compared with last year. “There are already signs of a rebound [in emissions],” he said.
Climate campaigners called on ministers to heed the IEA report and set out green recovery plans. Jamie Peters, campaigns director at Friends of the Earth, said: “A post-Covid world must be a fair one. It will only be equitable if the government prioritises health, wellbeing and opportunity for all parts of society. As if the case was not compelling enough in a dangerously heating planet, it is even more urgent post-Covid.”
Putting the IEA’s recommendations into action would boost the economy, added Rosie Rogers, head of green recovery at Greenpeace UK. “Government putting money behind sustainable solutions really is an economic no-brainer. It can see us build a recovery that both tackles the climate emergency and improves people’s lives through cleaner air and lower bills.”
Investors were also keen to put private sector money into a green recovery, alongside government stimulus spending, said Stephanie Pfeifer, chief executive of the Institutional Investor Group on Climate Change, representing funds and asset managers with $26tn in assets. “The IEA has shown [a green recovery] is not only desirable, but economically astute. Investors are fully committed to playing their part in this process.”
fucking up the world!!!
Russia says ‘years’ needed to clean up Arctic spill
June 10, 2020
By Agence France-Presse - raw story
Russian investigators on Wednesday detained three staff of a power plant over a huge fuel spill in the Arctic, as response teams warned a full clean-up would take years.
The spill of over 21,000 tonnes of fuel took place after a fuel reservoir collapsed last month at a power plant operated by a subsidiary of metals giant Norilsk Nickel in the city of Norilsk.
It is the largest ever to have hit the Arctic, say environmentalists.
Those working at the site have already seen the first effects of the spill on the local ecosystem, said Viktor Bronnikov, general director of Transneft Siberia oil and gas transportation company involved in the clean-up.
They included dead muskrats and ducks, he said.
The Investigative Committee looking into the accident said it had detained the director of the power station, Pavel Smirnov, and two engineers on suspicion of breaching environmental protection rules.
If convicted, they would risk up to five years in prison.
“The company considers this measure to be unjustifiably harsh,” Norilsk Nickel said in a statement to AFP, citing vice-president Nikolai Utkin.
All three “are cooperating with law enforcement authorities and now they would be much more useful at the scene of the clean-up operation”, he added.
– ‘Years’ to clean up –
At the scene at a remote area in the Norilsk industrial district, Bronnikov of Transneft Siberia said that the situation was stabilizing, but that the clean-up team had seen animals and birds apparently killed by the spill.
“Today I myself saw dead muskrats,” he told AFP, adding that workers had seen ducks killed by the fuel.
“If a bird lands on the diesel fuel or a muskrat swims through it, it is condemned to death,” he said.
He added however that he had not seen “a huge number” of any animals dying there.
Workers in waterproofs were using booms to contain the reddish-brown diesel on the surface of a river and pump it into tanks on the bank.
“We will be removing diesel fuel from the Ambarnaya River for at least eight to 10 days,” Bronnikov said.
“We will need years to completely clean up,” he added.
The teams have set up tents on the river bank and are using helicopters to bring in equipment and survey the vast flat area of grass and sparse trees.
After this “mechanical” stage, other methods will have to be used to absorb the rest of the diesel or cause it to break down, Bronnikov said.
– Kara Sea threatened –
Norilsk Nickel head Vladimir Potanin said the company would pay for clean-up efforts estimated at $146 million after President Vladimir Putin backed a state of emergency in the Arctic city.
The Investigative Committee said the power plant’s fuel tank had required major repairs from 2018 but the suspects “continued to use it in breach of safety rules.”
“As a result, the accident occurred,” the investigators’ statement said.
Norilsk Nickel said that the fuel reservoir was built in 1985 and underwent repairs in 2017 and 2018 after which it went through a safety audit.
Regional officials have said that despite efforts to contain the fuel leak using booms on the river surface, it has now reached a freshwater lake that is a major source of water for the region.
The pollution could now flow into the Kara Sea in the Arctic Ocean north of Siberia, which Greenpeace Russia expert Vladimir Chuprov told AFP would be a “disaster.”
But in a conference call on Wednesday, Norilsk Nickel’s first vice president Sergei Dyachenko denied the spill had reached the lake, saying the company had not found contamination there.
The metals giant has said the accident could have been caused by global warming thawing the permafrost under the fuel reservoir.
It has acknowledged it did not specifically monitor the condition of permafrost at its sites in the past and said it would do a full audit shortly.
The massive clean-up involves nearly 700 people, according to the emergencies ministry.
The spill of over 21,000 tonnes of fuel took place after a fuel reservoir collapsed last month at a power plant operated by a subsidiary of metals giant Norilsk Nickel in the city of Norilsk.
It is the largest ever to have hit the Arctic, say environmentalists.
Those working at the site have already seen the first effects of the spill on the local ecosystem, said Viktor Bronnikov, general director of Transneft Siberia oil and gas transportation company involved in the clean-up.
They included dead muskrats and ducks, he said.
The Investigative Committee looking into the accident said it had detained the director of the power station, Pavel Smirnov, and two engineers on suspicion of breaching environmental protection rules.
If convicted, they would risk up to five years in prison.
“The company considers this measure to be unjustifiably harsh,” Norilsk Nickel said in a statement to AFP, citing vice-president Nikolai Utkin.
All three “are cooperating with law enforcement authorities and now they would be much more useful at the scene of the clean-up operation”, he added.
– ‘Years’ to clean up –
At the scene at a remote area in the Norilsk industrial district, Bronnikov of Transneft Siberia said that the situation was stabilizing, but that the clean-up team had seen animals and birds apparently killed by the spill.
“Today I myself saw dead muskrats,” he told AFP, adding that workers had seen ducks killed by the fuel.
“If a bird lands on the diesel fuel or a muskrat swims through it, it is condemned to death,” he said.
He added however that he had not seen “a huge number” of any animals dying there.
Workers in waterproofs were using booms to contain the reddish-brown diesel on the surface of a river and pump it into tanks on the bank.
“We will be removing diesel fuel from the Ambarnaya River for at least eight to 10 days,” Bronnikov said.
“We will need years to completely clean up,” he added.
The teams have set up tents on the river bank and are using helicopters to bring in equipment and survey the vast flat area of grass and sparse trees.
After this “mechanical” stage, other methods will have to be used to absorb the rest of the diesel or cause it to break down, Bronnikov said.
– Kara Sea threatened –
Norilsk Nickel head Vladimir Potanin said the company would pay for clean-up efforts estimated at $146 million after President Vladimir Putin backed a state of emergency in the Arctic city.
The Investigative Committee said the power plant’s fuel tank had required major repairs from 2018 but the suspects “continued to use it in breach of safety rules.”
“As a result, the accident occurred,” the investigators’ statement said.
Norilsk Nickel said that the fuel reservoir was built in 1985 and underwent repairs in 2017 and 2018 after which it went through a safety audit.
Regional officials have said that despite efforts to contain the fuel leak using booms on the river surface, it has now reached a freshwater lake that is a major source of water for the region.
The pollution could now flow into the Kara Sea in the Arctic Ocean north of Siberia, which Greenpeace Russia expert Vladimir Chuprov told AFP would be a “disaster.”
But in a conference call on Wednesday, Norilsk Nickel’s first vice president Sergei Dyachenko denied the spill had reached the lake, saying the company had not found contamination there.
The metals giant has said the accident could have been caused by global warming thawing the permafrost under the fuel reservoir.
It has acknowledged it did not specifically monitor the condition of permafrost at its sites in the past and said it would do a full audit shortly.
The massive clean-up involves nearly 700 people, according to the emergencies ministry.
Greenhouse gas emissions
Lockdowns trigger dramatic fall in global carbon emissions
Responses to coronavirus crisis cause sharpest drop in carbon output since records began
Fiona Harvey Environment correspondent
the guardian
Tue 19 May 2020 11.00 EDT
Carbon dioxide emissions have fallen dramatically since lockdowns were imposed around the world due to the coronavirus crisis, research has shown.
Daily emissions of the greenhouse gas plunged 17% by early April compared with 2019 levels, according to the first definitive study of global carbon output this year.
The findings show the world has experienced the sharpest drop in carbon output since records began, with large sections of the global economy brought to a near standstill. When the lockdown was at its most stringent, in some countries emissions fell by just over a quarter (26%) on average. In the UK, the decline was about 31%, while in Australia emissions fell 28.3% for a period during April.
“This is a really big fall, but at the same time, 83% of global emissions are left, which shows how difficult it is to reduce emissions with changes in behaviour,” said Corinne Le Quéré, a professor of climate change at the University of East Anglia, and lead author of the study published in the journal Nature Climate Change. “And it is not desirable – this is not the way to tackle climate change.”
The unprecedented fall is likely to be only temporary. As countries slowly get back to normal activity, over the course of the year the annual decline is likely to be only about 7%, if some restrictions to halt the virus remain in place. However, if they are lifted in mid-June the fall for the year is likely to be only 4%.
That would still represent the biggest annual drop in emissions since the second world war, and a stark difference compared with recent trends, as emissions have been rising by about 1% annually. But it would make “a negligible impact on the Paris agreement” goals, Le Quéré said.
Emissions must fall to net zero by mid-century or soon after to meet the goals of the Paris agreement and keep global heating from reaching catastrophic levels, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The fall in carbon resulting from the Covid-19 crisis reveals how far the world still has to go, said Le Quéré.
The experience of the crisis so far has shown that changes in behaviour by individuals – such as not flying, working from home and driving less – can only go part of the way needed to cut emissions, as even the lockdown measures left the bulk of emission sources intact, she said, adding that bigger shifts are needed to the way people produce and use energy.
“Just behavioural change is not enough,” she said. “We need structural changes [to the economy and industry]. But if we take this opportunity to put structural changes in place, we have now seen what it is possible to achieve.”
Emissions from aviation showed a dramatic decline, of about 60%, as international flights between many countries were grounded. Emissions from surface transport fell less sharply, by about 36%. Power generation and industry accounted for about 86% of the total decline in emissions.
Despite such an unprecedented fall, the impacts on the climate are likely to be small. Stocks of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which reached 414.8 parts per million last year, will rise further towards the danger threshold of 450ppm this year, though perhaps at a slightly slower pace.
“Carbon dioxide stays in the air a long time, so although emissions are smaller, they are still happening and so carbon dioxide is still building up, just a little more slowly,” said Richard Betts, the head of climate impacts research at the Met Office Hadley Centre, who was not involved in the paper. “If we want to halt the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we need to stop putting it there altogether. It’s like we’re filling a bath and have turned down the tap slightly, but not turned it off.”
The lockdowns have caused steep falls in energy demand, but energy production has hardly been changed by the crisis, noted Mark Maslin, a professor of climatology at University College London, who was also not involved in the paper.
“The real lesson of this pandemic is that we must globally shift our energy production away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible if we are to ensure sustained year-on-year cuts to our global emissions,” he said. “The good news is that both of these will help to maintain the clean air and clear skies we have all rediscovered during lockdown, saving many lives.”
The comprehensive analysis was conducted by scientists from the University of East Anglia, Stanford University in the US, the Cicero Centre in Norway, as well as scientists in the Netherlands, Australia, France and Germany.
The researchers used measurements of economic activity, energy generation, industrial production, transport and other proxies to estimate carbon dioxide output. They concentrated their analysis on six areas: power generation, surface transport, industry, public buildings and commerce, residential sources, and aviation. Estimates were taken from 69 countries, 50 US states and 30 Chinese provinces, representing 97% of global carbon emissions.
Although the rising concentrations of carbon in the atmosphere are regularly measured, they are subject to large natural fluctuations so are unsuitable to the kind of snapshot analysis required to observe what is happening to global carbon output over a relatively short period.
RELATED: Greenhouse gas emissions, Coronavirus outbreak, Climate change, Pollution, Energy news
Daily emissions of the greenhouse gas plunged 17% by early April compared with 2019 levels, according to the first definitive study of global carbon output this year.
The findings show the world has experienced the sharpest drop in carbon output since records began, with large sections of the global economy brought to a near standstill. When the lockdown was at its most stringent, in some countries emissions fell by just over a quarter (26%) on average. In the UK, the decline was about 31%, while in Australia emissions fell 28.3% for a period during April.
“This is a really big fall, but at the same time, 83% of global emissions are left, which shows how difficult it is to reduce emissions with changes in behaviour,” said Corinne Le Quéré, a professor of climate change at the University of East Anglia, and lead author of the study published in the journal Nature Climate Change. “And it is not desirable – this is not the way to tackle climate change.”
The unprecedented fall is likely to be only temporary. As countries slowly get back to normal activity, over the course of the year the annual decline is likely to be only about 7%, if some restrictions to halt the virus remain in place. However, if they are lifted in mid-June the fall for the year is likely to be only 4%.
That would still represent the biggest annual drop in emissions since the second world war, and a stark difference compared with recent trends, as emissions have been rising by about 1% annually. But it would make “a negligible impact on the Paris agreement” goals, Le Quéré said.
Emissions must fall to net zero by mid-century or soon after to meet the goals of the Paris agreement and keep global heating from reaching catastrophic levels, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The fall in carbon resulting from the Covid-19 crisis reveals how far the world still has to go, said Le Quéré.
The experience of the crisis so far has shown that changes in behaviour by individuals – such as not flying, working from home and driving less – can only go part of the way needed to cut emissions, as even the lockdown measures left the bulk of emission sources intact, she said, adding that bigger shifts are needed to the way people produce and use energy.
“Just behavioural change is not enough,” she said. “We need structural changes [to the economy and industry]. But if we take this opportunity to put structural changes in place, we have now seen what it is possible to achieve.”
Emissions from aviation showed a dramatic decline, of about 60%, as international flights between many countries were grounded. Emissions from surface transport fell less sharply, by about 36%. Power generation and industry accounted for about 86% of the total decline in emissions.
Despite such an unprecedented fall, the impacts on the climate are likely to be small. Stocks of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which reached 414.8 parts per million last year, will rise further towards the danger threshold of 450ppm this year, though perhaps at a slightly slower pace.
“Carbon dioxide stays in the air a long time, so although emissions are smaller, they are still happening and so carbon dioxide is still building up, just a little more slowly,” said Richard Betts, the head of climate impacts research at the Met Office Hadley Centre, who was not involved in the paper. “If we want to halt the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we need to stop putting it there altogether. It’s like we’re filling a bath and have turned down the tap slightly, but not turned it off.”
The lockdowns have caused steep falls in energy demand, but energy production has hardly been changed by the crisis, noted Mark Maslin, a professor of climatology at University College London, who was also not involved in the paper.
“The real lesson of this pandemic is that we must globally shift our energy production away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible if we are to ensure sustained year-on-year cuts to our global emissions,” he said. “The good news is that both of these will help to maintain the clean air and clear skies we have all rediscovered during lockdown, saving many lives.”
The comprehensive analysis was conducted by scientists from the University of East Anglia, Stanford University in the US, the Cicero Centre in Norway, as well as scientists in the Netherlands, Australia, France and Germany.
The researchers used measurements of economic activity, energy generation, industrial production, transport and other proxies to estimate carbon dioxide output. They concentrated their analysis on six areas: power generation, surface transport, industry, public buildings and commerce, residential sources, and aviation. Estimates were taken from 69 countries, 50 US states and 30 Chinese provinces, representing 97% of global carbon emissions.
Although the rising concentrations of carbon in the atmosphere are regularly measured, they are subject to large natural fluctuations so are unsuitable to the kind of snapshot analysis required to observe what is happening to global carbon output over a relatively short period.
RELATED: Greenhouse gas emissions, Coronavirus outbreak, Climate change, Pollution, Energy news
One billion people will live in insufferable heat within 50 years – study
Human cost of climate crisis will hit harder and sooner than previously believed, research reveals
Jonathan Watts
the guardian
Tue 5 May 2020 04.52 EDT
The human cost of the climate crisis will hit harder, wider and sooner than previously believed, according to a study that shows a billion people will either be displaced or forced to endure insufferable heat for every additional 1C rise in the global temperature.
In a worst-case scenario of accelerating emissions, areas currently home to a third of the world’s population will be as hot as the hottest parts of the Sahara within 50 years, the paper warns. Even in the most optimistic outlook, 1.2 billion people will fall outside the comfortable “climate niche” in which humans have thrived for at least 6,000 years.
The authors of the study said they were “floored” and “blown away” by the findings because they had not expected our species to be so vulnerable.
“The numbers are flabbergasting. I literally did a double take when I first saw them, ” Tim Lenton, of Exeter University, said. “I’ve previously studied climate tipping points, which are usually considered apocalyptic. But this hit home harder. This puts the threat in very human terms.”
Instead of looking at climate change as a problem of physics or economics, the paper, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examines how it affects the human habitat.
The vast majority of humanity has always lived in regions where the average annual temperatures are around 6C (43F) to 28C (82F), which is ideal for human health and food production. But this sweet spot is shifting and shrinking as a result of manmade global heating, which drops more people into what the authors describe as “near unliveable” extremes.
Humanity is particularly sensitive because we are concentrated on land – which is warming faster than the oceans – and because most future population growth will be in already hot regions of Africa and Asia. As a result of these demographic factors, the average human will experience a temperature increase of 7.5C when global temperatures reach 3C, which is forecast towards the end of this century.
At that level, about 30% of the world’s population would live in extreme heat – defined as an average temperature of 29C (84F). These conditions are extremely rare outside the most scorched parts of the Sahara, but with global heating of 3C they are projected to envelop 1.2 billion people in India, 485 million in Nigeria and more than 100 million in each of Pakistan, Indonesia and Sudan.
This would add enormously to migration pressures and pose challenges to food production systems.
“I think it is fair to say that average temperatures over 29C are unliveable. You’d have to move or adapt. But there are limits to adaptation. If you have enough money and energy, you can use air conditioning and fly in food and then you might be OK. But that is not the case for most people,” said one of the lead authors of the study, Prof Marten Scheffer of Wageningen University.
An ecologist by training, Scheffer said the study started as a thought-experiment. He had previously studied the climate distribution of rainforests and savanna and wondered what the result would be if he applied the same methodology to humans. “We know that most creatures’ habitats are limited by temperature. For example, penguins are only found in cold water and corals only in warm water. But we did not expect humans to be so sensitive. We think of ourselves as very adaptable because we use clothes, heating and air conditioning. But, in fact, the vast majority of people live – and have always lived – inside a climate niche that is now moving as never before.”
We were blown away by the magnitude,” he said. “There will be more change in the next 50 years than in the past 6,000 years.”
The authors said their findings should spur policymakers to accelerate emission cuts and work together to cope with migration because each degree of warming that can be avoided will save a billion people from falling out of humanity’s climate niche.
“Clearly we will need a global approach to safeguard our children against the potentially enormous social tensions the projected change could invoke,” another of the authors, Xu Chi of Nanjing University, said.
In a worst-case scenario of accelerating emissions, areas currently home to a third of the world’s population will be as hot as the hottest parts of the Sahara within 50 years, the paper warns. Even in the most optimistic outlook, 1.2 billion people will fall outside the comfortable “climate niche” in which humans have thrived for at least 6,000 years.
The authors of the study said they were “floored” and “blown away” by the findings because they had not expected our species to be so vulnerable.
“The numbers are flabbergasting. I literally did a double take when I first saw them, ” Tim Lenton, of Exeter University, said. “I’ve previously studied climate tipping points, which are usually considered apocalyptic. But this hit home harder. This puts the threat in very human terms.”
Instead of looking at climate change as a problem of physics or economics, the paper, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examines how it affects the human habitat.
The vast majority of humanity has always lived in regions where the average annual temperatures are around 6C (43F) to 28C (82F), which is ideal for human health and food production. But this sweet spot is shifting and shrinking as a result of manmade global heating, which drops more people into what the authors describe as “near unliveable” extremes.
Humanity is particularly sensitive because we are concentrated on land – which is warming faster than the oceans – and because most future population growth will be in already hot regions of Africa and Asia. As a result of these demographic factors, the average human will experience a temperature increase of 7.5C when global temperatures reach 3C, which is forecast towards the end of this century.
At that level, about 30% of the world’s population would live in extreme heat – defined as an average temperature of 29C (84F). These conditions are extremely rare outside the most scorched parts of the Sahara, but with global heating of 3C they are projected to envelop 1.2 billion people in India, 485 million in Nigeria and more than 100 million in each of Pakistan, Indonesia and Sudan.
This would add enormously to migration pressures and pose challenges to food production systems.
“I think it is fair to say that average temperatures over 29C are unliveable. You’d have to move or adapt. But there are limits to adaptation. If you have enough money and energy, you can use air conditioning and fly in food and then you might be OK. But that is not the case for most people,” said one of the lead authors of the study, Prof Marten Scheffer of Wageningen University.
An ecologist by training, Scheffer said the study started as a thought-experiment. He had previously studied the climate distribution of rainforests and savanna and wondered what the result would be if he applied the same methodology to humans. “We know that most creatures’ habitats are limited by temperature. For example, penguins are only found in cold water and corals only in warm water. But we did not expect humans to be so sensitive. We think of ourselves as very adaptable because we use clothes, heating and air conditioning. But, in fact, the vast majority of people live – and have always lived – inside a climate niche that is now moving as never before.”
We were blown away by the magnitude,” he said. “There will be more change in the next 50 years than in the past 6,000 years.”
The authors said their findings should spur policymakers to accelerate emission cuts and work together to cope with migration because each degree of warming that can be avoided will save a billion people from falling out of humanity’s climate niche.
“Clearly we will need a global approach to safeguard our children against the potentially enormous social tensions the projected change could invoke,” another of the authors, Xu Chi of Nanjing University, said.
Ocean plastic was choking Chile’s shores. Now it’s in Patagonia’s hats
A startup is recycling tonnes of discarded fishing nets throughout Chile. Is this a template for tackling the global plastic waste problem?
Charis McGowan
the guardian
Fri 24 Apr 2020 09.01 EDT
In Tumbes, a village in southern Chile, discarded plastic fishing nets are crammed into gaps between parked cars and market stalls, evidence of a global waste problem that the town is working to resolve.
Until recently, most discarded fishing nets in this coastal fishing village were dumped straight into the sea – contributing to the massive plastic pollution crisis that’s choking the planet’s oceans.
“If you have a broken net, you throw it anywhere you can,” says Ramon Maldonado, a fisherman in Tumbes.
But a startup called Bureo – founded by three North American surfers – is collaborating with fishermen like Maldonado to keep hundreds of tonnes of discarded nets out of the ocean each year.
Nets are sorted, cleaned, and cut in Bureo’s warehouse in Concepción, a city a few miles from Tumbes. Here they are turned into 100% recycled polyester and nylon pellets, called NetPlus, which are sold to companies as a sustainable alternative to first-use plastics.
Today NetPlus is used in Patagonia’s hat brims, Trek bike parts, Humanscale office chairs – and even sustainable Jenga sets.
Bureo joins dozens of initiatives addressing an urgent environmental question: how do we tackle our ocean plastic problem? And can we do it without reducing plastic use?
While it is challenging to gauge exactly how much plastic has accumulated in the world’s oceans, an estimated 8m tonnes of new plastic pollution enters oceans every year. The oil industry is investing in a huge surge of plastic production, which is expected to grow by 40% by 2030. Studies have also shown the proliferation of single-use plastic is accelerating climate change through greenhouse gas emissions at every stage of its lifecycle.
If current trends continue, by 2050 there could be more plastic in the ocean than fish by weight, according to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
Northern Point, Girlfriend Collective and Rothy’s are all budding companies producing clothing entirely from ocean plastics. Larger brands such as Nike, Adidas and Fjallraven have also launched garments from recycled ocean plastic.
The plastics industry has long pushed recycling as the solution to pollution. In reality, less than 10% of the plastic produced in the US each year is recycled. This is in part because it is hard to make recycling initiatives profitable, as Bureo learned firsthand when they tried to produce sustainable skateboards in 2013.
“Ocean plastic is not one type of plastic that can be used for high-value products, it is mixed and degraded and needs to be separated,” says David Stover, who founded Bureo alongside Ben Kneppers and Kevin Ahearn.
Durable products need to be made from quality substances. Wading through masses of ocean trash and sourcing key material is time-consuming and financially draining.
The company met with scientists and coastal communities in Chile to vet different materials. They found that rather than smaller plastics such as bottles and six-pack rings, coastal communities were particularly burdened by fishing nets piling up on beaches.
Nets account for 10% of the ocean’s plastics, according to a United Nations report. Heavy and cumbersome, they choke land mammals and pollute sea beds and beaches. And fishermen in Chile were desperate to get rid of them.
“It was a burden and they had no solution for it,” says Kneppers.
Kneppers spent two years living in Chilean coastal villages, working directly with fishermen to flesh out how to collect and process the nets. Bureo compensates artisanal fishermen for their collaboration, while industrial vessels can earn environmental certifications by participating.
Curbing global plastic production, however, may prove the bigger challenge, especially given a likely surge in cheap new plastics resulting from falling oil prices.
“Replacing virgin plastics in the market with recycled materials is important to get to a circular economy,” says Luisa Santiago, who leads Latin American operations at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation. The ultimate goal, she stresses, must come from solutions that eradicate waste production, rather than rely on it. “We can’t recycle our way out of the problem.”
In the meantime, Bureo is making a dent in Chile’s net waste problem. The Concepción facility processes 800 tonnes of nets annually, clocking 2m lb of recycled raw plastic to date. They reached profitability in 2019.
The team has scaled production, launching sites in Peru and Argentina. They have also entered an agreement with Chile’s National Commercial Fishing Industry Association, and are on track to recycle 100% of the country’s wild-caught net waste.
All Patagonia’s hat brims now use Netplus, accounting for 60 tonnes of recycled material. Matt Dwyer, who leads Patagonia’s materials innovation and development team, says the hats are just the beginning.
“We have to provide whatever economic incentive we can for these materials to get recycled into high-quality durable goods, like a jacket you’re going to wear for 25 or 30 years,” he explains. “It’s about proving it can be done.”
Until recently, most discarded fishing nets in this coastal fishing village were dumped straight into the sea – contributing to the massive plastic pollution crisis that’s choking the planet’s oceans.
“If you have a broken net, you throw it anywhere you can,” says Ramon Maldonado, a fisherman in Tumbes.
But a startup called Bureo – founded by three North American surfers – is collaborating with fishermen like Maldonado to keep hundreds of tonnes of discarded nets out of the ocean each year.
Nets are sorted, cleaned, and cut in Bureo’s warehouse in Concepción, a city a few miles from Tumbes. Here they are turned into 100% recycled polyester and nylon pellets, called NetPlus, which are sold to companies as a sustainable alternative to first-use plastics.
Today NetPlus is used in Patagonia’s hat brims, Trek bike parts, Humanscale office chairs – and even sustainable Jenga sets.
Bureo joins dozens of initiatives addressing an urgent environmental question: how do we tackle our ocean plastic problem? And can we do it without reducing plastic use?
While it is challenging to gauge exactly how much plastic has accumulated in the world’s oceans, an estimated 8m tonnes of new plastic pollution enters oceans every year. The oil industry is investing in a huge surge of plastic production, which is expected to grow by 40% by 2030. Studies have also shown the proliferation of single-use plastic is accelerating climate change through greenhouse gas emissions at every stage of its lifecycle.
If current trends continue, by 2050 there could be more plastic in the ocean than fish by weight, according to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
Northern Point, Girlfriend Collective and Rothy’s are all budding companies producing clothing entirely from ocean plastics. Larger brands such as Nike, Adidas and Fjallraven have also launched garments from recycled ocean plastic.
The plastics industry has long pushed recycling as the solution to pollution. In reality, less than 10% of the plastic produced in the US each year is recycled. This is in part because it is hard to make recycling initiatives profitable, as Bureo learned firsthand when they tried to produce sustainable skateboards in 2013.
“Ocean plastic is not one type of plastic that can be used for high-value products, it is mixed and degraded and needs to be separated,” says David Stover, who founded Bureo alongside Ben Kneppers and Kevin Ahearn.
Durable products need to be made from quality substances. Wading through masses of ocean trash and sourcing key material is time-consuming and financially draining.
The company met with scientists and coastal communities in Chile to vet different materials. They found that rather than smaller plastics such as bottles and six-pack rings, coastal communities were particularly burdened by fishing nets piling up on beaches.
Nets account for 10% of the ocean’s plastics, according to a United Nations report. Heavy and cumbersome, they choke land mammals and pollute sea beds and beaches. And fishermen in Chile were desperate to get rid of them.
“It was a burden and they had no solution for it,” says Kneppers.
Kneppers spent two years living in Chilean coastal villages, working directly with fishermen to flesh out how to collect and process the nets. Bureo compensates artisanal fishermen for their collaboration, while industrial vessels can earn environmental certifications by participating.
Curbing global plastic production, however, may prove the bigger challenge, especially given a likely surge in cheap new plastics resulting from falling oil prices.
“Replacing virgin plastics in the market with recycled materials is important to get to a circular economy,” says Luisa Santiago, who leads Latin American operations at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation. The ultimate goal, she stresses, must come from solutions that eradicate waste production, rather than rely on it. “We can’t recycle our way out of the problem.”
In the meantime, Bureo is making a dent in Chile’s net waste problem. The Concepción facility processes 800 tonnes of nets annually, clocking 2m lb of recycled raw plastic to date. They reached profitability in 2019.
The team has scaled production, launching sites in Peru and Argentina. They have also entered an agreement with Chile’s National Commercial Fishing Industry Association, and are on track to recycle 100% of the country’s wild-caught net waste.
All Patagonia’s hat brims now use Netplus, accounting for 60 tonnes of recycled material. Matt Dwyer, who leads Patagonia’s materials innovation and development team, says the hats are just the beginning.
“We have to provide whatever economic incentive we can for these materials to get recycled into high-quality durable goods, like a jacket you’re going to wear for 25 or 30 years,” he explains. “It’s about proving it can be done.”
Global warming to cause ‘catastrophic’ species loss: study
April 9, 2020
By Agence France-Presse - raw story
Global warming will cause “catastrophic” biodiversity loss across the world if greenhouse gas emissions aren’t curbed, with some ecosystems liable to collapse as soon as 2030, according to new research into where and when die-offs may occur.
Earth has never in human history warmed so quickly or uniformly as currently, but a variety of factors affect temperatures in individual regions, with significant seasonal and geographic variation.
Scientists predict that at the current level of manmade carbon emissions, Earth is on course to heat up to four degrees Celsius by 2100.
Instead of looking at global trends, researchers in Britain, the United States and South Africa looked at more than 150 years of climate data and cross-referenced that with the spread of more than 30,000 species of birds, mammals, reptiles and fish.
They then divided the globe into 100 square kilometre (39 square mile) segments, and modelled the temperature trends and effects this would have on wildlife in a given area.
Writing in the journal Nature, they concluded that under emissions as usual — known as the RCP8.5 scenario — up to 73 percent of species will experience unprecedented warming with potentially disastrous effects for populations.
Alex Pigot, from University College London’s Centre for Biodiversity and Environment, said that the models showed that animal populations were liable to collapse once they cross a temperature “horizon” — being exposed to heat they’re not evolved to handle.
“As we pass this threshold we expect the risk of local extinction to increase substantially,” Pigot told AFP.
“It’s not a slippery slope, but a series of cliff edges, hitting different areas at different times,” he said.
The models change dramatically according to each emissions pathway.
For example, at 4C of warming 15 percent of all animals could see extreme heat that could cause “irreversible damage” to regional ecosystems.
But at 2C of warming — the cap aimed for in the Paris climate agreement — that figure dropped to two percent, according to the models.
The researchers predicted that such unprecedented temperature events will begin before 2030 in tropical oceans.
Recent phenomena such as the mass bleaching of the Great Barrier reef suggest this is already occurring in places, the team said, adding that higher latitudes would see similar events by 2050.
Coral reefs occupy a tiny percentage of the oceans but support as much as a quarter of all marine life.
Earth has already heated more than 1C since the Industrial Revolution and planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are climbing annually.
The United Nations says humanity needs to slash emissions 7.6 percent annually by 2030 in order to limit warming to 1.5C — the more ambitious aim of the Paris accord.
“As we approach 2C of global warming, there is an alarming escalation in the risks of these abrupt biodiversity losses, providing strong evidence for the need to hold warming below 2C,” said Pigot.
Earth has never in human history warmed so quickly or uniformly as currently, but a variety of factors affect temperatures in individual regions, with significant seasonal and geographic variation.
Scientists predict that at the current level of manmade carbon emissions, Earth is on course to heat up to four degrees Celsius by 2100.
Instead of looking at global trends, researchers in Britain, the United States and South Africa looked at more than 150 years of climate data and cross-referenced that with the spread of more than 30,000 species of birds, mammals, reptiles and fish.
They then divided the globe into 100 square kilometre (39 square mile) segments, and modelled the temperature trends and effects this would have on wildlife in a given area.
Writing in the journal Nature, they concluded that under emissions as usual — known as the RCP8.5 scenario — up to 73 percent of species will experience unprecedented warming with potentially disastrous effects for populations.
Alex Pigot, from University College London’s Centre for Biodiversity and Environment, said that the models showed that animal populations were liable to collapse once they cross a temperature “horizon” — being exposed to heat they’re not evolved to handle.
“As we pass this threshold we expect the risk of local extinction to increase substantially,” Pigot told AFP.
“It’s not a slippery slope, but a series of cliff edges, hitting different areas at different times,” he said.
The models change dramatically according to each emissions pathway.
For example, at 4C of warming 15 percent of all animals could see extreme heat that could cause “irreversible damage” to regional ecosystems.
But at 2C of warming — the cap aimed for in the Paris climate agreement — that figure dropped to two percent, according to the models.
The researchers predicted that such unprecedented temperature events will begin before 2030 in tropical oceans.
Recent phenomena such as the mass bleaching of the Great Barrier reef suggest this is already occurring in places, the team said, adding that higher latitudes would see similar events by 2050.
Coral reefs occupy a tiny percentage of the oceans but support as much as a quarter of all marine life.
Earth has already heated more than 1C since the Industrial Revolution and planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are climbing annually.
The United Nations says humanity needs to slash emissions 7.6 percent annually by 2030 in order to limit warming to 1.5C — the more ambitious aim of the Paris accord.
“As we approach 2C of global warming, there is an alarming escalation in the risks of these abrupt biodiversity losses, providing strong evidence for the need to hold warming below 2C,” said Pigot.
sea level
Polar ice caps melting six times faster than in 1990s
Damian Carrington Environment editor
the guardian
Wed 11 Mar 2020 12.00 EDT
Losses of ice from Greenland and Antarctica are tracking the worst-case climate scenario, scientists warn
The polar ice caps are melting six times faster than in the 1990s, according to the most complete analysis to date.
The ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica is tracking the worst-case climate warming scenario set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists say. Without rapid cuts to carbon emissions the analysis indicates there could be a rise in sea levels that would leave 400 million people exposed to coastal flooding each year by the end of the century.
Rising sea levels are the one of the most damaging long-term impacts of the climate crisis, and the contribution of Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating. The new analysis updates and combines recent studies of the ice masses and predicts that 2019 will prove to have been a record-breaking year when the most recent data is processed.
The previous peak year for Greenland and Antarctic ice melting was 2010, after a natural climate cycle led to a run of very hot summers. But the Arctic heatwave of 2019 means it is nearly certain that more ice was lost last year.
The average annual loss of ice from Greenland and Antarctica in the 2010s was 475bn tonnes – six times greater than the 81bn tonnes a year lost in the 1990s. In total the two ice caps lost 6.4tn tonnes of ice from 1992 to 2017, with melting in Greenland responsible for 60% of that figure.
The IPCC’s most recent mid-range prediction for global sea level rise in 2100 is 53cm. But the new analysis suggests that if current trends continue the oceans will rise by an additional 17cm.
“Every centimetre of sea level rise leads to coastal flooding and coastal erosion, disrupting people’s lives around the planet,” said Prof Andrew Shepherd, of the University of Leeds. He said the extra 17cm would mean the number of exposed to coastal flooding each year rising from 360 million to 400 million. “These are not unlikely events with small impacts,” he said. “They are already under way and will be devastating for coastal communities.”
Erik Ivins, of Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in California, who led the assessment with Shepherd, said the lost ice was a clear sign of global heating. “The satellite measurements provide prima facie, rather irrefutable, evidence,” he said.
Almost all the ice loss from Antarctica and half of that from Greenland arose from warming oceans melting the glaciers that flow from the ice caps. This causes glacial flow to speed up, dumping more icebergs into the ocean. The remainder of Greenland’s ice losses are caused by hotter air temperatures that melt the surface of the ice sheet.
The combined analysis was carried out by a team of 89 scientists from 50 international organisations, who combined the findings of 26 ice surveys. It included data from 11 satellite missions that tracked the ice sheets’ changing volume, speed of flow and mass.
About a third of the total sea level rise now comes from Greenland and Antarctic ice loss. Just under half comes from the thermal expansion of warming ocean water and a fifth from other smaller glaciers. But the latter sources are not accelerating, unlike in Greenland and Antarctica.
Shepherd said the ice caps had been slow to respond to human-caused global heating. Greenland and especially Antarctica were quite stable at the start of the 1990s despite decades of a warming climate.
Shepherd said it took about 30 years for the ice caps to react. Now that they had a further 30 years of melting was inevitable, even if emissions were halted today. Nonetheless, he said, urgent carbon emissions cuts were vital. “We can offset some of that [sea level rise] if we stop heating the planet.”
The IPCC is in the process of producing a new global climate report and its lead author, Prof Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir, of the University of Iceland, said: “The reconciled estimate of Greenland and Antarctic ice loss is timely.”
She said she also saw increased losses from Iceland’s ice caps last year. “Summer 2019 was very warm in this region.”
The polar ice caps are melting six times faster than in the 1990s, according to the most complete analysis to date.
The ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica is tracking the worst-case climate warming scenario set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists say. Without rapid cuts to carbon emissions the analysis indicates there could be a rise in sea levels that would leave 400 million people exposed to coastal flooding each year by the end of the century.
Rising sea levels are the one of the most damaging long-term impacts of the climate crisis, and the contribution of Greenland and Antarctica is accelerating. The new analysis updates and combines recent studies of the ice masses and predicts that 2019 will prove to have been a record-breaking year when the most recent data is processed.
The previous peak year for Greenland and Antarctic ice melting was 2010, after a natural climate cycle led to a run of very hot summers. But the Arctic heatwave of 2019 means it is nearly certain that more ice was lost last year.
The average annual loss of ice from Greenland and Antarctica in the 2010s was 475bn tonnes – six times greater than the 81bn tonnes a year lost in the 1990s. In total the two ice caps lost 6.4tn tonnes of ice from 1992 to 2017, with melting in Greenland responsible for 60% of that figure.
The IPCC’s most recent mid-range prediction for global sea level rise in 2100 is 53cm. But the new analysis suggests that if current trends continue the oceans will rise by an additional 17cm.
“Every centimetre of sea level rise leads to coastal flooding and coastal erosion, disrupting people’s lives around the planet,” said Prof Andrew Shepherd, of the University of Leeds. He said the extra 17cm would mean the number of exposed to coastal flooding each year rising from 360 million to 400 million. “These are not unlikely events with small impacts,” he said. “They are already under way and will be devastating for coastal communities.”
Erik Ivins, of Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in California, who led the assessment with Shepherd, said the lost ice was a clear sign of global heating. “The satellite measurements provide prima facie, rather irrefutable, evidence,” he said.
Almost all the ice loss from Antarctica and half of that from Greenland arose from warming oceans melting the glaciers that flow from the ice caps. This causes glacial flow to speed up, dumping more icebergs into the ocean. The remainder of Greenland’s ice losses are caused by hotter air temperatures that melt the surface of the ice sheet.
The combined analysis was carried out by a team of 89 scientists from 50 international organisations, who combined the findings of 26 ice surveys. It included data from 11 satellite missions that tracked the ice sheets’ changing volume, speed of flow and mass.
About a third of the total sea level rise now comes from Greenland and Antarctic ice loss. Just under half comes from the thermal expansion of warming ocean water and a fifth from other smaller glaciers. But the latter sources are not accelerating, unlike in Greenland and Antarctica.
Shepherd said the ice caps had been slow to respond to human-caused global heating. Greenland and especially Antarctica were quite stable at the start of the 1990s despite decades of a warming climate.
Shepherd said it took about 30 years for the ice caps to react. Now that they had a further 30 years of melting was inevitable, even if emissions were halted today. Nonetheless, he said, urgent carbon emissions cuts were vital. “We can offset some of that [sea level rise] if we stop heating the planet.”
The IPCC is in the process of producing a new global climate report and its lead author, Prof Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir, of the University of Iceland, said: “The reconciled estimate of Greenland and Antarctic ice loss is timely.”
She said she also saw increased losses from Iceland’s ice caps last year. “Summer 2019 was very warm in this region.”
NEW SPECIES FOUND IN EARTH'S DEEPEST TRENCH HAS PLASTIC IN ITS BODY—SO SCIENTISTS HAVE NAMED IT EURYTHENES PLASTICUS
BY ARISTOS GEORGIOU - newsweek
ON 3/6/20
Scientists have discovered a new species of marine animal in the deepest trench on Earth—a find which might normally be cause for celebration. However, the researchers also identified plastics in its body, highlighting the scale of the global pollution crisis.
A team from Newcastle University in the U.K. found the creature—a type of crustacean known as an amphipod (colloquially referred to as "hoppers")—in the Mariana Trench at a depth of around 20,000 feet, according to research published in the journal Zootaxa.
The 1,580 mile-long trench located in the western Pacific Ocean has a maximum depth of around 36,000 feet. But even animals living in these extreme and seemingly remote environments don't appear to be exempt from the impacts of plastic pollution.
The researchers found tiny pieces of plastic debris known as microplastics in the body of the previously unknown amphipod. The material they identified is polyethylene terephthalate (PET)—a common plastic which is widely used in food and drink packaging.
As a result of this find, the Newcastle team decided to name the new species Eurythenes plasticus in order to highlight the fact that immediate action needs to be taken to "stop the deluge of plastic waste into our oceans," Alan Jamieson, marine ecologist and lead author of the study, said in a statement. The animal is now one of 240 known species to have been recorded ingesting plastic.
"We have new species turning up that are already contaminated and so we have missed the window to understand these species in a natural environment," Jamieson told Newsweek. "[This discovery] exemplifies the extent of the plastic problem. Species in remote and extreme marine environments are suffering as a result of human activity. Any detrimental effects on large populations are hard to grasp in new species as we didn't know what these populations were like prior to contamination."
Plastic debris is now common throughout throughout the world's oceans. In fact, one 2015 study found that around eight million tonnes of the material enters the oceans every year. Once in the water, this plastic can break down into smaller and smaller pieces, eventually becoming microplastics—which are frequently ingested by marine animals such as Eurythenes plasticus.
"Having indigestible fragments in its guts can lead to blockage, less room for food, and the absorption of nastier chemicals like PCBs which bind to plastic in water," Jamieson told Newsweek.
Lauren Spurrier, Vice President of Ocean Conservation at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)—who was not involved in the paper (although WWF supported the research)—said the decision to call this newly discovered species from one of the deepest and remote places on the planet Eurythenes plasticus was a "bold and necessary move."
"There can be no disputing the ubiquitous presence of plastics in our environment and its impact on nature," she said in a statement provided to Newsweek. "We now are seeing even more devastating impacts of plastic pollution, in that it is infecting species science is only just now discovering. While the official existence of plastics in the taxonomic record is a stark concept, this discovery should mobilize us all to take immediate strong action against this global pollutant."
Heike Vesper, Director of the Marine Programme at WWF Germany, added in a statement: "Plastics are in the air that we breathe, in the water that we drink and now also in animals that live far away from human civilization."
A team from Newcastle University in the U.K. found the creature—a type of crustacean known as an amphipod (colloquially referred to as "hoppers")—in the Mariana Trench at a depth of around 20,000 feet, according to research published in the journal Zootaxa.
The 1,580 mile-long trench located in the western Pacific Ocean has a maximum depth of around 36,000 feet. But even animals living in these extreme and seemingly remote environments don't appear to be exempt from the impacts of plastic pollution.
The researchers found tiny pieces of plastic debris known as microplastics in the body of the previously unknown amphipod. The material they identified is polyethylene terephthalate (PET)—a common plastic which is widely used in food and drink packaging.
As a result of this find, the Newcastle team decided to name the new species Eurythenes plasticus in order to highlight the fact that immediate action needs to be taken to "stop the deluge of plastic waste into our oceans," Alan Jamieson, marine ecologist and lead author of the study, said in a statement. The animal is now one of 240 known species to have been recorded ingesting plastic.
"We have new species turning up that are already contaminated and so we have missed the window to understand these species in a natural environment," Jamieson told Newsweek. "[This discovery] exemplifies the extent of the plastic problem. Species in remote and extreme marine environments are suffering as a result of human activity. Any detrimental effects on large populations are hard to grasp in new species as we didn't know what these populations were like prior to contamination."
Plastic debris is now common throughout throughout the world's oceans. In fact, one 2015 study found that around eight million tonnes of the material enters the oceans every year. Once in the water, this plastic can break down into smaller and smaller pieces, eventually becoming microplastics—which are frequently ingested by marine animals such as Eurythenes plasticus.
"Having indigestible fragments in its guts can lead to blockage, less room for food, and the absorption of nastier chemicals like PCBs which bind to plastic in water," Jamieson told Newsweek.
Lauren Spurrier, Vice President of Ocean Conservation at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)—who was not involved in the paper (although WWF supported the research)—said the decision to call this newly discovered species from one of the deepest and remote places on the planet Eurythenes plasticus was a "bold and necessary move."
"There can be no disputing the ubiquitous presence of plastics in our environment and its impact on nature," she said in a statement provided to Newsweek. "We now are seeing even more devastating impacts of plastic pollution, in that it is infecting species science is only just now discovering. While the official existence of plastics in the taxonomic record is a stark concept, this discovery should mobilize us all to take immediate strong action against this global pollutant."
Heike Vesper, Director of the Marine Programme at WWF Germany, added in a statement: "Plastics are in the air that we breathe, in the water that we drink and now also in animals that live far away from human civilization."
Study: Air pollution shortens lives by average of 2.9 years, causes 8.8 million early deaths a year
Meteor Blades
Daily Kos Staff
Wednesday March 04, 2020 · 1:10 PM PST
Published in Cardiovascular Research, a new study--“Loss of life expectancy from air pollution compared to other risk factors: a worldwide perspective”—has concluded from 2015 data that fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ground-level ozone (smog) shorten average life spans more than tobacco smoking, HIV/AIDS, violence, and vector-borne diseases like malaria. The leading culprit: the burning of fossil fuels in power plants, transportation, and the residential sector. The scientists used a new model created by other researchers, the Global Exposure Mortality Model (GEMM), that offers improved coverage of exposure to PM2.5 matter 1/30th the diameter of a human hair:
Using this model, we investigated the effects of different pollution sources, distinguishing between natural (wildfires, aeolian dust) and anthropogenic emissions, including fossil fuel use. Global excess mortality from all ambient air pollution is estimated at 8.8 (7.11–10.41) million/year, with an LLE [ loss of life expectancy] of 2.9 (2.3–3.5) years, being a factor of two higher than earlier estimates, and exceeding that of tobacco smoking.
Ambient air pollution is one of the main global health risks, causing significant excess mortality and LLE, especially through cardiovascular diseases. It causes an LLE that rivals that of tobacco smoking. The global mean LLE from air pollution strongly exceeds that by violence (all forms together), i.e. by an order of magnitude (LLE being 2.9 and 0.3 years, respectively). [...]
The leading air pollution source sector is fossil fuel use, which includes emissions from power generation, industry, traffic, and residential energy use. The residential source additionally involves biofuel use, which relatedly causes household air pollution (Figure 4). In India, for example, residential biofuel use is a main factor in both ambient and household air pollution.24 In China, on the other hand, a large part of the residential air pollution is from small-scale coal (hence fossil fuel) combustion.25,26 Since residential ambient and household pollution are not independent, the associated mortality is not additive.5,27
For North America, the study found the loss of life expectancy was 1.4 years. The worst impact was felt in East Asia, with an average shortened life span of 3.9 years. Worldwide, the estimated number of premature deaths is 8.8 million (ranging from 7.11 million to 10.41 million), the study says. Compare that with the estimated toll for smoking—7.2 million premature deaths in 2015—which shortened lives by an average of 2.2 years. HIV/AIDS shortened life expectancy by 0.7 years. Diseases passed by insects and parasites, malaria being the leading example, shortened average life spans by 0.6 years. The scientists say that violence, including war, cut life expectancy by an estimated 0.3 years.
Neela Bannerjee at InsideClimate News reports:
The findings point to a vast level of threat to human lives from air pollution, according to the study's authors. "Since the impact of air pollution on public health overall is much larger than expected, and is a worldwide phenomenon, we believe our results show there is an 'air pollution pandemic,'" said Dr. Thomas Münzel, a cardiologist at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and an author on the study. "Policymakers and the medical community should be paying much more attention to this. Both air pollution and smoking are preventable, but over the past decades much less attention has been paid to air pollution than to smoking, especially among cardiologists."
Meanwhile, the Trump regime is working on a new rule—called Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science—that would make it much harder to enact rules curtailing pollution. The proposal would require scientists to disclose all raw data for studies used to back up new rules. That would make enacting new environmental rules—say, a regulation to tighten emissions—far more difficult, because scientists often rely on medical information gathered under confidentiality agreements. And it’s not just new rules. The proposal is designed to also apply retroactively to regulations already in place to protect public health.[...]
Using this model, we investigated the effects of different pollution sources, distinguishing between natural (wildfires, aeolian dust) and anthropogenic emissions, including fossil fuel use. Global excess mortality from all ambient air pollution is estimated at 8.8 (7.11–10.41) million/year, with an LLE [ loss of life expectancy] of 2.9 (2.3–3.5) years, being a factor of two higher than earlier estimates, and exceeding that of tobacco smoking.
Ambient air pollution is one of the main global health risks, causing significant excess mortality and LLE, especially through cardiovascular diseases. It causes an LLE that rivals that of tobacco smoking. The global mean LLE from air pollution strongly exceeds that by violence (all forms together), i.e. by an order of magnitude (LLE being 2.9 and 0.3 years, respectively). [...]
The leading air pollution source sector is fossil fuel use, which includes emissions from power generation, industry, traffic, and residential energy use. The residential source additionally involves biofuel use, which relatedly causes household air pollution (Figure 4). In India, for example, residential biofuel use is a main factor in both ambient and household air pollution.24 In China, on the other hand, a large part of the residential air pollution is from small-scale coal (hence fossil fuel) combustion.25,26 Since residential ambient and household pollution are not independent, the associated mortality is not additive.5,27
For North America, the study found the loss of life expectancy was 1.4 years. The worst impact was felt in East Asia, with an average shortened life span of 3.9 years. Worldwide, the estimated number of premature deaths is 8.8 million (ranging from 7.11 million to 10.41 million), the study says. Compare that with the estimated toll for smoking—7.2 million premature deaths in 2015—which shortened lives by an average of 2.2 years. HIV/AIDS shortened life expectancy by 0.7 years. Diseases passed by insects and parasites, malaria being the leading example, shortened average life spans by 0.6 years. The scientists say that violence, including war, cut life expectancy by an estimated 0.3 years.
Neela Bannerjee at InsideClimate News reports:
The findings point to a vast level of threat to human lives from air pollution, according to the study's authors. "Since the impact of air pollution on public health overall is much larger than expected, and is a worldwide phenomenon, we believe our results show there is an 'air pollution pandemic,'" said Dr. Thomas Münzel, a cardiologist at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and an author on the study. "Policymakers and the medical community should be paying much more attention to this. Both air pollution and smoking are preventable, but over the past decades much less attention has been paid to air pollution than to smoking, especially among cardiologists."
Meanwhile, the Trump regime is working on a new rule—called Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science—that would make it much harder to enact rules curtailing pollution. The proposal would require scientists to disclose all raw data for studies used to back up new rules. That would make enacting new environmental rules—say, a regulation to tighten emissions—far more difficult, because scientists often rely on medical information gathered under confidentiality agreements. And it’s not just new rules. The proposal is designed to also apply retroactively to regulations already in place to protect public health.[...]
World's beaches disappearing due to climate crisis – study
UK on course to lose a quarter of its sandy coast because of human-driven erosion
Stefano Valentino
the guardian
Mon 2 Mar 2020 11.32 EST
Almost half of the world’s sandy beaches will have retreated significantly by the end of the century as a result of climate-driven coastal flooding and human interference, according to new research.
The sand erosion will endanger wildlife and could inflict a heavy toll on coastal settlements that will no longer have buffer zones to protect them from rising sea levels and storm surges. In addition, measures by governments to mitigate against the damage are predicted to become increasingly expensive and in some cases unsustainable.
In 30 years, erosion will have destroyed 36,097km (22,430 miles) or 13.6% of sandy coastlines identified from satellite images by scientists for the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European commission. They predict the situation will worsen in the second half of the century, washing away a further 95,061km or 25.7% of Earth’s beaches.
These estimates are far from the most catastrophic; they rely on an optimistic forecast of international action to fight climate breakdown, a scenario known as RCP4.5. In this scenario of reduced ice-cap melting and lower thermal expansion of water, oceans will only have risen by 50cm by 2100.
However, if the world continues to emit carbon at its current rate, sea levels will rise by an estimated 80cm, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. If this happens, a total of 131,745km of beaches, or 13% of the planet’s ice-free coastline, will go under water.
Around the globe, the average shoreline retreat will be 86.4 metres in the RCP4.5 scenario or 128.1 metres in the high-carbon scenario, though amounts will vary significantly between locations. Flatter or wilder coastlines will be more affected than those where waterfronts are steeper, or those artificially maintained as part of coastal development.
In the best-case scenario, the UK will lose 1,531km or 27.7% of its sandy coast, and 2,415km (43.7%) in the worst case. Australia (14,849km lost) and Canada (14,425km) are predicted to be the worst-affected countries, followed by Chile (6,659km), Mexico (5,488km), China (5,440km) and the US (5,530km). The Gambia and Guinea-Bissau have short coastlines, but both are predicted to lose more than 60% of theirs.
The study predicts that the hardest-hit areas in the UK will be west Dorset, north Devon, Great Yarmouth, Barrow-in-Furness and north-east Lincolnshire. In these areas, beach retreat is predicted to be five times the national average.
“The length of threatened seashores incorporates locations that will be submerged by more than 100 metres, assuming there are no physical limits to potential retreat,” said Michalis Vousdoukas, an oceanographer at the JRC and lead author of the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. “Our 100-metre threshold is conservative since most beaches’ width is below 50 metres, especially near human settlements and in small islands, such as the Caribbean and the Mediterranean.”
Large beaches will narrow by 100-200 metres on Atlantic and Pacific coasts and the Australian side of the Indian Ocean, wiping out more than 60% of sand deposits in a number of developing countries that are economically fragile and heavily dependent on coastal tourism.
But swift action to limit emissions and fight climate breakdown could help reduce the impact, experts say.
“Moderate emissions mitigation could prevent 17% of the shoreline retreat in 2050 and 40% in 2100, thus preserving on average 42 metres of sand between land and sea,” Vousdoukas said.
The researchers projected the future anthropogenic and geological changes based on 30 years of observations.
Sea-level rise is exacerbating problems caused by construction and barriers on the shoreline such as buildings, roads or dams, which have changed the natural replenishment cycle of sandy beaches.
“In the UK, part of manmade erosion results from protecting cliffs whose wearing would normally top up the associated beaches with gravel,” said Robert Nicholls, the director of the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia in Norwich. “This happens, for example, in Bournemouth, to safeguard luxury properties built on top of fancy viewpoints.”
In some regions such as the Baltic, marine erosion is compensated by land rise. Sediments may also be brought by rivers, either naturally as in the Amazon, or resulting from artificial activities as in the Chinese deltas that accumulate residues from industrial sites upstream.
A third driver of erosion is the intensification of storms, which is associated with climate breakdown. These look on course to further erode the most vulnerable beaches; the study predicts that the British seashores facing most erosion are the east and west coasts, which are more exposed to tidal surges than the south.
By the end of the century up to 63% of low-lying coastal regions worldwide will be threatened. In these areas, both population density and development tend to be higher than inland.
“Seaward human expansion will continue, mostly in unspoiled coastlines that are particularly extensive in Asia and Africa,” Vousdoukas said. “Adaptive measures are urgently needed.”
In many places, the cost of protecting the shoreline often outweighs the benefits. For example, in 2017 a £62m sea wall was built to protect the tourist resort of Blackpool. Besides requiring indefinite spending on maintenance, such concrete defences are seen as more of a problem than a solution as they can disrupt the process by which sand is deposited by ocean currents, exacerbating erosion.
In some places the Environmental Agency has chosen to replenish beaches with sand dredged offshore. Not only is this harmful to marine habitats, mining sand from the seabed is expensive. Since 1994 millions of pounds have been spent yearly to replenish the 20km seafront between Skegness and Mablethorpe in Lincolnshire, also helping to preserve 35,000 hectares of farmland.
Dr Sally Brown, deputy head of life and environmental sciences at Bournemouth University, said: “Building defences helps maintain coastline position, but defences are known to reduce beach width or depth over multiple decades. Responding to sea-level rise means looking strategically at how and where we defend coasts today, which may mean protecting only limited parts of the coast.
“Beach nourishment schemes can help the problem, such as in Bournemouth, but these beaches need a regular top-up. Ultimately, we cannot nourish everywhere for ever, meaning that hard decisions need to be made about how much to spend and how to manage the coast in decades to come. This could affect those living on the coast, and tourists who enjoy the sandy beaches too. Sea-level rise will only make this situation worse.”
The sand erosion will endanger wildlife and could inflict a heavy toll on coastal settlements that will no longer have buffer zones to protect them from rising sea levels and storm surges. In addition, measures by governments to mitigate against the damage are predicted to become increasingly expensive and in some cases unsustainable.
In 30 years, erosion will have destroyed 36,097km (22,430 miles) or 13.6% of sandy coastlines identified from satellite images by scientists for the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European commission. They predict the situation will worsen in the second half of the century, washing away a further 95,061km or 25.7% of Earth’s beaches.
These estimates are far from the most catastrophic; they rely on an optimistic forecast of international action to fight climate breakdown, a scenario known as RCP4.5. In this scenario of reduced ice-cap melting and lower thermal expansion of water, oceans will only have risen by 50cm by 2100.
However, if the world continues to emit carbon at its current rate, sea levels will rise by an estimated 80cm, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. If this happens, a total of 131,745km of beaches, or 13% of the planet’s ice-free coastline, will go under water.
Around the globe, the average shoreline retreat will be 86.4 metres in the RCP4.5 scenario or 128.1 metres in the high-carbon scenario, though amounts will vary significantly between locations. Flatter or wilder coastlines will be more affected than those where waterfronts are steeper, or those artificially maintained as part of coastal development.
In the best-case scenario, the UK will lose 1,531km or 27.7% of its sandy coast, and 2,415km (43.7%) in the worst case. Australia (14,849km lost) and Canada (14,425km) are predicted to be the worst-affected countries, followed by Chile (6,659km), Mexico (5,488km), China (5,440km) and the US (5,530km). The Gambia and Guinea-Bissau have short coastlines, but both are predicted to lose more than 60% of theirs.
The study predicts that the hardest-hit areas in the UK will be west Dorset, north Devon, Great Yarmouth, Barrow-in-Furness and north-east Lincolnshire. In these areas, beach retreat is predicted to be five times the national average.
“The length of threatened seashores incorporates locations that will be submerged by more than 100 metres, assuming there are no physical limits to potential retreat,” said Michalis Vousdoukas, an oceanographer at the JRC and lead author of the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. “Our 100-metre threshold is conservative since most beaches’ width is below 50 metres, especially near human settlements and in small islands, such as the Caribbean and the Mediterranean.”
Large beaches will narrow by 100-200 metres on Atlantic and Pacific coasts and the Australian side of the Indian Ocean, wiping out more than 60% of sand deposits in a number of developing countries that are economically fragile and heavily dependent on coastal tourism.
But swift action to limit emissions and fight climate breakdown could help reduce the impact, experts say.
“Moderate emissions mitigation could prevent 17% of the shoreline retreat in 2050 and 40% in 2100, thus preserving on average 42 metres of sand between land and sea,” Vousdoukas said.
The researchers projected the future anthropogenic and geological changes based on 30 years of observations.
Sea-level rise is exacerbating problems caused by construction and barriers on the shoreline such as buildings, roads or dams, which have changed the natural replenishment cycle of sandy beaches.
“In the UK, part of manmade erosion results from protecting cliffs whose wearing would normally top up the associated beaches with gravel,” said Robert Nicholls, the director of the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia in Norwich. “This happens, for example, in Bournemouth, to safeguard luxury properties built on top of fancy viewpoints.”
In some regions such as the Baltic, marine erosion is compensated by land rise. Sediments may also be brought by rivers, either naturally as in the Amazon, or resulting from artificial activities as in the Chinese deltas that accumulate residues from industrial sites upstream.
A third driver of erosion is the intensification of storms, which is associated with climate breakdown. These look on course to further erode the most vulnerable beaches; the study predicts that the British seashores facing most erosion are the east and west coasts, which are more exposed to tidal surges than the south.
By the end of the century up to 63% of low-lying coastal regions worldwide will be threatened. In these areas, both population density and development tend to be higher than inland.
“Seaward human expansion will continue, mostly in unspoiled coastlines that are particularly extensive in Asia and Africa,” Vousdoukas said. “Adaptive measures are urgently needed.”
In many places, the cost of protecting the shoreline often outweighs the benefits. For example, in 2017 a £62m sea wall was built to protect the tourist resort of Blackpool. Besides requiring indefinite spending on maintenance, such concrete defences are seen as more of a problem than a solution as they can disrupt the process by which sand is deposited by ocean currents, exacerbating erosion.
In some places the Environmental Agency has chosen to replenish beaches with sand dredged offshore. Not only is this harmful to marine habitats, mining sand from the seabed is expensive. Since 1994 millions of pounds have been spent yearly to replenish the 20km seafront between Skegness and Mablethorpe in Lincolnshire, also helping to preserve 35,000 hectares of farmland.
Dr Sally Brown, deputy head of life and environmental sciences at Bournemouth University, said: “Building defences helps maintain coastline position, but defences are known to reduce beach width or depth over multiple decades. Responding to sea-level rise means looking strategically at how and where we defend coasts today, which may mean protecting only limited parts of the coast.
“Beach nourishment schemes can help the problem, such as in Bournemouth, but these beaches need a regular top-up. Ultimately, we cannot nourish everywhere for ever, meaning that hard decisions need to be made about how much to spend and how to manage the coast in decades to come. This could affect those living on the coast, and tourists who enjoy the sandy beaches too. Sea-level rise will only make this situation worse.”
The world is failing to ensure children have a 'liveable planet', report finds
Children in biggest carbon-emitting nations are healthiest, while those with tiny environmental footprints suffer twofold from poor health and living at the sharp end of the climate crisis
Saeed Kamali Dehghan
the guardian
Wed 19 Feb 2020 01.00 EST
Every country in the world is failing to shield children’s health and their futures from intensifying ecological degradation, climate change and exploitative marketing practices, says a new report.
The report says that despite dramatic improvements in survival, nutrition, and education over the past 20 years, “today’s children face an uncertain future”, with every child facing “existential threats”.
“In 2015, the world’s countries agreed on the sustainable development goals (SDGs), yet nearly five years later, few countries have recorded much progress towards achieving them,” says the report by a commission of 40 child and adolescent health experts from around the world.
“Climate change, ecological degradation, migrating populations, conflict, pervasive inequalities, and predatory commercial practices threaten the health and future of children in every country,” it says.
The commission, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations children’s agency, Unicef, and medical journal the Lancet, calls for radical changes to protect children’s health and futures from the intensifying climate emergency.
It also highlights the threat of predatory commercial practices, linking children’s exposure to marketing of fast food and sugary drinks to an 11-fold increase in childhood obesity, from 11 million in 1975 to 124 million in 2016.
The report includes an index of 180 countries that compares data on survival, wellbeing, health, education and nutrition; as well as sustainability, with a proxy for greenhouse gas emissions, and equity, or income gaps.
Norway, South Korea, the Netherlands, France and Ireland are found to be the best countries for a child to flourish in his or her early years. The Central African Republic, Chad, Somalia, Niger, and Mali are the bottom five in the list, based on the same ranking.
But when performance is compared taking per capita carbon emissions into account, Burundi, Chad and Somalia are best performers, while the US, Australia and Saudi Arabia are among the bottom 10 countries.
“When authors took per capita CO2 emissions into account, the top countries [on the child flourishing ranking] trail behind: Norway ranked 156, the Republic of Korea 166, and the Netherlands 160,” the report says. “Each of the three emits 210% more CO2 per capita than their 2030 target.”
“The only countries on track to beat CO2 emission per capita targets by 2030, while also performing fairly (within the top 70) on child flourishing measures are: Albania, Armenia, Grenada, Jordan, Moldova, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam,” the report says.
The UK is ranked among the top 10 countries when it comes to child flourishing, but placed 133rd on “delivering on emissions targets”; it is “currently on track to emit 115% more CO2 than its 2030 emissions target”.
Experts behind the report agree that “while the poorest countries need to do more to support their children’s ability to live healthy lives, excessive carbon emissions – disproportionately from wealthier countries – threaten the future of all children”.
Stefan Peterson, Unicef’s chief of health, said children living in the poorest countries are facing the brunt of a changing climate, despite having a tiny carbon footprint.
“These children face enormous challenges to their health and wellbeing, and are also now at the greatest disadvantage due to the climate crisis,” he said. “We need sustainable gains in child health and development, which means that big carbon emitters need to reduce their emissions for all children to thrive, poor and rich.”
The report says: “If global warming exceeds 4C by the year 2100 in line with current projections, this would lead to devastating health consequences for children, due to rising ocean levels, heatwaves, proliferation of diseases like malaria and dengue, and malnutrition.”
Anthony Costello, professor of global health and sustainable development at University College London, said the commission was calling for a radical rethink on global child health.
“Climate change threatens our children’s future so we must stop carbon emissions as soon as possible,” he told the Guardian. “Our new index shows that not a single country performed well on both child development and emissions indicators.
“We also call for greater regulation of marketing of tobacco, alcohol, formula milk, sugar-sweetened beverages and gambling to children, and of social media companies which target children through secret algorithms and the inappropriate use of their personal data.”
The report says children are at risk from harmful marketing. “Evidence suggests that children in some countries see as many as 30,000 advertisements on television alone in a single year, while youth exposure to vaping (e-cigarettes) advertisements increased by more than 250% in the US over two years, reaching more than 24 million young people.”
Industry self-regulation has failed, said Costello, adding that in Australia, for instance, “children and adolescent viewers were still exposed to 51 million alcohol ads during just one year of televised football, cricket and rugby”.
“The reality could be much worse still,” he said. “We have few facts and figures about the huge expansion of social media advertising and algorithms aimed at our children.”
The commission calls on governments to put measures in place “to ensure children receive their rights and entitlements now and a liveable planet in the years to come”.
“We live in an era like no other. Our children face a future of great opportunity, but they stand on the precipice of a climate crisis … our challenge is great and we seem to be paralysed,” it says.
The report says that despite dramatic improvements in survival, nutrition, and education over the past 20 years, “today’s children face an uncertain future”, with every child facing “existential threats”.
“In 2015, the world’s countries agreed on the sustainable development goals (SDGs), yet nearly five years later, few countries have recorded much progress towards achieving them,” says the report by a commission of 40 child and adolescent health experts from around the world.
“Climate change, ecological degradation, migrating populations, conflict, pervasive inequalities, and predatory commercial practices threaten the health and future of children in every country,” it says.
The commission, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations children’s agency, Unicef, and medical journal the Lancet, calls for radical changes to protect children’s health and futures from the intensifying climate emergency.
It also highlights the threat of predatory commercial practices, linking children’s exposure to marketing of fast food and sugary drinks to an 11-fold increase in childhood obesity, from 11 million in 1975 to 124 million in 2016.
The report includes an index of 180 countries that compares data on survival, wellbeing, health, education and nutrition; as well as sustainability, with a proxy for greenhouse gas emissions, and equity, or income gaps.
Norway, South Korea, the Netherlands, France and Ireland are found to be the best countries for a child to flourish in his or her early years. The Central African Republic, Chad, Somalia, Niger, and Mali are the bottom five in the list, based on the same ranking.
But when performance is compared taking per capita carbon emissions into account, Burundi, Chad and Somalia are best performers, while the US, Australia and Saudi Arabia are among the bottom 10 countries.
“When authors took per capita CO2 emissions into account, the top countries [on the child flourishing ranking] trail behind: Norway ranked 156, the Republic of Korea 166, and the Netherlands 160,” the report says. “Each of the three emits 210% more CO2 per capita than their 2030 target.”
“The only countries on track to beat CO2 emission per capita targets by 2030, while also performing fairly (within the top 70) on child flourishing measures are: Albania, Armenia, Grenada, Jordan, Moldova, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam,” the report says.
The UK is ranked among the top 10 countries when it comes to child flourishing, but placed 133rd on “delivering on emissions targets”; it is “currently on track to emit 115% more CO2 than its 2030 emissions target”.
Experts behind the report agree that “while the poorest countries need to do more to support their children’s ability to live healthy lives, excessive carbon emissions – disproportionately from wealthier countries – threaten the future of all children”.
Stefan Peterson, Unicef’s chief of health, said children living in the poorest countries are facing the brunt of a changing climate, despite having a tiny carbon footprint.
“These children face enormous challenges to their health and wellbeing, and are also now at the greatest disadvantage due to the climate crisis,” he said. “We need sustainable gains in child health and development, which means that big carbon emitters need to reduce their emissions for all children to thrive, poor and rich.”
The report says: “If global warming exceeds 4C by the year 2100 in line with current projections, this would lead to devastating health consequences for children, due to rising ocean levels, heatwaves, proliferation of diseases like malaria and dengue, and malnutrition.”
Anthony Costello, professor of global health and sustainable development at University College London, said the commission was calling for a radical rethink on global child health.
“Climate change threatens our children’s future so we must stop carbon emissions as soon as possible,” he told the Guardian. “Our new index shows that not a single country performed well on both child development and emissions indicators.
“We also call for greater regulation of marketing of tobacco, alcohol, formula milk, sugar-sweetened beverages and gambling to children, and of social media companies which target children through secret algorithms and the inappropriate use of their personal data.”
The report says children are at risk from harmful marketing. “Evidence suggests that children in some countries see as many as 30,000 advertisements on television alone in a single year, while youth exposure to vaping (e-cigarettes) advertisements increased by more than 250% in the US over two years, reaching more than 24 million young people.”
Industry self-regulation has failed, said Costello, adding that in Australia, for instance, “children and adolescent viewers were still exposed to 51 million alcohol ads during just one year of televised football, cricket and rugby”.
“The reality could be much worse still,” he said. “We have few facts and figures about the huge expansion of social media advertising and algorithms aimed at our children.”
The commission calls on governments to put measures in place “to ensure children receive their rights and entitlements now and a liveable planet in the years to come”.
“We live in an era like no other. Our children face a future of great opportunity, but they stand on the precipice of a climate crisis … our challenge is great and we seem to be paralysed,” it says.
The voices of children in the global health debate
Grace Gatera, Gabriela Pavarini - the lancer.com
Published:February 18, 2020
In the face of imminent threats arising from climate change, commercial marketing of harmful products, and pervasive inequities, the new WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission1 makes a compelling ethical and economic case for investing in the world's children. The Commission advocates for children to be at the centre of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and for the protection of their health and rights. This agenda is essential and urgent to avoid mistakes that could cost a generation the chance to grow up safely, happily, and with abundant resources. Crucially, the Commission recognises children and adolescents as active agents with rights to freedom of expression, dignity, and citizenship: decision makers in their own lives and in society at large. Integrating young people into decision making contributes to a more cohesive and egalitarian society, catalysing our ability to create a sustainable and healthy future.
As young adults who grew up in low-income and middle-income countries and members of the group of Young Leaders for the 2018 Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development,2 this vision strikes the right chord. We have seen, and sometimes experienced first-hand, the challenges of children and adolescents growing up in some of the poorest parts of the world. To different extents, we have faced challenges to our health and wellbeing, which impaired our ability to function in the world. We have risen. And everywhere we look, other young people are rising. From Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai to climate activist Vanessa Nakate, from educational rights activist Thandiwe Chama to mental health campaigner Victor Ugo, young people are expressing their powerful voice for their future, their society, and their planet.
But young people's expression of agency requires more than a motivation for civic duty. A commitment to participatory leadership must be made by those who hold substantial influence. The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission identifies several adult-made barriers to engagement, including discrimination against young people, a lack of trust in their views, and reluctance from overburdened authorities to take on additional tasks. We stand with the Commission in advocating for investments to address social norms that ignore children's voices and to create policies that promote the full and effective participation of young people.
As proposed by the Commission, children and adolescents can support monitoring and social accountability of SDGs, mobilise governments to adopt new health and sustainability policies, and help design and lead programmes and interventions. Because our problems are vast, complex, and interconnected, effective participation in tackling these problems requires innovation. U-Report, a social platform created by UNICEF, and other digital tools galvanise young people's engagement at an unprecedented scale. New qualitative methods, such as photovoice for participatory photography,3 provide a window for navigating local complexities. Researchers, policy makers, and international and local organisations must work closely with young people to develop such tools and understand their own aspirations for engagement. For instance, in partnership with UNICEF, our group of Young Leaders for the Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development is using U-Report to identify how and where young people wish to be involved in advancing the goal of promoting mental health and wellbeing in their communities and wider society.
Alongside scalability, a need exists for inclusive tools that allow for genuine and meaningful engagement from children in rural areas, ethnic minorities, gender and sexual minorities, those exposed to poverty and violence, and those who experience health challenges. In our work with the Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development on the My Mind Our Humanity campaign, arts-based approaches have allowed us to engage young people from a range of backgrounds, both face-to-face and online. Poetry and music have created safe spaces for sharing deeply personal experiences of mental health challenges and supporting each other. These approaches have allowed us to challenge stigma by reminding young people of our shared humanity. The potential of arts-based and digital tools to foster inclusive engagement and participation is important, and our capacity to empower young generations is dependent on our ability to harness these and other resources to understand their values and experiences.
The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission invites us to think holistically about children and their rights to be heard and respected, and emphasises the role of community engagement in promoting the health and development of the world's children. Children's participation goes far beyond formal, high-level platforms. Having a voice—or lacking one—defines every relationship and interaction children experience at home and in school, work, leisure settings, and other spaces they inhabit. Children are empowered when they feel safe and welcome at home and school; when they have someone to talk to if something is wrong; and when family, friends, and teachers hear their concerns and appreciate their ideas. Indeed, family togetherness and connection to one's culture are crucial for health and wellbeing, according to the children consulted by the Commission, from communities across New Zealand, Lebanon, Nigeria, and Argentina. The potential of shared experiences to harness children's health and wellbeing is enormous. By fostering a culture of connectedness and mutual respect, we meet children's needs for self-esteem and confidence and strengthen their ability to make a difference.
The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission presents a candid assessment of the threats children face and the sombre implications for their future. But the Commission also presents a clear vision for making a better world, for them and with them. Too often have we seen young people sidelined while those who have the power to make a change hesitate. For too long have young people been silenced, mocked, and judged for their bold ambitions to challenge the status quo. We will not be deterred. Now and always, the voices of children will call for an inclusive, fair, and sustainable future.
As young adults who grew up in low-income and middle-income countries and members of the group of Young Leaders for the 2018 Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development,2 this vision strikes the right chord. We have seen, and sometimes experienced first-hand, the challenges of children and adolescents growing up in some of the poorest parts of the world. To different extents, we have faced challenges to our health and wellbeing, which impaired our ability to function in the world. We have risen. And everywhere we look, other young people are rising. From Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai to climate activist Vanessa Nakate, from educational rights activist Thandiwe Chama to mental health campaigner Victor Ugo, young people are expressing their powerful voice for their future, their society, and their planet.
But young people's expression of agency requires more than a motivation for civic duty. A commitment to participatory leadership must be made by those who hold substantial influence. The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission identifies several adult-made barriers to engagement, including discrimination against young people, a lack of trust in their views, and reluctance from overburdened authorities to take on additional tasks. We stand with the Commission in advocating for investments to address social norms that ignore children's voices and to create policies that promote the full and effective participation of young people.
As proposed by the Commission, children and adolescents can support monitoring and social accountability of SDGs, mobilise governments to adopt new health and sustainability policies, and help design and lead programmes and interventions. Because our problems are vast, complex, and interconnected, effective participation in tackling these problems requires innovation. U-Report, a social platform created by UNICEF, and other digital tools galvanise young people's engagement at an unprecedented scale. New qualitative methods, such as photovoice for participatory photography,3 provide a window for navigating local complexities. Researchers, policy makers, and international and local organisations must work closely with young people to develop such tools and understand their own aspirations for engagement. For instance, in partnership with UNICEF, our group of Young Leaders for the Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development is using U-Report to identify how and where young people wish to be involved in advancing the goal of promoting mental health and wellbeing in their communities and wider society.
Alongside scalability, a need exists for inclusive tools that allow for genuine and meaningful engagement from children in rural areas, ethnic minorities, gender and sexual minorities, those exposed to poverty and violence, and those who experience health challenges. In our work with the Lancet Commission on Global Mental Health and Sustainable Development on the My Mind Our Humanity campaign, arts-based approaches have allowed us to engage young people from a range of backgrounds, both face-to-face and online. Poetry and music have created safe spaces for sharing deeply personal experiences of mental health challenges and supporting each other. These approaches have allowed us to challenge stigma by reminding young people of our shared humanity. The potential of arts-based and digital tools to foster inclusive engagement and participation is important, and our capacity to empower young generations is dependent on our ability to harness these and other resources to understand their values and experiences.
The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission invites us to think holistically about children and their rights to be heard and respected, and emphasises the role of community engagement in promoting the health and development of the world's children. Children's participation goes far beyond formal, high-level platforms. Having a voice—or lacking one—defines every relationship and interaction children experience at home and in school, work, leisure settings, and other spaces they inhabit. Children are empowered when they feel safe and welcome at home and school; when they have someone to talk to if something is wrong; and when family, friends, and teachers hear their concerns and appreciate their ideas. Indeed, family togetherness and connection to one's culture are crucial for health and wellbeing, according to the children consulted by the Commission, from communities across New Zealand, Lebanon, Nigeria, and Argentina. The potential of shared experiences to harness children's health and wellbeing is enormous. By fostering a culture of connectedness and mutual respect, we meet children's needs for self-esteem and confidence and strengthen their ability to make a difference.
The WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission presents a candid assessment of the threats children face and the sombre implications for their future. But the Commission also presents a clear vision for making a better world, for them and with them. Too often have we seen young people sidelined while those who have the power to make a change hesitate. For too long have young people been silenced, mocked, and judged for their bold ambitions to challenge the status quo. We will not be deterred. Now and always, the voices of children will call for an inclusive, fair, and sustainable future.
Half-a-million insect species face extinction: scientists
February 10, 2020
By Agence France-Presse - raw story
Half of the one million animal and plant species on Earth facing extinction are insects, and their disappearance could be catastrophic for humankind, scientists have said in a “warning to humanity”.
“The current insect extinction crisis is deeply worrying,” said Pedro Cardoso, a biologist at the Finnish Museum of Natural History and lead author of a review study published Monday.
“Yet, what we know is only the tip of the iceberg,” he told AFP.
The disappearance of bugs that fly, crawl, burrow, jump and walk on water is part of a gathering mass extinction event, only the sixth in the last half-billion years.
The last one was 66 million years ago, when an errant space rock wiped out land-based dinosaurs and most other life forms.
This time we are to blame.
“Human activity is responsible for almost all insect population declines and extinctions,” Cardoso told AFP.
The main drivers are dwindling and degraded habitat, followed by pollutants — especially insecticides — and invasive species.
Over-exploitation — more than 2,000 species of insects are part of the human diet — and climate change are also taking a toll.
The decline of butterflies, beetles, ants, bees, wasps, flies, crickets and dragonflies has consequences far beyond their own demise.
“With insect extinction, we lose much more than species,” Cardoso said.
“Many insect species are vital providers of services that are irreplaceable,” including pollination, nutrient cycling and pest control.
– Biodiversity ‘hotspots’ –
These “ecosystem services” are worth $57 billion (52 billion euros) a year in the United States alone, earlier research has found.
Globally, crops that require insect pollination have an economic value of at least $235-577 billion annually, according to the UN biodiversity science panel, known as IPBES.
Many animals rely on abundant insects to survive.
A sharp drop in bird numbers across Europe and the United States, for example, has been linked to the collapse of insect populations decimated by pesticide use.
Scientists estimate the number of insect species at about 5.5 million. Only a fifth of them have been identified and named.
“The number of threatened and extinct insect species is woefully underestimated because so many are rare or undescribed,” Cardoso said.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species has evaluated only some 8,400 species of insects out of one million known to exist.
Five to 10 percent of all insect species have died out since the industrial era kicked into high gear some 200 years ago.
Half of indigenous species of plants and vertebrates are found exclusively in some three dozen biodiversity “hotspots” that cover on 2.5 percent of Earth surface.
“These hotspots likely harbour a similar percentage of endemic insect species,” said the study titled “Scientists’ warning to humanity on insect extinctions,” published in Conservation Biology.
A quarter century ago conservation scientists issued a “Warning to Humanity” about the collapse of Nature. In 2017, they issued a second warning, signed by 15,000 scientists.
The new study, titled “Scientists’ warning to humanity on insect extinctions”, was published in the journal Conservation Biology.
“The current insect extinction crisis is deeply worrying,” said Pedro Cardoso, a biologist at the Finnish Museum of Natural History and lead author of a review study published Monday.
“Yet, what we know is only the tip of the iceberg,” he told AFP.
The disappearance of bugs that fly, crawl, burrow, jump and walk on water is part of a gathering mass extinction event, only the sixth in the last half-billion years.
The last one was 66 million years ago, when an errant space rock wiped out land-based dinosaurs and most other life forms.
This time we are to blame.
“Human activity is responsible for almost all insect population declines and extinctions,” Cardoso told AFP.
The main drivers are dwindling and degraded habitat, followed by pollutants — especially insecticides — and invasive species.
Over-exploitation — more than 2,000 species of insects are part of the human diet — and climate change are also taking a toll.
The decline of butterflies, beetles, ants, bees, wasps, flies, crickets and dragonflies has consequences far beyond their own demise.
“With insect extinction, we lose much more than species,” Cardoso said.
“Many insect species are vital providers of services that are irreplaceable,” including pollination, nutrient cycling and pest control.
– Biodiversity ‘hotspots’ –
These “ecosystem services” are worth $57 billion (52 billion euros) a year in the United States alone, earlier research has found.
Globally, crops that require insect pollination have an economic value of at least $235-577 billion annually, according to the UN biodiversity science panel, known as IPBES.
Many animals rely on abundant insects to survive.
A sharp drop in bird numbers across Europe and the United States, for example, has been linked to the collapse of insect populations decimated by pesticide use.
Scientists estimate the number of insect species at about 5.5 million. Only a fifth of them have been identified and named.
“The number of threatened and extinct insect species is woefully underestimated because so many are rare or undescribed,” Cardoso said.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species has evaluated only some 8,400 species of insects out of one million known to exist.
Five to 10 percent of all insect species have died out since the industrial era kicked into high gear some 200 years ago.
Half of indigenous species of plants and vertebrates are found exclusively in some three dozen biodiversity “hotspots” that cover on 2.5 percent of Earth surface.
“These hotspots likely harbour a similar percentage of endemic insect species,” said the study titled “Scientists’ warning to humanity on insect extinctions,” published in Conservation Biology.
A quarter century ago conservation scientists issued a “Warning to Humanity” about the collapse of Nature. In 2017, they issued a second warning, signed by 15,000 scientists.
The new study, titled “Scientists’ warning to humanity on insect extinctions”, was published in the journal Conservation Biology.
Scientists fear the ‘doomsday glacier’ is in even more trouble than we feared
Julia Conley / Common Dreams - alternet
January 31, 2020
A study by British and American scientists revealed that a massive sheet of ice known as the “doomsday glacier” is melting faster than experts previously believed—edging the world closer to a possible sea-level rise of more than 10 feet.
Researchers at New York University and the British Antarctic Survey drilled through nearly 2,000 feet of ice in the Thwaites glacier in West Antarctica, to measure temperatures at the 75-mile wide ice sheet’s “grounding line,” where the ice meets the ocean.
The water just beneath the ice was found to be 32º Fahrenheit—more than 2º above freezing temperature in the Antarctic region.
The findings have “huge implications for global sea level rise,” NYU scientist David Holland said in a statement.
350.org co-founder and author Bill McKibben was among the climate action campaigners who expressed alarm over the new study.
“Oh, damn,” McKibben wrote on social media.
The researchers expressed concern that the water beneath the glacier could be even warmer in other areas.
Scientists refer to Thwaites as the “doomsday glacier” due to the dire implications its rapid melting could have for the planet. Though a 10-foot sea-level rise would likely take years, the melting of the glacier could eventually mean the U.S. would lose 28,800 square miles of coastal land—pushing 12.3 million people currently living in those areas out of their homes.
“Warm waters in this part of the world, as remote as they may seem, should serve as a warning to all of us about the potential dire changes to the planet brought about by climate change,” Holland said.
The Thwaites glacier has lost 600 billion tons of ice over the past several decades, accelerating to as many as 50 billion tons per year in recent years.
“There is very warm water there, and clearly, it could not have been there forever, or the glacier could not be there,” Holland told the Washington Post of the recent findings, suggesting the water has gotten warmer recently.
Scientists are especially concerned about the Thwaites because its configuration is an example of “marine ice sheet instability.”
As Chris Mooney wrote at the Post:
Thwaites gets deeper and thicker from its oceanfront region back into its interior in the heart of West Antarctica. This is known to be an unstable configuration for a glacier, because as the ocean continues to eat away at its base, the glacier becomes thicker, so more ice is exposed to the ocean. In turn, that ice flows outward faster.
BBC released a short video detailing the scientists’ journey to the Thwaites glacier and their findings.
“The ice rises almost a mile from the sea bed and it’s collapsing into the sea at two miles a year,” the narration explains. “If Thwaites melts, it will increase sea levels worldwide by half a meter. But it sits in the middle of the Antarctic ice sheet and there’s three meters more of sea level rise locked up in there.”
“That is really, really bad,” Holland told the Post of the most recent discovery. “That’s not a sustainable situation for that glacier.”
Researchers at New York University and the British Antarctic Survey drilled through nearly 2,000 feet of ice in the Thwaites glacier in West Antarctica, to measure temperatures at the 75-mile wide ice sheet’s “grounding line,” where the ice meets the ocean.
The water just beneath the ice was found to be 32º Fahrenheit—more than 2º above freezing temperature in the Antarctic region.
The findings have “huge implications for global sea level rise,” NYU scientist David Holland said in a statement.
350.org co-founder and author Bill McKibben was among the climate action campaigners who expressed alarm over the new study.
“Oh, damn,” McKibben wrote on social media.
The researchers expressed concern that the water beneath the glacier could be even warmer in other areas.
Scientists refer to Thwaites as the “doomsday glacier” due to the dire implications its rapid melting could have for the planet. Though a 10-foot sea-level rise would likely take years, the melting of the glacier could eventually mean the U.S. would lose 28,800 square miles of coastal land—pushing 12.3 million people currently living in those areas out of their homes.
“Warm waters in this part of the world, as remote as they may seem, should serve as a warning to all of us about the potential dire changes to the planet brought about by climate change,” Holland said.
The Thwaites glacier has lost 600 billion tons of ice over the past several decades, accelerating to as many as 50 billion tons per year in recent years.
“There is very warm water there, and clearly, it could not have been there forever, or the glacier could not be there,” Holland told the Washington Post of the recent findings, suggesting the water has gotten warmer recently.
Scientists are especially concerned about the Thwaites because its configuration is an example of “marine ice sheet instability.”
As Chris Mooney wrote at the Post:
Thwaites gets deeper and thicker from its oceanfront region back into its interior in the heart of West Antarctica. This is known to be an unstable configuration for a glacier, because as the ocean continues to eat away at its base, the glacier becomes thicker, so more ice is exposed to the ocean. In turn, that ice flows outward faster.
BBC released a short video detailing the scientists’ journey to the Thwaites glacier and their findings.
“The ice rises almost a mile from the sea bed and it’s collapsing into the sea at two miles a year,” the narration explains. “If Thwaites melts, it will increase sea levels worldwide by half a meter. But it sits in the middle of the Antarctic ice sheet and there’s three meters more of sea level rise locked up in there.”
“That is really, really bad,” Holland told the Post of the most recent discovery. “That’s not a sustainable situation for that glacier.”
Relative of extinct tortoise located in Galapagos
February 1, 2020
By Agence France-Presse - raw story
A scientific expedition to the Galapagos Islands has discovered a tortoise with a “strong” genetic link to a presumed-extinct subspecies made famous by the popular Lonesome George, national park officials said Friday.
George, the last known member of the Chelonoidis nigra abingdonii Pinta tortoise species, died in 2012 in captivity aged over 100 after refusing to provide any offspring.
The Galapagos National Parks (PNG) said the expedition had discovered a young, female specimen deemed “a high-importance find because it has a strong genetic component of the species ‘Chelonoidis abingdonii.'”
She “could be a direct descendant of a pure individual, which could still be alive somewhere,” the park said.
Park rangers and scientists from PNG and the Galapagos Conservancy found an additional 29 tortoises — 11 males and 18 females — that share part of their genetic makeup with the Chelonoidis niger Floreana subspecies, also thought to be extinct.
Researchers chose Wolf Volcano for their expedition because whalers and pirates who would eat the animals were thought to have dumped some of the tortoises there in the past to lighten their ships’ loads.
The Galapagos Islands, located 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) off the coast of Ecuador in the Pacific Ocean, were made famous by Charles Darwin’s studies of their breathtaking biodiversity.
The park says there are 10,000 to 12,000 tortoises on the volcano.
George, the last known member of the Chelonoidis nigra abingdonii Pinta tortoise species, died in 2012 in captivity aged over 100 after refusing to provide any offspring.
The Galapagos National Parks (PNG) said the expedition had discovered a young, female specimen deemed “a high-importance find because it has a strong genetic component of the species ‘Chelonoidis abingdonii.'”
She “could be a direct descendant of a pure individual, which could still be alive somewhere,” the park said.
Park rangers and scientists from PNG and the Galapagos Conservancy found an additional 29 tortoises — 11 males and 18 females — that share part of their genetic makeup with the Chelonoidis niger Floreana subspecies, also thought to be extinct.
Researchers chose Wolf Volcano for their expedition because whalers and pirates who would eat the animals were thought to have dumped some of the tortoises there in the past to lighten their ships’ loads.
The Galapagos Islands, located 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) off the coast of Ecuador in the Pacific Ocean, were made famous by Charles Darwin’s studies of their breathtaking biodiversity.
The park says there are 10,000 to 12,000 tortoises on the volcano.
Tropical Forests Are Losing the Ability to Absorb CO2, Study Says
BY Daisy Dunne, Carbon Brief - truthout
PUBLISHED January 28, 2020
The world’s tropical forests are losing their ability to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, while boreal forests are absorbing emissions at an increasingly fast rate, a study finds.
The new analysis uses a combination of remote-sensing data and modelling to create a detailed picture of carbon loss and gain across all of Earth’s biomes from 1992 to 2015.
It shows a diverging picture in the world’s two most important ecosystems for storing carbon on land: tropical rainforests and “boreal” forests, which are found in the cold climate of the high latitudes.
The chief driver of carbon loss in tropical forests over the study period was deforestation. Particularly affected areas are likely to include the Amazon, Indonesia and southeastern Asia, the lead author tells Carbon Brief.
It is not fully clear what is driving carbon gains in boreal forests, another scientist tells Carbon Brief. However, one likely driver is the “CO2 fertilisation effect” — a term describing how increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere can boost plant growth.
Overall, the findings paint a comprehensive picture of a “worrying” shift in the ability of tropical forests to absorb CO2 emissions, she adds.
Evergreen
Around 30% of the greenhouse gas emissions from human activity are absorbed by the land — making it an important “carbon sink”.
The land takes in CO2 from the atmosphere when trees and other types of vegetation carry out photosynthesis, the process where plants use CO2 to build new materials, such as shoots, roots and leaves. This means that, as long as plants are alive, they can act as long-term “sinks” of CO2.
The new study, published in Nature Ecology and Evolution, uses a host of techniques to create a detailed picture of carbon loss and gain from 1992 to 2015 across all of the world’s biomes, which include drylands, sparse land, tundra (an Arctic environment) and temperate, boreal and tropical regions.
---
To analyse carbon storage in each region, the authors use a combination of modelling and remote-sensing data. This data comes from satellites that use microwaves to detect changes in “above-ground biomass” — a measure of all the living plant matter that covers the land’s surface, including branches, leaves, trunks and fallen foliage.
In line with previous research, the study finds that tropical and boreal forests are the most important biomes for storing carbon. Together, these two biomes accounted for more than half (53%) the carbon held by land over the study period.
However, these two regions are now showing “divergence” in their ability to store carbon, says Dr Torben Tagesson, study lead author and researcher at Lund University in Sweden. He tells Carbon Brief:
“This study gives us an insight in how this CO2 uptake is distributed across the world — and we show that the contribution of the tropical forests is substantially decreasing. At the same time, the contribution of boreal forests is increasing.”
Overall, the land carbon sink increased over the study period — largely as a result of the boreal forests absorbing more CO2, he adds. The study finds that the land sink added grew by an additional 1bn tonnes of carbon from 1992-2015.
---
“Plant Food”
The reason why boreal forests are absorbing CO2 at an increasingly fast rate is more difficult to tease out, says Tagesson. The study finds that both land-use change and meteorological factors played “minor roles” in the observed increase in boreal carbon storage over the study period.
However, it is likely that the “CO2 fertilisation effect” is playing a role, he adds. Plants use CO2 in photosynthesis and, so, as humans emit more of it, it appears that plants are growing faster — and storing more carbon.
Though the CO2 fertilisation effect has boosted the ability of boreal forests to absorb CO2 over the study period, it is possible that this effect may slow down or even reverse, says Prof Anja Rammig, a researcher of land-surface interactions from the Technical University of Munich, who was not involved in the study. She tells Carbon Brief:
“The question is: How long will this carbon stay in forests? It could be that this carbon gets lost earlier because if trees are growing faster, they could die younger. If trees are dying younger, we could expect to see a completely reversed picture in 10 or 20 years.”
The new study is “very solid” and creates a “comprehensive picture” of how the land carbon sink is changing, she adds. “A real strength is the authors look at above-ground biomass, rather than just ‘greening’, which is often used in forestry studies.”
“Greening” is a top-down measurement of how much more green the land has become over time. It is often derived from satellites that can create high-resolution images.
On the other hand, above-ground biomass is a measure of all the living plant matter that covers the land’s surface. Because it takes into account all biomass, rather than making a top-down estimate, it can be seen as a more complete way of measuring forest carbon, she says.
The high-resolution tools used in the study make it “extremely novel”, agrees Prof Ranga Myneni, a researcher of climate-forest dynamics from Boston University, who was not involved in the research. He tells Carbon Brief:
“I think the value of this study is in being able to tease out contributions of different biomes to the land carbon sink and then look at the temporal dynamics of those contributions, principally in the case of tropical and boreal forests.”
The new analysis uses a combination of remote-sensing data and modelling to create a detailed picture of carbon loss and gain across all of Earth’s biomes from 1992 to 2015.
It shows a diverging picture in the world’s two most important ecosystems for storing carbon on land: tropical rainforests and “boreal” forests, which are found in the cold climate of the high latitudes.
The chief driver of carbon loss in tropical forests over the study period was deforestation. Particularly affected areas are likely to include the Amazon, Indonesia and southeastern Asia, the lead author tells Carbon Brief.
It is not fully clear what is driving carbon gains in boreal forests, another scientist tells Carbon Brief. However, one likely driver is the “CO2 fertilisation effect” — a term describing how increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere can boost plant growth.
Overall, the findings paint a comprehensive picture of a “worrying” shift in the ability of tropical forests to absorb CO2 emissions, she adds.
Evergreen
Around 30% of the greenhouse gas emissions from human activity are absorbed by the land — making it an important “carbon sink”.
The land takes in CO2 from the atmosphere when trees and other types of vegetation carry out photosynthesis, the process where plants use CO2 to build new materials, such as shoots, roots and leaves. This means that, as long as plants are alive, they can act as long-term “sinks” of CO2.
The new study, published in Nature Ecology and Evolution, uses a host of techniques to create a detailed picture of carbon loss and gain from 1992 to 2015 across all of the world’s biomes, which include drylands, sparse land, tundra (an Arctic environment) and temperate, boreal and tropical regions.
---
To analyse carbon storage in each region, the authors use a combination of modelling and remote-sensing data. This data comes from satellites that use microwaves to detect changes in “above-ground biomass” — a measure of all the living plant matter that covers the land’s surface, including branches, leaves, trunks and fallen foliage.
In line with previous research, the study finds that tropical and boreal forests are the most important biomes for storing carbon. Together, these two biomes accounted for more than half (53%) the carbon held by land over the study period.
However, these two regions are now showing “divergence” in their ability to store carbon, says Dr Torben Tagesson, study lead author and researcher at Lund University in Sweden. He tells Carbon Brief:
“This study gives us an insight in how this CO2 uptake is distributed across the world — and we show that the contribution of the tropical forests is substantially decreasing. At the same time, the contribution of boreal forests is increasing.”
Overall, the land carbon sink increased over the study period — largely as a result of the boreal forests absorbing more CO2, he adds. The study finds that the land sink added grew by an additional 1bn tonnes of carbon from 1992-2015.
---
“Plant Food”
The reason why boreal forests are absorbing CO2 at an increasingly fast rate is more difficult to tease out, says Tagesson. The study finds that both land-use change and meteorological factors played “minor roles” in the observed increase in boreal carbon storage over the study period.
However, it is likely that the “CO2 fertilisation effect” is playing a role, he adds. Plants use CO2 in photosynthesis and, so, as humans emit more of it, it appears that plants are growing faster — and storing more carbon.
Though the CO2 fertilisation effect has boosted the ability of boreal forests to absorb CO2 over the study period, it is possible that this effect may slow down or even reverse, says Prof Anja Rammig, a researcher of land-surface interactions from the Technical University of Munich, who was not involved in the study. She tells Carbon Brief:
“The question is: How long will this carbon stay in forests? It could be that this carbon gets lost earlier because if trees are growing faster, they could die younger. If trees are dying younger, we could expect to see a completely reversed picture in 10 or 20 years.”
The new study is “very solid” and creates a “comprehensive picture” of how the land carbon sink is changing, she adds. “A real strength is the authors look at above-ground biomass, rather than just ‘greening’, which is often used in forestry studies.”
“Greening” is a top-down measurement of how much more green the land has become over time. It is often derived from satellites that can create high-resolution images.
On the other hand, above-ground biomass is a measure of all the living plant matter that covers the land’s surface. Because it takes into account all biomass, rather than making a top-down estimate, it can be seen as a more complete way of measuring forest carbon, she says.
The high-resolution tools used in the study make it “extremely novel”, agrees Prof Ranga Myneni, a researcher of climate-forest dynamics from Boston University, who was not involved in the research. He tells Carbon Brief:
“I think the value of this study is in being able to tease out contributions of different biomes to the land carbon sink and then look at the temporal dynamics of those contributions, principally in the case of tropical and boreal forests.”
Race to exploit the world’s seabed set to wreak havoc on marine life
Robin McKie Science Editor
the guardian
Sat 25 Jan 2020 09.10 EST
New research warns that ‘blue acceleration’ – a global goldrush to claim the ocean floor – is already impacting on the environment.
The scaly-foot snail is one of Earth’s strangest creatures. It lives more than 2,300 metres below the surface of the sea on a trio of deep-sea hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. Here it has evolved a remarkable form of protection against the crushing, grim conditions found at these Stygian depths. It grows a shell made of iron.
Discovered in 1999, the multi-layered iron sulphide armour of Chrysomallon squamiferum – which measures a few centimetres in diameter – has already attracted the interest of the US defence department, whose scientists are now studying its genes in a bid to discover how it grows its own metal armour.
The researchers will have to move quickly, however, for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature has just added the snail to its list of threatened species. German and Chinese industrial groups have revealed plans to explore the seabed around two of the three vents that provide homes for scaly-foot snails. Should they proceed, and mine the seabed’s veins of metals and minerals, a large chunk of the snail’s home base will be destroyed and the existence of this remarkable little creature will be threatened.
“On land, we are already exploiting mineral resources to the full,” says Jean-Baptiste Jouffray, of Stockholm University. “At the same time, the need for rare elements and metals is becoming increasingly important to supply green technologies such as wind and solar power plants.
“And so industrialists are looking to the seabed where it is now technologically and economically feasible to mine for minerals. Hence the arrival of threats to creatures like the scaly-foot snail.”
Jouffray is the lead author of an analysis, published last week in the journal One Earth, which involved synthesising 50 years of data from shipping, drilling, aquaculture, and other marine industries and which paints an alarming picture of the impact of future exploitation of the oceans.
This threat comes not just from seabed mining – which is set to expand dramatically in coming years – but from fish farming, desalination plant construction, shipping, submarine cable laying, cruise tourism and the building of offshore wind farms.
This is “blue acceleration”, the term that is used by Jouffray and his co-authors to describe the recent rapid rise in marine industrialisation, a trend that has brought increasing ocean acidification, marine heating, coral reef destruction, and plastic pollution in its wake. As they state in their paper: “From the shoreline to the deep sea, the blue acceleration is already having major social and ecological consequences”.
Another illustration of blue acceleration is provided by seabed grabbing, state the authors. Article 76 of the UN convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS) allows countries to claim seabed that lies beyond the 200 miles of a nation’s exclusive economic zone. Since the first claim under Article 76 was made in 2001, 83 countries have made submissions. Put together, these claims account for more than 37 million sq km of seabed, an area more than twice the size of Russia.
Many seabed grabbers include small island states that are trying to become large ocean states in the process. For example, the Cook islands in the South Pacific has claimed an area of seabed that is 1,700 times its land surface. “The extension of the continental shelf is therefore not only transforming the geopoltical landscape, it is also substantially shrinking the area designated as the common heritage of humankind,” states the report.
Examples of the conflicts that could ensue because of the blue acceleration include the disruption of key fish stocks by drilling for gas or oil offshore; pipelines that prevent trawl fishing; and offshore wind farms that disturb tourism.
Norway provides a stark demonstration of likely future conflicts. It aims to bring about fivefold rises both in salmon farming and cruise tourism in its waters over coming years while also building more and more offshore wind farms and more and more offshore gas and oil platforms. Seabed mining for minerals is also scheduled to begin. This saturation of ocean space renders Norwegian waters as being highly vulnerable to shocks, states the report.
The South China Sea is another potential flashpoint. It is a key gateway in the region’s network of undersea telecommunication cables; a third of the world’s shipping passes through it; while half the world’s fishing boats operate in its waters – which are disputed variously by China, Malaysia, Vietnam and others. Should armed conflict break out here over any of these issues, there would be a far-reaching impact on the world’s economy.
“The relevance of the ocean for humanity’s future is undisputed,” states the report. “However, addressing the diversity of claims, their impacts and their interactions, will require effective governance.”
To achieve this, the authors call for greater accountability to be imposed on those financing the fundamental changes that are now being made to Earth’s oceans. These include both banks and governments.
In addition, the vulnerability of small island states needs to be addressed, it adds: “Navigating the blue acceleration in a just and sustainable way requires particular emphasis on the implications of increased ocean use across the globe – and how these claims could have an impact on the economic safety and wellbeing of vulnerable communities and social groups.”
The scaly-foot snail is one of Earth’s strangest creatures. It lives more than 2,300 metres below the surface of the sea on a trio of deep-sea hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. Here it has evolved a remarkable form of protection against the crushing, grim conditions found at these Stygian depths. It grows a shell made of iron.
Discovered in 1999, the multi-layered iron sulphide armour of Chrysomallon squamiferum – which measures a few centimetres in diameter – has already attracted the interest of the US defence department, whose scientists are now studying its genes in a bid to discover how it grows its own metal armour.
The researchers will have to move quickly, however, for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature has just added the snail to its list of threatened species. German and Chinese industrial groups have revealed plans to explore the seabed around two of the three vents that provide homes for scaly-foot snails. Should they proceed, and mine the seabed’s veins of metals and minerals, a large chunk of the snail’s home base will be destroyed and the existence of this remarkable little creature will be threatened.
“On land, we are already exploiting mineral resources to the full,” says Jean-Baptiste Jouffray, of Stockholm University. “At the same time, the need for rare elements and metals is becoming increasingly important to supply green technologies such as wind and solar power plants.
“And so industrialists are looking to the seabed where it is now technologically and economically feasible to mine for minerals. Hence the arrival of threats to creatures like the scaly-foot snail.”
Jouffray is the lead author of an analysis, published last week in the journal One Earth, which involved synthesising 50 years of data from shipping, drilling, aquaculture, and other marine industries and which paints an alarming picture of the impact of future exploitation of the oceans.
This threat comes not just from seabed mining – which is set to expand dramatically in coming years – but from fish farming, desalination plant construction, shipping, submarine cable laying, cruise tourism and the building of offshore wind farms.
This is “blue acceleration”, the term that is used by Jouffray and his co-authors to describe the recent rapid rise in marine industrialisation, a trend that has brought increasing ocean acidification, marine heating, coral reef destruction, and plastic pollution in its wake. As they state in their paper: “From the shoreline to the deep sea, the blue acceleration is already having major social and ecological consequences”.
Another illustration of blue acceleration is provided by seabed grabbing, state the authors. Article 76 of the UN convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS) allows countries to claim seabed that lies beyond the 200 miles of a nation’s exclusive economic zone. Since the first claim under Article 76 was made in 2001, 83 countries have made submissions. Put together, these claims account for more than 37 million sq km of seabed, an area more than twice the size of Russia.
Many seabed grabbers include small island states that are trying to become large ocean states in the process. For example, the Cook islands in the South Pacific has claimed an area of seabed that is 1,700 times its land surface. “The extension of the continental shelf is therefore not only transforming the geopoltical landscape, it is also substantially shrinking the area designated as the common heritage of humankind,” states the report.
Examples of the conflicts that could ensue because of the blue acceleration include the disruption of key fish stocks by drilling for gas or oil offshore; pipelines that prevent trawl fishing; and offshore wind farms that disturb tourism.
Norway provides a stark demonstration of likely future conflicts. It aims to bring about fivefold rises both in salmon farming and cruise tourism in its waters over coming years while also building more and more offshore wind farms and more and more offshore gas and oil platforms. Seabed mining for minerals is also scheduled to begin. This saturation of ocean space renders Norwegian waters as being highly vulnerable to shocks, states the report.
The South China Sea is another potential flashpoint. It is a key gateway in the region’s network of undersea telecommunication cables; a third of the world’s shipping passes through it; while half the world’s fishing boats operate in its waters – which are disputed variously by China, Malaysia, Vietnam and others. Should armed conflict break out here over any of these issues, there would be a far-reaching impact on the world’s economy.
“The relevance of the ocean for humanity’s future is undisputed,” states the report. “However, addressing the diversity of claims, their impacts and their interactions, will require effective governance.”
To achieve this, the authors call for greater accountability to be imposed on those financing the fundamental changes that are now being made to Earth’s oceans. These include both banks and governments.
In addition, the vulnerability of small island states needs to be addressed, it adds: “Navigating the blue acceleration in a just and sustainable way requires particular emphasis on the implications of increased ocean use across the globe – and how these claims could have an impact on the economic safety and wellbeing of vulnerable communities and social groups.”
Greenhouse gas emissions
Study finds shock rise in levels of potent greenhouse gas
Scientists had expected fall in levels of HFC-23 after India and China said they had halted emissions
Matthew Taylor
the guardian
Tue 21 Jan 2020 05.00 EST
Efforts to reduce levels of one potent greenhouse gas appear to be failing, according to a study.
Scientists had expected to find a dramatic reduction in levels of the hydrofluorocarbon HFC-23 in the atmosphere after India and China, two of the main sources, reported in 2017 that they had almost completely eliminated emissions.
But a paper published in the journal Nature Communications says that by 2018 concentrations of the gas – used in fridges, inhalers and air conditioners – had not fallen but were increasing at a record rate.
Matt Rigby, from Bristol University, who co-authored the study and is a member of the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment, said academics had hoped to see a big reduction following the reports from India and China.
“This potent greenhouse gas has been growing rapidly in the atmosphere for decades now, and these reports suggested that the rise should have almost completely stopped in the space of two or three years. This would have been a big win for climate.”
Scientists say the fact they found emissions had risen is a puzzle and could have implications for the Montreal protocol, an international treaty that was designed to protect the stratospheric ozone layer.
Kieran Stanley, the lead author of the study, said that although China and India were not yet bound by the agreement, their reported reduction would have put them on course to be consistent with it.
“Our study finds that it is very likely that China has not been as successful in reducing HFC-23 emissions as reported,” he said. “However, without additional measurements, we can’t be sure whether India has been able to implement its abatement programme.”
HFCs were hailed as an answer to the hole in the ozone layer that appeared over Antarctica in the 1980s because they replaced hundreds of chemical substances widely used in aerosols that depleted the thin layer of ozone that protects Earth from harmful rays from the sun.
But in recent years there has been mounting concern at how the potent greenhouse gas was undermining efforts to keep global heating below dangerous levels. Scientists say one tonne of HFC-23 emissions is equivalent to the release of more than 12,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.
Experts estimate that had the HFC-23 emissions reductions been as large as reported, the equivalent of a year’s worth of Spain’s CO2 emissions would have been avoided between 2015 and 2017.
As the climate crisis escalates...
Scientists had expected to find a dramatic reduction in levels of the hydrofluorocarbon HFC-23 in the atmosphere after India and China, two of the main sources, reported in 2017 that they had almost completely eliminated emissions.
But a paper published in the journal Nature Communications says that by 2018 concentrations of the gas – used in fridges, inhalers and air conditioners – had not fallen but were increasing at a record rate.
Matt Rigby, from Bristol University, who co-authored the study and is a member of the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment, said academics had hoped to see a big reduction following the reports from India and China.
“This potent greenhouse gas has been growing rapidly in the atmosphere for decades now, and these reports suggested that the rise should have almost completely stopped in the space of two or three years. This would have been a big win for climate.”
Scientists say the fact they found emissions had risen is a puzzle and could have implications for the Montreal protocol, an international treaty that was designed to protect the stratospheric ozone layer.
Kieran Stanley, the lead author of the study, said that although China and India were not yet bound by the agreement, their reported reduction would have put them on course to be consistent with it.
“Our study finds that it is very likely that China has not been as successful in reducing HFC-23 emissions as reported,” he said. “However, without additional measurements, we can’t be sure whether India has been able to implement its abatement programme.”
HFCs were hailed as an answer to the hole in the ozone layer that appeared over Antarctica in the 1980s because they replaced hundreds of chemical substances widely used in aerosols that depleted the thin layer of ozone that protects Earth from harmful rays from the sun.
But in recent years there has been mounting concern at how the potent greenhouse gas was undermining efforts to keep global heating below dangerous levels. Scientists say one tonne of HFC-23 emissions is equivalent to the release of more than 12,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.
Experts estimate that had the HFC-23 emissions reductions been as large as reported, the equivalent of a year’s worth of Spain’s CO2 emissions would have been avoided between 2015 and 2017.
As the climate crisis escalates...
Ocean temperatures hit record high as rate of heating accelerates
Oceans are clearest measure of climate crisis as they absorb 90% of heat trapped by greenhouse gases
by Damian Carrington Environment editor
the guardian
Mon 13 Jan 2020 11.57 EST
The heat in the world’s oceans reached a new record level in 2019, showing “irrefutable and accelerating” heating of the planet.
The world’s oceans are the clearest measure of the climate emergency because they absorb more than 90% of the heat trapped by the greenhouse gases emitted by fossil fuel burning, forest destruction and other human activities.
The new analysis shows the past five years are the top five warmest years recorded in the ocean and the past 10 years are also the top 10 years on record. The amount of heat being added to the oceans is equivalent to every person on the planet running 100 microwave ovens all day and all night.
Hotter oceans lead to more severe storms and disrupt the water cycle, meaning more floods, droughts and wildfires, as well as an inexorable rise in sea level. Higher temperatures are also harming life in the seas, with the number of marine heatwaves increasing sharply.
The most common measure of global heating is the average surface air temperature, as this is where people live. But natural climate phenomena such as El Niño events mean this can be quite variable from year to year.
“The oceans are really what tells you how fast the Earth is warming,” said Prof John Abraham at the University of St Thomas, in Minnesota, US, and one of the team behind the new analysis. “Using the oceans, we see a continued, uninterrupted and accelerating warming rate of planet Earth. This is dire news.”
“We found that 2019 was not only the warmest year on record, it displayed the largest single-year increase of the entire decade, a sobering reminder that human-caused heating of our planet continues unabated,” said Prof Michael Mann, at Penn State University, US, and another team member.
The analysis, published in the journal Advances In Atmospheric Sciences, uses ocean data from every available source. Most data is from the 3,800 free-drifting Argo floats dispersed across the oceans, but also from torpedo-like bathythermographs dropped from ships in the past.
The results show heat increasing at an accelerating rate as greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere. The rate from 1987 to 2019 is four and a half times faster than that from 1955 to 1986. The vast majority of oceans regions are showing an increase in thermal energy.
This energy drives bigger storms and more extreme weather, said Abraham: “When the world and the oceans heat up, it changes the way rain falls and evaporates. There’s a general rule of thumb that drier areas are going to become drier and wetter areas are going to become wetter, and rainfall will happen in bigger downbursts.”
Hotter oceans also expand and melt ice, causing sea levels to rise. The past 10 years also show the highest sea level measured in records dating back to 1900. Scientists expect about one metre of sea level rise by the end of the century, enough to displace 150 million people worldwide.
Dan Smale, at the Marine Biological Association in the UK, and not part of the analysis team, said the methods used are state of the art and the data is the best available. “For me, the take-home message is that the heat content of the upper layers of the global ocean, particularly to 300 metre depth, is rapidly increasing, and will continue to increase as the oceans suck up more heat from the atmosphere,” he said.
“The upper layers of the ocean are vital for marine biodiversity, as they support some of the most productive and rich ecosystems on Earth, and warming of this magnitude will dramatically impact on marine life,” Smale said.
The new analysis assesses the heat in the top 2,000m of the ocean, as that is where most of the data is collected. It is also where the vast majority of the heat accumulates and where most marine life lives.
The analysis method was developed by researchers at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing and uses statistical methods to interpolate heat levels in the few places where there was no data, such as under the Arctic ice cap. An independent analysis of the same data by the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration shows that same increasing heat trend.
Reliable ocean heat measurements stretch back to the middle of the 20th century. But Abraham said: “Even before that, we know the oceans were not hotter.”
“The data we have is irrefutable, but we still have hope because humans can still take action,” he said. “We just haven’t taken meaningful action yet.”
The world’s oceans are the clearest measure of the climate emergency because they absorb more than 90% of the heat trapped by the greenhouse gases emitted by fossil fuel burning, forest destruction and other human activities.
The new analysis shows the past five years are the top five warmest years recorded in the ocean and the past 10 years are also the top 10 years on record. The amount of heat being added to the oceans is equivalent to every person on the planet running 100 microwave ovens all day and all night.
Hotter oceans lead to more severe storms and disrupt the water cycle, meaning more floods, droughts and wildfires, as well as an inexorable rise in sea level. Higher temperatures are also harming life in the seas, with the number of marine heatwaves increasing sharply.
The most common measure of global heating is the average surface air temperature, as this is where people live. But natural climate phenomena such as El Niño events mean this can be quite variable from year to year.
“The oceans are really what tells you how fast the Earth is warming,” said Prof John Abraham at the University of St Thomas, in Minnesota, US, and one of the team behind the new analysis. “Using the oceans, we see a continued, uninterrupted and accelerating warming rate of planet Earth. This is dire news.”
“We found that 2019 was not only the warmest year on record, it displayed the largest single-year increase of the entire decade, a sobering reminder that human-caused heating of our planet continues unabated,” said Prof Michael Mann, at Penn State University, US, and another team member.
The analysis, published in the journal Advances In Atmospheric Sciences, uses ocean data from every available source. Most data is from the 3,800 free-drifting Argo floats dispersed across the oceans, but also from torpedo-like bathythermographs dropped from ships in the past.
The results show heat increasing at an accelerating rate as greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere. The rate from 1987 to 2019 is four and a half times faster than that from 1955 to 1986. The vast majority of oceans regions are showing an increase in thermal energy.
This energy drives bigger storms and more extreme weather, said Abraham: “When the world and the oceans heat up, it changes the way rain falls and evaporates. There’s a general rule of thumb that drier areas are going to become drier and wetter areas are going to become wetter, and rainfall will happen in bigger downbursts.”
Hotter oceans also expand and melt ice, causing sea levels to rise. The past 10 years also show the highest sea level measured in records dating back to 1900. Scientists expect about one metre of sea level rise by the end of the century, enough to displace 150 million people worldwide.
Dan Smale, at the Marine Biological Association in the UK, and not part of the analysis team, said the methods used are state of the art and the data is the best available. “For me, the take-home message is that the heat content of the upper layers of the global ocean, particularly to 300 metre depth, is rapidly increasing, and will continue to increase as the oceans suck up more heat from the atmosphere,” he said.
“The upper layers of the ocean are vital for marine biodiversity, as they support some of the most productive and rich ecosystems on Earth, and warming of this magnitude will dramatically impact on marine life,” Smale said.
The new analysis assesses the heat in the top 2,000m of the ocean, as that is where most of the data is collected. It is also where the vast majority of the heat accumulates and where most marine life lives.
The analysis method was developed by researchers at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing and uses statistical methods to interpolate heat levels in the few places where there was no data, such as under the Arctic ice cap. An independent analysis of the same data by the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration shows that same increasing heat trend.
Reliable ocean heat measurements stretch back to the middle of the 20th century. But Abraham said: “Even before that, we know the oceans were not hotter.”
“The data we have is irrefutable, but we still have hope because humans can still take action,” he said. “We just haven’t taken meaningful action yet.”
Statistic of the decade: The massive deforestation of the Amazon
December 23, 2019
By The Conversation - raw story
This year, I was on the judging panel for the Royal Statistical Society’s International Statistic of the Decade.
Much like Oxford English Dictionary’s “Word of the Year” competition, the international statistic is meant to capture the zeitgeist of this decade. The judging panel accepted nominations from the statistical community and the public at large for a statistic that shines a light on the decade’s most pressing issues.
On Dec. 23, we announced the winner: the 8.4 million soccer fields of land deforested in the Amazon over the past decade. That’s 24,000 square miles, or about 10.3 million American football fields.
This statistic, while giving only a snapshot of the issue, provides insight into the dramatic change to this landscape over the last 10 years. Since 2010, mile upon mile of rainforest has been replaced with a wide range of commercial developments, including cattle ranching, logging and the palm oil industry.
This calculation by the committee is based on deforestation monitoring results from Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, as well as FIFA’s regulations on soccer pitch dimensions.
Calculating the cost
There are a number of reasons why this deforestation matters – financial, environmental and social.
First of all, 20 million to 30 million people live in the Amazon rainforest and depend on it for survival. It’s also the home to thousands of species of plants and animals, many at risk of extinction.
Second, one-fifth of the world’s fresh water is in the Amazon Basin, supplying water to the world by releasing water vapor into the atmosphere that can travel thousands of miles. But unprecedented droughts have plagued Brazil this decade, attributed to the deforestation of the Amazon.
During the droughts, in Sao Paulo state, some farmers say they lost over one-third of their crops due to the water shortage. The government promised the coffee industry almost US$300 million to help with their losses.
Finally, the Amazon rainforest is responsible for storing over 180 billion tons of carbon alone. When trees are cleared or burned, that carbon is released back into the atmosphere. Studies show that the social cost of carbon emissions is about $417 per ton.
Finally, as a November 2018 study shows, the Amazon could generate over $8 billion each year if just left alone, from sustainable industries including nut farming and rubber, as well as the environmental effects.
Financial gain?
Some might argue that there has been a financial gain from deforestation and that it really isn’t a bad thing. Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, went so far as to say that saving the Amazon is an impediment to economic growth and that “where there is indigenous land, there is wealth underneath it.”
In an effort to be just as thoughtful in that sense, let’s take a look. Assume each acre of rainforest converted into farmland is worth about $1,000, which is about what U.S. farmers have paid to buy productive farmland in Brazil. Then, over the past decade, that farmland amounts to about $1 billion.
The deforested land mainly contributes to cattle raising for slaughter and sale. There are a little over 200 million cattle in Brazil. Assuming the two cows per acre, the extra land means a gain of about $20 billion for Brazil.
Chump change compared to the economic loss from deforestation. The farmers, commercial interest groups and others looking for cheap land all have a clear vested interest in deforestation going ahead, but any possible short-term gain is clearly outweighed by long-term loss.
Rebounding
Right now, every minute, over three football fields of Amazon rainforest are being lost.
What if someone wanted to replant the lost rainforest? Many charity organizations are raising money to do just that.
At the cost of over $2,000 per acre – and that is the cheapest I could find – it isn’t cheap, totaling over $30 billion to replace what the Amazon lost this decade.
Still, the studies that I’ve seen and my calculations suggest that trillions have been lost due to deforestation over the past decade alone.
Much like Oxford English Dictionary’s “Word of the Year” competition, the international statistic is meant to capture the zeitgeist of this decade. The judging panel accepted nominations from the statistical community and the public at large for a statistic that shines a light on the decade’s most pressing issues.
On Dec. 23, we announced the winner: the 8.4 million soccer fields of land deforested in the Amazon over the past decade. That’s 24,000 square miles, or about 10.3 million American football fields.
This statistic, while giving only a snapshot of the issue, provides insight into the dramatic change to this landscape over the last 10 years. Since 2010, mile upon mile of rainforest has been replaced with a wide range of commercial developments, including cattle ranching, logging and the palm oil industry.
This calculation by the committee is based on deforestation monitoring results from Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, as well as FIFA’s regulations on soccer pitch dimensions.
Calculating the cost
There are a number of reasons why this deforestation matters – financial, environmental and social.
First of all, 20 million to 30 million people live in the Amazon rainforest and depend on it for survival. It’s also the home to thousands of species of plants and animals, many at risk of extinction.
Second, one-fifth of the world’s fresh water is in the Amazon Basin, supplying water to the world by releasing water vapor into the atmosphere that can travel thousands of miles. But unprecedented droughts have plagued Brazil this decade, attributed to the deforestation of the Amazon.
During the droughts, in Sao Paulo state, some farmers say they lost over one-third of their crops due to the water shortage. The government promised the coffee industry almost US$300 million to help with their losses.
Finally, the Amazon rainforest is responsible for storing over 180 billion tons of carbon alone. When trees are cleared or burned, that carbon is released back into the atmosphere. Studies show that the social cost of carbon emissions is about $417 per ton.
Finally, as a November 2018 study shows, the Amazon could generate over $8 billion each year if just left alone, from sustainable industries including nut farming and rubber, as well as the environmental effects.
Financial gain?
Some might argue that there has been a financial gain from deforestation and that it really isn’t a bad thing. Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, went so far as to say that saving the Amazon is an impediment to economic growth and that “where there is indigenous land, there is wealth underneath it.”
In an effort to be just as thoughtful in that sense, let’s take a look. Assume each acre of rainforest converted into farmland is worth about $1,000, which is about what U.S. farmers have paid to buy productive farmland in Brazil. Then, over the past decade, that farmland amounts to about $1 billion.
The deforested land mainly contributes to cattle raising for slaughter and sale. There are a little over 200 million cattle in Brazil. Assuming the two cows per acre, the extra land means a gain of about $20 billion for Brazil.
Chump change compared to the economic loss from deforestation. The farmers, commercial interest groups and others looking for cheap land all have a clear vested interest in deforestation going ahead, but any possible short-term gain is clearly outweighed by long-term loss.
Rebounding
Right now, every minute, over three football fields of Amazon rainforest are being lost.
What if someone wanted to replant the lost rainforest? Many charity organizations are raising money to do just that.
At the cost of over $2,000 per acre – and that is the cheapest I could find – it isn’t cheap, totaling over $30 billion to replace what the Amazon lost this decade.
Still, the studies that I’ve seen and my calculations suggest that trillions have been lost due to deforestation over the past decade alone.
Greenhouse gas emissions
Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports
Head of World Meteorological Organization says ‘no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline’
Damian Carrington Environment editor
the guardian
Mon 25 Nov 2019 05.00 EST
The concentration of climate-heating greenhouse gases has hit a record high, according to a report from the UN’s World Meteorological Organization.
The jumps in the key gases measured in 2018 were all above the average for the last decade, showing action on the climate emergency to date is having no effect in the atmosphere. The WMO said the gap between targets and reality were both “glaring and growing”.
The rise in concentration of greenhouses gases follows inevitably from the continued surge in global emissions, which was described as “brutal news” for 2018. The world’s scientists calculate that emissions must fall by half by 2030 to give a good chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C, beyond which hundreds of millions of people will suffer more heatwaves, droughts, floods and poverty.
But Petteri Taalas, the WMO secretary-general, said: “There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, despite all the commitments under the Paris agreement on climate change. We need to increase the level of ambition for the sake of the future welfare of mankind.
“It is worth recalling that the last time the Earth experienced a comparable concentration of carbon dioxide was 3-5m years ago. Back then, the temperature was 2-3C warmer and sea level was 10-20 metres higher than now.”
Three-quarters of the emissions cuts pledged by countries under the Paris agreement of 2015 are “totally inadequate”, according to a comprehensive expert analysis published earlier in November, putting the world on a path to climate disaster. Another report has found that nations are on track to produce more than double the fossil fuels in 2030 than could be burned while keeping heating under 1.5C.
“The [CO2 concentration] number is the closest thing to a real-world Doomsday Clock, and it’s pushing us ever closer to midnight,” said John Sauven, head of Greenpeace UK. “Our ability to preserve civilisation as we know it, avert the mass extinction of species, and leave a healthy planet to our children depend on us urgently stopping the clock.”
The WMO report, published on Monday, found the global average concentration of CO2 reached 407.8 parts per million in 2018, up from 405.5ppm in 2017. It is now 50% higher than in 1750, before the industrial revolution sparked the widespread burning of coal, oil and gas.
Since 1990, the increase in greenhouse gas levels has made the heating effect of the atmosphere 43% stronger. Most of that – four-fifths – is caused by CO2. But the concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide, the two other key greenhouse gases, also surged in 2018 by a higher amount than the annual average over the past decade.
Methane, which is produced by cattle, rice paddies and fossil fuel exploitation, is responsible for 17% of the heating effect. Its concentration is now more than double pre-industrial levels.
Nitrous oxide, which comes from heavy fertiliser use and forest burning, is now 23% higher than in 1750. The observations are made by the Global Atmosphere Watch network, which includes stations in the Arctic, high mountains and tropical islands.
“The record rise in greenhouse gas concentrations is a cruel reminder that for all the real progress in clean technology, we have yet to even stop global emissions increases,” said Nick Mabey, chief executive of think tank E3G. “The climate system cannot be negotiated with. Until we stop new investment in fossil fuels and massively scale up green power the risks from catastrophic climate change will continue to rise.”
When the world’s nations agreed the Paris deal in 2015, they pledged to ramp up their promised emissions cuts by the annual UN climate summit in 2020, which will be hosted by the UK in Glasgow. This year’s summit needs to do vital preparatory work and begins on 2 December in Madrid, Spain. Chile had been due to host but cancelled because of civil unrest.
Richard Black, director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit in the UK, said: “This record level of greenhouse gases should act as a sobering reminder to governments that so far they are collectively reneging on the pledge they made at the Paris summit, of attempting to keep global warming to 1.5C. That window is closing, and Chile, Italy and the UK [must] use all the diplomatic tools they have to put emissions on a trajectory closer to what science recommends and the public want.”
The jumps in the key gases measured in 2018 were all above the average for the last decade, showing action on the climate emergency to date is having no effect in the atmosphere. The WMO said the gap between targets and reality were both “glaring and growing”.
The rise in concentration of greenhouses gases follows inevitably from the continued surge in global emissions, which was described as “brutal news” for 2018. The world’s scientists calculate that emissions must fall by half by 2030 to give a good chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C, beyond which hundreds of millions of people will suffer more heatwaves, droughts, floods and poverty.
But Petteri Taalas, the WMO secretary-general, said: “There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, despite all the commitments under the Paris agreement on climate change. We need to increase the level of ambition for the sake of the future welfare of mankind.
“It is worth recalling that the last time the Earth experienced a comparable concentration of carbon dioxide was 3-5m years ago. Back then, the temperature was 2-3C warmer and sea level was 10-20 metres higher than now.”
Three-quarters of the emissions cuts pledged by countries under the Paris agreement of 2015 are “totally inadequate”, according to a comprehensive expert analysis published earlier in November, putting the world on a path to climate disaster. Another report has found that nations are on track to produce more than double the fossil fuels in 2030 than could be burned while keeping heating under 1.5C.
“The [CO2 concentration] number is the closest thing to a real-world Doomsday Clock, and it’s pushing us ever closer to midnight,” said John Sauven, head of Greenpeace UK. “Our ability to preserve civilisation as we know it, avert the mass extinction of species, and leave a healthy planet to our children depend on us urgently stopping the clock.”
The WMO report, published on Monday, found the global average concentration of CO2 reached 407.8 parts per million in 2018, up from 405.5ppm in 2017. It is now 50% higher than in 1750, before the industrial revolution sparked the widespread burning of coal, oil and gas.
Since 1990, the increase in greenhouse gas levels has made the heating effect of the atmosphere 43% stronger. Most of that – four-fifths – is caused by CO2. But the concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide, the two other key greenhouse gases, also surged in 2018 by a higher amount than the annual average over the past decade.
Methane, which is produced by cattle, rice paddies and fossil fuel exploitation, is responsible for 17% of the heating effect. Its concentration is now more than double pre-industrial levels.
Nitrous oxide, which comes from heavy fertiliser use and forest burning, is now 23% higher than in 1750. The observations are made by the Global Atmosphere Watch network, which includes stations in the Arctic, high mountains and tropical islands.
“The record rise in greenhouse gas concentrations is a cruel reminder that for all the real progress in clean technology, we have yet to even stop global emissions increases,” said Nick Mabey, chief executive of think tank E3G. “The climate system cannot be negotiated with. Until we stop new investment in fossil fuels and massively scale up green power the risks from catastrophic climate change will continue to rise.”
When the world’s nations agreed the Paris deal in 2015, they pledged to ramp up their promised emissions cuts by the annual UN climate summit in 2020, which will be hosted by the UK in Glasgow. This year’s summit needs to do vital preparatory work and begins on 2 December in Madrid, Spain. Chile had been due to host but cancelled because of civil unrest.
Richard Black, director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit in the UK, said: “This record level of greenhouse gases should act as a sobering reminder to governments that so far they are collectively reneging on the pledge they made at the Paris summit, of attempting to keep global warming to 1.5C. That window is closing, and Chile, Italy and the UK [must] use all the diplomatic tools they have to put emissions on a trajectory closer to what science recommends and the public want.”
another testament to man's stupidity!!!
Last Surviving Sumatran Rhino in Malaysia Dies
By Associated Press - time
11/23/19
(KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia) — The Sumatran rhinoceros has become extinct in Malaysia, after the last of the species in the country succumbed to cancer on Saturday.
The Wildlife Department in eastern Sabah state on Borneo island said the rhino, named Iman, died of natural causes due to shock in her system. She had uterine tumors since her capture in March 2014.
Department director Augustine Tuuga said in a statement that Iman, who reportedly was 25 years old, was suffering significant pain from growing pressure of the tumors to her bladder but that her death came sooner than expected.
It came six months after the death of the country’s only male rhino in Sabah. Another female rhino also died in captivity in 2017 in the state. Efforts to breed them have been futile but Sabah authorities have harvested their cells for possible reproduction.
“Despite us knowing that this would happen sooner rather than later, we are so very saddened by this news,” said Sabah Environment Minister Christina Liew.
Liew said that Iman had escaped death several times over the past few years due to sudden massive blood loss, but that wildlife officials managed to nurse her back to health and obtained her egg cells for a possible collaboration with Indonesia to reproduce the critically endangered species through artificial insemination.
The Sumatra rhino is the smallest of the rhinoceros species and the only rhino with two horns. The species once roamed across Asia as far as India, but its numbers have shrunk drastically due to deforestation and poaching. The WWF conservation group estimates that there are only about 80 left, mostly living in the wild in Sumatra and Borneo.
The Wildlife Department in eastern Sabah state on Borneo island said the rhino, named Iman, died of natural causes due to shock in her system. She had uterine tumors since her capture in March 2014.
Department director Augustine Tuuga said in a statement that Iman, who reportedly was 25 years old, was suffering significant pain from growing pressure of the tumors to her bladder but that her death came sooner than expected.
It came six months after the death of the country’s only male rhino in Sabah. Another female rhino also died in captivity in 2017 in the state. Efforts to breed them have been futile but Sabah authorities have harvested their cells for possible reproduction.
“Despite us knowing that this would happen sooner rather than later, we are so very saddened by this news,” said Sabah Environment Minister Christina Liew.
Liew said that Iman had escaped death several times over the past few years due to sudden massive blood loss, but that wildlife officials managed to nurse her back to health and obtained her egg cells for a possible collaboration with Indonesia to reproduce the critically endangered species through artificial insemination.
The Sumatra rhino is the smallest of the rhinoceros species and the only rhino with two horns. The species once roamed across Asia as far as India, but its numbers have shrunk drastically due to deforestation and poaching. The WWF conservation group estimates that there are only about 80 left, mostly living in the wild in Sumatra and Borneo.
rural america
Regenerative, Organic Agriculture is Essential to Fighting Climate Change
BY RONNIE CUMMINS - in these times
FRIDAY, NOV 8, 2019, 12:29 PM
The climate emergency is finally getting the attention of the media and the U.S. (and world) body politic, as well as a growing number of politicians, activists and even U.S. farmers.
This great awakening has arrived just in time, given the record-breaking temperatures, violent weather, crop failures and massive waves of forced migration that are quickly becoming the norm. Global scientists have dropped their customary caution. They now warn us that we have to reduce global emissions, by a drastic 45%, over the next decade. If we don’t, we’ll pass the point of no return — defined as reaching 450 parts per million or more of CO2 in the atmosphere — sometime between 2030 and 2050, at which point the climate crisis will morph into a climate catastrophe. That’s when the melting polar ice and Arctic permafrost will trigger catastrophic sea rise, fueling deadly forest fires, climate chaos, crop failures, famine and the widespread disintegration of society as we know it.
To prevent such an outcome, most people now understand that we must quickly move to renewable forms of energy and reduce our fossil fuel emissions as much as possible. But it’s far less widely accepted that energy conservation and renewables can’t do the job alone.
Alongside the massive political and economic campaign to move to 100% (or nearly 100%) renewable energy as soon as possible, we must put an end to the massive emissions of our corporate-dominated food and farming system and start drawing down and sequestering in our soils and forests billions of tons of “legacy” CO2 from the atmosphere, using the enhanced photosynthesis of regenerative farming, reforestation and land restoration.
“Regenerative agriculture” refers to farming and grazing practices that, among other benefits, reverse climate change by rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded soil biodiversity. This results in both carbon drawdown and improved water infiltration and storage in soils.
Regenerative practices include:
• Reduction or elimination of tillage and the use of synthetic chemicals
• Use of cover crops, crop rotations, compost and animal manures
• Integrating animals with perennial and annual plants to create a biologically diverse ecosystem on the farm
• Grazing and pasturing animals on grass, and more specifically using a planned multi-paddock rotation system
• Raising animals in conditions that mimic their natural habitat
If regenerative food, farming and land use — which essentially means moving to the next stage of organic farming, free-range livestock grazing and eco-system restoration — are just as essential to our survival as moving beyond fossil fuels, why aren’t more people talking about this? Why is it that moving beyond industrial agriculture, factory farms, agro-exports and highly-processed junk food to regenerating soils and forests and drawing down enough excess carbon from the atmosphere to re-stabilize our climate is getting so little attention from the media, politicians and the general public?
Our collective ignorance on this crucial topic may have something to do with the fact that we never learned about these things in school, or even college, and until recently there was very little discussion of regeneration in the mass media, or even the alternative media.
But there’s another reason regeneration as a climate solution doesn’t get its due in Congress or in the media: Powerful corporations in the food, farming and forestry sector, along with their indentured politicians, don’t want to admit that their current degenerate, climate-destabilizing, “profit-at-any-cost” production practices and business priorities threaten our very survival.
And government agencies are right there, helping corporate agribusiness and Big Food bury the evidence that these industries’ energy-intensive, chemical-intensive industrial agricultural and food production practices contribute more to global warming than the fossil fuel industry.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) repeatedly claim that industrial agriculture is responsible for a mere 9% of our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. As the EPA explains, greenhouse gas (GHG) “emissions from agriculture come from livestock such as cows, agricultural soils and rice production.”
After hearing this 9% figure regurgitated over and over again in the media, most people draw the conclusion that food and farming aren’t that important of a factor in global warming, especially when compared with transportation, electricity generation, manufacturing and heating and cooling our buildings.
What the EPA, USDA, Big Ag, chemical, and food corporations are conveniently hiding from the public is that there’s no way to separate “U.S. agriculture” from our “food system” as a whole. Their faulty math (i.e. concealing food and farming emissions under the categories of transportation, manufacturing, etc.) is nothing but a smokescreen to hide the massive fossil fuel use and emissions currently belched out by our enormously wasteful, environmentally destructive, climate-destabilizing (and globalized) food system.
USDA and EPA’s nine-percent figure is ridiculous. What about the massive use of petroleum products and fossil fuels to power U.S. tractors and farm equipment, and to manufacture the billions of pounds of pesticides and chemical fertilizers that are dumped and sprayed on farmlands?
What about the ethanol industry that eats up 40 percent of our chemical- and energy-intensive GMO corn production? Among other environmental crimes, the ethanol industry incentivizes farmers to drain wetlands and damage fragile lands. Taking the entire process into account, corn production for ethanol produces more emissions than it supposedly saves when burned in our cars and trucks.
What about the massive release of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide from factory farms and the GMO, monocrop industrial grain farms that supply these feedlots and CAFOs with animal feed?
What about the methane emissions from the fracking wells that produce the natural gas that is used in prodigious amounts to manufacture the nitrogen fertilizer dumped on farmlands — fertilizer that then pollutes our waterways and creates oceanic dead zones as well as releasing massive amounts of nitrous oxide (300 percent more damaging than even CO2) into our already oversaturated atmosphere?
What about the 15-20 percent of global fossil fuel emissions that come from processing, packaging (most often in non-recycled plastic), refrigerating and transporting our highly processed (mainly junk) food and agricultural commodities on the average 1,500 miles before they reach the consumer?
What about the enormous amounts of GHG emissions, deforestation and ecosystem destruction in the international supply chain enabling Big Box stores, supermarket chains and junk food purveyors to sell imported cheap food, in many cases “food-like substances” from China and overseas to undernourished U.S. consumers?
What about the enormous emissions from U.S. landfills where wasted food (30-50 percent of our entire production) rots and releases methane, when it could be used to produce compost to replace synthetic fertilizers?
A more accurate estimate of GHG emissions from U.S. and international food, farming and land use is 44-57 percent, not the 9 percent, as the EPA and USDA suggest.
We’re never going to reach net zero emissions in the U.S. by 2030, as the Green New Deal calls for, without a profound change — in fact a revolution — in our food, farming, and land use practices.
This great awakening has arrived just in time, given the record-breaking temperatures, violent weather, crop failures and massive waves of forced migration that are quickly becoming the norm. Global scientists have dropped their customary caution. They now warn us that we have to reduce global emissions, by a drastic 45%, over the next decade. If we don’t, we’ll pass the point of no return — defined as reaching 450 parts per million or more of CO2 in the atmosphere — sometime between 2030 and 2050, at which point the climate crisis will morph into a climate catastrophe. That’s when the melting polar ice and Arctic permafrost will trigger catastrophic sea rise, fueling deadly forest fires, climate chaos, crop failures, famine and the widespread disintegration of society as we know it.
To prevent such an outcome, most people now understand that we must quickly move to renewable forms of energy and reduce our fossil fuel emissions as much as possible. But it’s far less widely accepted that energy conservation and renewables can’t do the job alone.
Alongside the massive political and economic campaign to move to 100% (or nearly 100%) renewable energy as soon as possible, we must put an end to the massive emissions of our corporate-dominated food and farming system and start drawing down and sequestering in our soils and forests billions of tons of “legacy” CO2 from the atmosphere, using the enhanced photosynthesis of regenerative farming, reforestation and land restoration.
“Regenerative agriculture” refers to farming and grazing practices that, among other benefits, reverse climate change by rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded soil biodiversity. This results in both carbon drawdown and improved water infiltration and storage in soils.
Regenerative practices include:
• Reduction or elimination of tillage and the use of synthetic chemicals
• Use of cover crops, crop rotations, compost and animal manures
• Integrating animals with perennial and annual plants to create a biologically diverse ecosystem on the farm
• Grazing and pasturing animals on grass, and more specifically using a planned multi-paddock rotation system
• Raising animals in conditions that mimic their natural habitat
If regenerative food, farming and land use — which essentially means moving to the next stage of organic farming, free-range livestock grazing and eco-system restoration — are just as essential to our survival as moving beyond fossil fuels, why aren’t more people talking about this? Why is it that moving beyond industrial agriculture, factory farms, agro-exports and highly-processed junk food to regenerating soils and forests and drawing down enough excess carbon from the atmosphere to re-stabilize our climate is getting so little attention from the media, politicians and the general public?
Our collective ignorance on this crucial topic may have something to do with the fact that we never learned about these things in school, or even college, and until recently there was very little discussion of regeneration in the mass media, or even the alternative media.
But there’s another reason regeneration as a climate solution doesn’t get its due in Congress or in the media: Powerful corporations in the food, farming and forestry sector, along with their indentured politicians, don’t want to admit that their current degenerate, climate-destabilizing, “profit-at-any-cost” production practices and business priorities threaten our very survival.
And government agencies are right there, helping corporate agribusiness and Big Food bury the evidence that these industries’ energy-intensive, chemical-intensive industrial agricultural and food production practices contribute more to global warming than the fossil fuel industry.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) repeatedly claim that industrial agriculture is responsible for a mere 9% of our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. As the EPA explains, greenhouse gas (GHG) “emissions from agriculture come from livestock such as cows, agricultural soils and rice production.”
After hearing this 9% figure regurgitated over and over again in the media, most people draw the conclusion that food and farming aren’t that important of a factor in global warming, especially when compared with transportation, electricity generation, manufacturing and heating and cooling our buildings.
What the EPA, USDA, Big Ag, chemical, and food corporations are conveniently hiding from the public is that there’s no way to separate “U.S. agriculture” from our “food system” as a whole. Their faulty math (i.e. concealing food and farming emissions under the categories of transportation, manufacturing, etc.) is nothing but a smokescreen to hide the massive fossil fuel use and emissions currently belched out by our enormously wasteful, environmentally destructive, climate-destabilizing (and globalized) food system.
USDA and EPA’s nine-percent figure is ridiculous. What about the massive use of petroleum products and fossil fuels to power U.S. tractors and farm equipment, and to manufacture the billions of pounds of pesticides and chemical fertilizers that are dumped and sprayed on farmlands?
What about the ethanol industry that eats up 40 percent of our chemical- and energy-intensive GMO corn production? Among other environmental crimes, the ethanol industry incentivizes farmers to drain wetlands and damage fragile lands. Taking the entire process into account, corn production for ethanol produces more emissions than it supposedly saves when burned in our cars and trucks.
What about the massive release of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide from factory farms and the GMO, monocrop industrial grain farms that supply these feedlots and CAFOs with animal feed?
What about the methane emissions from the fracking wells that produce the natural gas that is used in prodigious amounts to manufacture the nitrogen fertilizer dumped on farmlands — fertilizer that then pollutes our waterways and creates oceanic dead zones as well as releasing massive amounts of nitrous oxide (300 percent more damaging than even CO2) into our already oversaturated atmosphere?
What about the 15-20 percent of global fossil fuel emissions that come from processing, packaging (most often in non-recycled plastic), refrigerating and transporting our highly processed (mainly junk) food and agricultural commodities on the average 1,500 miles before they reach the consumer?
What about the enormous amounts of GHG emissions, deforestation and ecosystem destruction in the international supply chain enabling Big Box stores, supermarket chains and junk food purveyors to sell imported cheap food, in many cases “food-like substances” from China and overseas to undernourished U.S. consumers?
What about the enormous emissions from U.S. landfills where wasted food (30-50 percent of our entire production) rots and releases methane, when it could be used to produce compost to replace synthetic fertilizers?
A more accurate estimate of GHG emissions from U.S. and international food, farming and land use is 44-57 percent, not the 9 percent, as the EPA and USDA suggest.
We’re never going to reach net zero emissions in the U.S. by 2030, as the Green New Deal calls for, without a profound change — in fact a revolution — in our food, farming, and land use practices.
another of capitalism's many failures!!!
Scientists Say a Quarter of Pigs Around the World Could Die of Swine Fever
BY ASSOCIATED PRESS
UPDATED: OCTOBER 31, 2019 5:55 AM ET
(SYDNEY) — Around a quarter of the world’s pigs are expected to die from African swine fever as authorities grapple with a complex disease spreading rapidly in the globalization era, the World Organization for Animal Health’s president said Thursday.
A sharp reduction in the world’s pig population would lead to possible food shortages and high pork prices, and it might also cause shortfalls in the many products made from pigs, such as the blood-thinner heparin that’s used in people, said Dr. Mark Schipp, the organization’s president.
The disease’s spread in the past year to countries including China, which has half the world’s pigs, had inflamed a worldwide crisis, Schipp told reporters at a briefing in Sydney.
“I don’t think the species will be lost, but it’s the biggest threat to the commercial raising of pigs we’ve ever seen,” he said. “And it’s the biggest threat to any commercial livestock of our generation.”
African swine fever, fatal to hogs but no threat to humans, has wiped out pig herds in many Asian countries. Chinese authorities have destroyed about 1.2 million pigs in an effort to contain the disease there since August 2018.
The price of pork has nearly doubled from a year ago in China, which produces and consumes two-thirds of the world’s pork. And China’s efforts to buy pork abroad, as well as smaller outbreaks in other countries, are pushing up global prices.
“There are some shortages in some countries, and there’s been some substitutions using other sources of protein, which is driving up the prices of other proteins,” said Schipp.
Progress had been made toward a vaccine, but Schipp, who is also Australia’s chief veterinary officer, said the work was challenging because the virus itself is large and has a complex structure. He said a big step forward was the announcement last week that scientists had unraveled the 3D structure of the virus.
African swine fever is spread by contact among pigs, through contaminated fodder and by ticks. It originated in South Africa and appeared in Europe in in the 1960s. A recent reappearance in western Europe came from wild pigs transferred into Belgian forests for hunting purposes.
Its capacity to spread rapidly is shown by its spread from China in the past year, Schipp said. Mongolia, the Korean Peninsula, Southeast Asia and East Timor have had outbreaks as well.
He said the spread reflects the global movement of pork and of people but also the effect of tariffs and trade barriers, which sends those obtaining pork to seek out riskier sources. And Schipp said quality control was difficult for products such as skins for sausages, salamis and similar foods.
“Those casing products move through multiple countries,” he said. “They’re cleaned in one, graded in another, sorted in another, partially treated in another, and finally treated in a fourth of fifth country. They’ve very hard to trace, through so many countries.”
An emerging issue in the crisis is a potential heparin shortage, Schipp said.
“Most of it is sourced from China, which has been badly hit. There are concerns that this will threaten the global supply of heparin,” Schipp said.
He praised China’s efforts to battle the disease and said the outbreaks would change the way pigs are raised.
“In China, previously they had a lot of backyard piggeries. They’re seeing this as an opportunity to take a big step forward and move to large scale commercial piggeries,” Schipp said. “The challenge will be to other countries without the infrastructure or capital reserves to scale up in those ways.”
A sharp reduction in the world’s pig population would lead to possible food shortages and high pork prices, and it might also cause shortfalls in the many products made from pigs, such as the blood-thinner heparin that’s used in people, said Dr. Mark Schipp, the organization’s president.
The disease’s spread in the past year to countries including China, which has half the world’s pigs, had inflamed a worldwide crisis, Schipp told reporters at a briefing in Sydney.
“I don’t think the species will be lost, but it’s the biggest threat to the commercial raising of pigs we’ve ever seen,” he said. “And it’s the biggest threat to any commercial livestock of our generation.”
African swine fever, fatal to hogs but no threat to humans, has wiped out pig herds in many Asian countries. Chinese authorities have destroyed about 1.2 million pigs in an effort to contain the disease there since August 2018.
The price of pork has nearly doubled from a year ago in China, which produces and consumes two-thirds of the world’s pork. And China’s efforts to buy pork abroad, as well as smaller outbreaks in other countries, are pushing up global prices.
“There are some shortages in some countries, and there’s been some substitutions using other sources of protein, which is driving up the prices of other proteins,” said Schipp.
Progress had been made toward a vaccine, but Schipp, who is also Australia’s chief veterinary officer, said the work was challenging because the virus itself is large and has a complex structure. He said a big step forward was the announcement last week that scientists had unraveled the 3D structure of the virus.
African swine fever is spread by contact among pigs, through contaminated fodder and by ticks. It originated in South Africa and appeared in Europe in in the 1960s. A recent reappearance in western Europe came from wild pigs transferred into Belgian forests for hunting purposes.
Its capacity to spread rapidly is shown by its spread from China in the past year, Schipp said. Mongolia, the Korean Peninsula, Southeast Asia and East Timor have had outbreaks as well.
He said the spread reflects the global movement of pork and of people but also the effect of tariffs and trade barriers, which sends those obtaining pork to seek out riskier sources. And Schipp said quality control was difficult for products such as skins for sausages, salamis and similar foods.
“Those casing products move through multiple countries,” he said. “They’re cleaned in one, graded in another, sorted in another, partially treated in another, and finally treated in a fourth of fifth country. They’ve very hard to trace, through so many countries.”
An emerging issue in the crisis is a potential heparin shortage, Schipp said.
“Most of it is sourced from China, which has been badly hit. There are concerns that this will threaten the global supply of heparin,” Schipp said.
He praised China’s efforts to battle the disease and said the outbreaks would change the way pigs are raised.
“In China, previously they had a lot of backyard piggeries. They’re seeing this as an opportunity to take a big step forward and move to large scale commercial piggeries,” Schipp said. “The challenge will be to other countries without the infrastructure or capital reserves to scale up in those ways.”
SEA 'BOILING' WITH METHANE DISCOVERED IN SIBERIA: 'NO ONE HAS EVER RECORDED ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE'
BY HANNAH OSBORNE - newsweek
ON 10/8/19 AT 5:25 AM EDT
Scientists in Siberia have discovered an area of sea that is "boiling" with methane, with bubbles that can be scooped from the water with buckets. Researchers on an expedition to the East Siberian Sea said the "methane fountain" was unlike anything they had seen before, with concentrations of the gas in the region to be six to seven times higher than the global average.
The team, led by Igor Semiletov, from Tomsk Polytechnic University in Russia, traveled to an area of the Eastern Arctic previously known to produce methane fountains. They were studying the environmental consequences of permafrost thawing beneath the ocean.
Permafrost is ground that is permanently frozen—in some cases for tens of thousands of years. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, permafrost currently covers about 8.7 million square miles of the Northern Hemisphere.
Locked within in the permafrost is organic material. When the ground thaws, this material starts to break down and, as it does, it releases methane—a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide. With global temperatures increasing, scientists are concerned the warming will result in more permafrost thawing, causing more methane to be released, leading to even more warming. This is known as a positive feedback loop.
A huge proportion of Siberia is covered in permafrost, but this is starting to change. Over recent years, scientists working in remote regions have started documenting changes to the landscape thought to be related to it thawing, including huge craters. In 2016, footage emerged of the ground wobbling "like jelly."
But permafrost is also present under the ocean. In 2017, scientists announced they had discovered hundreds of craters at the bottom of the Barents Sea, north of Norway and Russia. The craters had formed from methane building up then exploding suddenly when the pressure got too high.
In the latest expedition to chart methane emissions coming from the ocean, researchers analyzed the water around Bennett Island, taking samples of sea water and sediments. In one area, however, they found something unexpected—an extremely sharp increase in the concentration of atmospheric methane. According to a statement from Tomsk Polytechnic University, it was six to seven times higher than average.
They then noticed an area of water around four to five square meters that was "boiling with methane bubbles," the statement said. This could be scooped out with buckets, the researchers said. After identifying the fountain, the team was able to take samples directly from it. Methane levels around the fountain were nine times higher than average global concentrations.
"This is the most powerful gas fountain I've ever seen," Semiletov said, according to a translation from the Moscow Times. "No one has ever recorded anything like this before."
After identifying the fountain, the team was able to take samples directly from it. Methane levels around the fountain were nine times higher than average global concentrations. The following day they found another methane fountain and conducted a comprehensive analysis of it.
Sergey Nikiforov, a journalist who took part in the expedition, said there will now be more research and experiments in this part of the ocean: "The work to study the secrets of the Arctic seas...continues," he said in a statement.
The team, led by Igor Semiletov, from Tomsk Polytechnic University in Russia, traveled to an area of the Eastern Arctic previously known to produce methane fountains. They were studying the environmental consequences of permafrost thawing beneath the ocean.
Permafrost is ground that is permanently frozen—in some cases for tens of thousands of years. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, permafrost currently covers about 8.7 million square miles of the Northern Hemisphere.
Locked within in the permafrost is organic material. When the ground thaws, this material starts to break down and, as it does, it releases methane—a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide. With global temperatures increasing, scientists are concerned the warming will result in more permafrost thawing, causing more methane to be released, leading to even more warming. This is known as a positive feedback loop.
A huge proportion of Siberia is covered in permafrost, but this is starting to change. Over recent years, scientists working in remote regions have started documenting changes to the landscape thought to be related to it thawing, including huge craters. In 2016, footage emerged of the ground wobbling "like jelly."
But permafrost is also present under the ocean. In 2017, scientists announced they had discovered hundreds of craters at the bottom of the Barents Sea, north of Norway and Russia. The craters had formed from methane building up then exploding suddenly when the pressure got too high.
In the latest expedition to chart methane emissions coming from the ocean, researchers analyzed the water around Bennett Island, taking samples of sea water and sediments. In one area, however, they found something unexpected—an extremely sharp increase in the concentration of atmospheric methane. According to a statement from Tomsk Polytechnic University, it was six to seven times higher than average.
They then noticed an area of water around four to five square meters that was "boiling with methane bubbles," the statement said. This could be scooped out with buckets, the researchers said. After identifying the fountain, the team was able to take samples directly from it. Methane levels around the fountain were nine times higher than average global concentrations.
"This is the most powerful gas fountain I've ever seen," Semiletov said, according to a translation from the Moscow Times. "No one has ever recorded anything like this before."
After identifying the fountain, the team was able to take samples directly from it. Methane levels around the fountain were nine times higher than average global concentrations. The following day they found another methane fountain and conducted a comprehensive analysis of it.
Sergey Nikiforov, a journalist who took part in the expedition, said there will now be more research and experiments in this part of the ocean: "The work to study the secrets of the Arctic seas...continues," he said in a statement.
Names and Locations of the Top 100 People Killing the Planet
“The earth is not dying, it is being killed, and those who are killing it have names and addresses.” – Utah Phillips
Jordan Engel - portside.org
may 2019
Just 100 companies are responsible for more than 70% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. The guys who run those companies – and they are mostly guys – have gotten rich on the backs of literally all life on Earth. Their business model relies on the destruction of the only home humanity has ever known. Meanwhile, we misdirect our outrage at our neighbors, friends, and family for using plastic straws or not recycling. If there is anyone who deserves the outrage of all 7.5 billion of us, it’s these 100 people right here. Combined, they control the majority of the world’s mineral rights – the “right” to exploit the remaining unextracted oil, gas, and coal. They need to know that we won’t leave them alone until they agree to Keep It In The Ground. Not just their companies, but them. Now it’s personal.
Houston tops this list as home to 7 of the 100 top ecocidal planet killers, followed by Jakarta, Calgary, Moscow, and Beijing. The richest person on the list is Russian oil magnate Vagit Alekperov, who is currently worth $20.7 billion.
The map is in the form of a cartogram which represents the size of countries by their cumulative carbon dioxide emissions since industrialization.
This map is a response to the pervasive myth that we can stop climate change if we just modify our personal behavior and buy more green products. Whether or not we separate our recycling, these corporations will go on trashing the planet unless we stop them. The key decision-makers at these companies have the privilege of relative anonymity, and with this map, we’re trying to pull back that veil and call them out. These guys should feel the same personal responsibility for saving the planet that we all feel.
Houston tops this list as home to 7 of the 100 top ecocidal planet killers, followed by Jakarta, Calgary, Moscow, and Beijing. The richest person on the list is Russian oil magnate Vagit Alekperov, who is currently worth $20.7 billion.
The map is in the form of a cartogram which represents the size of countries by their cumulative carbon dioxide emissions since industrialization.
This map is a response to the pervasive myth that we can stop climate change if we just modify our personal behavior and buy more green products. Whether or not we separate our recycling, these corporations will go on trashing the planet unless we stop them. The key decision-makers at these companies have the privilege of relative anonymity, and with this map, we’re trying to pull back that veil and call them out. These guys should feel the same personal responsibility for saving the planet that we all feel.
greed AND profit vs human beings!!!
Scientists have known burning coal warms the climate for a long time. This 1912 headline proves it.
Popular Mechanics explained that spewing CO2 into the air "tends to... raise its temperature."
JOE ROMM - thinkprogress
AUG 15, 2018, 1:38 PM
On August 14, 1912, a New Zealand newspaper’s “science notes and news” section ran a blurb headlined, “Coal consumption affecting climate.” An Australian paper ran the same headline and blurb the previous month.
As the full clipping read (emphasis added), “The furnaces of the world are now burning about 2,000,000,000 tons of coal a year. When this is burned, uniting with oxygen, it adds about 7,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere yearly. This tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the earth and to raise its temperature. The effect may be considerable in a few centuries.”
The fact-checking website Snopes.com verified the authenticity of those clippings and traced the story to the caption in a lengthy article in the March 1912 issue of Popular Mechanics on “The effect of the combustion of coal on the climate — what scientists predict for the future.”
“It has been found that if the air contained more carbon dioxide, which is the product of the combustion of coal or vegetable material, the temperature would be somewhat higher,” the article explains. “Since burning coal produces carbon dioxide it may be inquired whether the enormous use of the fuel in modern times may not be an important factor in filling the atmosphere with this substance, and consequently indirectly raising the temperature of the earth.”
The truth is, scientists have known that burning coal releases carbon dioxide that in turn warms the planet for a long, long time. Yet coal consumption has continued to rise decade after decade regardless.
Indeed, the scientific understanding that certain gases trap heat and warm the planet dates back to the 1850s. Eunice Foote discovered CO2’s warming properties in 1856, and was the first scientist to make the connection between CO2 and climate change. Irish physicist John Tyndall, who often gets all the credit, didn’t make the connection until 1859.
By the turn of the 19th century, Svante August Arrhenius was quantifying how CO2 contributed to the greenhouse effect and later made the connection between global warming and fossil fuel combustion.
In a 1917 paper, Alexander Graham Bell wrote that the unrestricted burning of fossil fuels “would have a sort of greenhouse effect.” The man who invented the telephone four decades earlier added, “the net result is the greenhouse becomes a sort of hot-house.”
That’s why stories in newspapers and magazines have appeared many times over the past century. Popular Mechanics alone has run articles on climate change in 1912, 1930, 1940, 1957, 1964, 1988, and on and on — as it explained in an article earlier this year.
But the modern media always seems surprised when the old clippings show up, perhaps because the fossil fuel-funded disinformation campaign has been so pervasive and effective in casting doubt on the science for so long.
Today, “Coal consumption affecting climate” isn’t even news. The main difference between now and a century ago, however, is that having dawdled so long, the headline should read, “Coal consumption destroying climate — and we’re almost out of time to avert disaster.”
Yet tragically, despite over a century of science, President Trump not only traffics in the disinformation, calling climate change a “hoax,” but he continues to vow to bring back coal.
As the full clipping read (emphasis added), “The furnaces of the world are now burning about 2,000,000,000 tons of coal a year. When this is burned, uniting with oxygen, it adds about 7,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere yearly. This tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the earth and to raise its temperature. The effect may be considerable in a few centuries.”
The fact-checking website Snopes.com verified the authenticity of those clippings and traced the story to the caption in a lengthy article in the March 1912 issue of Popular Mechanics on “The effect of the combustion of coal on the climate — what scientists predict for the future.”
“It has been found that if the air contained more carbon dioxide, which is the product of the combustion of coal or vegetable material, the temperature would be somewhat higher,” the article explains. “Since burning coal produces carbon dioxide it may be inquired whether the enormous use of the fuel in modern times may not be an important factor in filling the atmosphere with this substance, and consequently indirectly raising the temperature of the earth.”
The truth is, scientists have known that burning coal releases carbon dioxide that in turn warms the planet for a long, long time. Yet coal consumption has continued to rise decade after decade regardless.
Indeed, the scientific understanding that certain gases trap heat and warm the planet dates back to the 1850s. Eunice Foote discovered CO2’s warming properties in 1856, and was the first scientist to make the connection between CO2 and climate change. Irish physicist John Tyndall, who often gets all the credit, didn’t make the connection until 1859.
By the turn of the 19th century, Svante August Arrhenius was quantifying how CO2 contributed to the greenhouse effect and later made the connection between global warming and fossil fuel combustion.
In a 1917 paper, Alexander Graham Bell wrote that the unrestricted burning of fossil fuels “would have a sort of greenhouse effect.” The man who invented the telephone four decades earlier added, “the net result is the greenhouse becomes a sort of hot-house.”
That’s why stories in newspapers and magazines have appeared many times over the past century. Popular Mechanics alone has run articles on climate change in 1912, 1930, 1940, 1957, 1964, 1988, and on and on — as it explained in an article earlier this year.
But the modern media always seems surprised when the old clippings show up, perhaps because the fossil fuel-funded disinformation campaign has been so pervasive and effective in casting doubt on the science for so long.
Today, “Coal consumption affecting climate” isn’t even news. The main difference between now and a century ago, however, is that having dawdled so long, the headline should read, “Coal consumption destroying climate — and we’re almost out of time to avert disaster.”
Yet tragically, despite over a century of science, President Trump not only traffics in the disinformation, calling climate change a “hoax,” but he continues to vow to bring back coal.
The Anthropocene epoch: scientists declare dawn of human-influenced age
Experts say human impact on Earth so profound that Holocene must give way to epoch defined by nuclear tests, plastic pollution and domesticated chicken
by ~ Damian Carrington
From The Guardian: Humanity’s impact on the Earth is now so profound that a new geological epoch – the Anthropocene – needs to be declared, according to an official expert group who presented the recommendation to the International Geological Congress in Cape Town on Monday.
The new epoch should begin about 1950, the experts said, and was likely to be defined by the radioactive elements dispersed across the planet by nuclear bomb tests, although an array of other signals, including plastic pollution, soot from power stations, concrete, and even the bones left by the global proliferation of the domestic chicken were now under consideration.
The current epoch, the Holocene, is the 12,000 years of stable climate since the last ice age during which all human civilisation developed. But the striking acceleration since the mid-20th century of carbon dioxide emissions and sea level rise, the global mass extinction of species, and the transformation of land by deforestation and development mark the end of that slice of geological time, the experts argue. The Earth is so profoundly changed that the Holocene must give way to the Anthropocene.
“The significance of the Anthropocene is that it sets a different trajectory for the Earth system, of which we of course are part,” said Prof Jan Zalasiewicz, a geologist at the University of Leicester and chair of the Working Group on the Anthropocene (WGA), which started work in 2009..
...Evidence of the Anthropocene
Human activity has:
“If our recommendation is accepted, the Anthropocene will have started just a little before I was born,” he said. “We have lived most of our lives in something called the Anthropocene and are just realising the scale and permanence of the change.”
The new epoch should begin about 1950, the experts said, and was likely to be defined by the radioactive elements dispersed across the planet by nuclear bomb tests, although an array of other signals, including plastic pollution, soot from power stations, concrete, and even the bones left by the global proliferation of the domestic chicken were now under consideration.
The current epoch, the Holocene, is the 12,000 years of stable climate since the last ice age during which all human civilisation developed. But the striking acceleration since the mid-20th century of carbon dioxide emissions and sea level rise, the global mass extinction of species, and the transformation of land by deforestation and development mark the end of that slice of geological time, the experts argue. The Earth is so profoundly changed that the Holocene must give way to the Anthropocene.
“The significance of the Anthropocene is that it sets a different trajectory for the Earth system, of which we of course are part,” said Prof Jan Zalasiewicz, a geologist at the University of Leicester and chair of the Working Group on the Anthropocene (WGA), which started work in 2009..
...Evidence of the Anthropocene
Human activity has:
- Pushed extinction rates of animals and plants far above the long-term average. The Earth is on course to see 75% of species become extinct in the next few centuries if current trends continue.
- Increased levels of climate-warming CO2 in the atmosphere at the fastest rate for 66m years, with fossil-fuel burning pushing levels from 280 parts per million before the industrial revolution to 400ppm and rising today.
- Put so much plastic in our waterways and oceans that microplastic particles are now virtually ubiquitous, and plastics will likely leave identifiable fossil records for future generations to discover.
- Doubled the nitrogen and phosphorous in our soils in the past century with fertiliser use. This is likely to be the largest impact on the nitrogen cycle in 2.5bn years.
- Left a permanent layer of airborne particulates in sediment and glacial ice such as black carbon from fossil fuel burning.
“If our recommendation is accepted, the Anthropocene will have started just a little before I was born,” he said. “We have lived most of our lives in something called the Anthropocene and are just realising the scale and permanence of the change.”