Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Ice-Free Arctic Could Be Here in 23 Years
The Arctic ice cap has collapsed at an unprecedented rate this summer and levels of sea ice in the region now stand at a record low, scientists said last night. Experts said they were "stunned" by the loss of ice, with an area almost twice as big as Britain disappearing in the last week alone. So much ice has melted this summer that the north-west passage across the top of Canada is fully navigable, and observers say the north-east passage along Russia's Arctic coast could open later this month. If the increased rate of melting continues, the summertime Arctic could be totally free of ice by 2030.
Mark Serreze, an Arctic specialist at the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre at Colorado University in Denver which released the figures, said: "It's amazing. It's simply fallen off a cliff and we're still losing ice." The Arctic has now lost about a third of its ice since satellite measurements began 30 years ago, and the rate of loss has accelerated sharply since 2002.
Dr Serreze said: "If you asked me a couple of years ago when the Arctic could lose all of its ice, then I would have said 2100, or 2070 maybe. But now I think that 2030 is a reasonable estimate. It seems that the Arctic is going to be a very different place within our lifetimes, and certainly within our children's lifetimes."
The new figures show that sea ice extent is currently down to 4.4m square kilometres (1.7m square miles) and still falling. The previous record low was 5.3m square kilometres in September 2005. From 1979 to 2000 the average sea ice extent was 7.7m square kilometres. The minimum extent of sea ice usually occurs late in September each year, as the freezing Arctic winter begins to bite.
The sea ice usually then begins to freeze again over the winter. But Dr Serreze said that would be difficult this year. "This summer we've got all this open water and added heat going into the ocean. That is going to make it much harder for the ice to grow back. What we've seen this year sets us up for an even worse year next year." The winter ice has already failed to make up for increased losses in the summer in each of the last two years.
Changes in wind and ocean circulation patterns can help reduce sea ice extent, but Dr Serreze said the main culprit was man-made global warming. "The rules are starting to change and what's changing the rules is the input of greenhouse gases. This year puts the exclamation mark on a series of record lows that tell us something is happening."
The dramatic loss is further bad news for the region's wildlife which relies on the sea ice, such as polar bears. The animals use its coastal fringes to find food, and as the summer ice retreats to the north, they must swim further to hunt for seals. Some colonies of bears have already showed signs of malnutrition and biologists say there could be a severe drop in their population within a few decades, though they may not go extinct.
Yesterday's announcement will also increase political interest in the Arctic, with a number of countries currently jostling to exploit the oil and gas reserves believed to lie under the ocean, which could become more accessible as the icy cover retreats. Last month Russia claimed a huge area around the north pole, and Denmark and Canada are preparing similar claims, which rely on showing that a chain of underwater mountains that runs across the region are connected to their respective continental shelves.
© 2007 The Guardian



101 Comments so far
Show All"The Iraqi Resistance is by definition democratic as it is the spontaneous expression of a people who took its destiny into its hands, and is by definition progressive as it defends the interests of the people."
"The Iraqi Resistance and the other resistance movements of the Middle East are movements of the peoples and by nature egalitarian."
America has been invaded and occupied by a fascist regime. It's time for an American Resistance.
NUCLEAR POWER AND URANIUM MINING by Dr. Helen Caldicott
(Published in the Adelaide Advertiser, June 29, 2007)
Contrary to industry propaganda nuclear power contributes substantially to
global warming. Fossil fuels used to mine and enrich uranium, construct and
decommission the reactor, transport and store the intensely radioactive
waste for eons of time produce global warming gases. Presently a gas fired
electricity generator emits three times more CO2 than a similar sized atomic
reactor, but as the supply of high grade uranium ore declines, a nuclear
plant will, within decades, generate as much CO2 as a gas fired generator.
Uranium supplies are finite. If global electricity was nuclear generated
today, only nine years supply of uranium remain.
Despite massive government subsidies in the US, Wall Street and Standard and
Poors are reluctant to invest in nuclear powerhaving been severely burnt in
the 1970s and 80s when Three Mile Island and Chernobyl caused the cost of
nuclear reactors to soar. The 2005 US energy bill allocated $13 billion to
the nuclear "renaissance" because the nuclear industry is simply not viable
without government support.
Nuclear power is a tenuous investment. A nuclear accident or terrorist
attack would signal the end of nuclear power. David Lochbaum, a nuclear
engineer from the Union of Concerned Scientists says "It is not if but when
there is a meltdown" because of lax and inefficient safety procedures
overseen by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the 103 operating US
reactors. A meltdown could permanently contaminate an area the size of
Pennsylvania with over 100 radioactive elements.
Surprisingly security has virtually not been tightened at the 103 US
reactors since 9/11 even though one of the targets of the terrorists was the
Indian Point reactor complex 35 miles from Manhattan.
Nuclear power is medically dangerous. Operating nuclear reactors routinely
emit radioactive materials into the air and water including the fat soluble
noble gases, xenon, krypton and argon which are readily absorbed through the
lung and migrate in the blood to fatty tissues of the abdominal fat pad and
upper thighs where they irradiate the reproductive organs with high doses of
mutagenic gamma radiation. Carcinogenic tritium - radioactive hydrogen is
also routinely released.
But more is at stake. 30 tons of highly carcinogenic nuclear waste is
manufactured yearly in each reactor which is stored in cooling pools
adjacent to the reactors. A terrorist attack on a pool containing 10 to 30
times more radiation than the reactor itself could release massive amounts
of radiation devastating surrounding communities and agricultural areas for
ever.
Nuclear waste must be isolated from the environment for at least 250,000
years, a physical and scientific impossibility. Odourless, tasteless and
invisible radioactive isotopes seep and leak into the environment, where
they concentrate in the food chain, enter the human body, and migrate to
specific organs irradiating and mutating surrounding cells for many years.
The incubation time for cancer is insidious - 5 to 60 years. Over time,
future generations will inevitably experience epidemics of cancer, leukemia
and genetic disease.
Nuclear power is a transient generator of electricity but its actual legacy
will be medically catastrophic. Public health denotes that if a disease is
incurable the only recourse is prevention. Uranium mining and its offspring
nuclear power are therefore medically contraindicated.
In his book, Solar Florida, John Blackburn (emeritus economics prof)points out that all of Florida's energy needs could be met (including transportation) if only 2% of Florida's landmass were dedicated to PV collectors operating at 10% efficiency.
If instead of subsidizing sugar, cattle, cotton and corn production (which use water, fertilizer, pesticides and create nutrient-rich runoff) we subsidized only solar and wind farms, the taxpayer, the environment, the farmer and the country would all be better off. . .at NO expense to standard of living. (Emphasis added for MtnGoat's benefit.)
ARA, I don't think collective punishment of all humanity is appropriate to the ecological "crimes" that have been committed.
Gore said that we have to stop people from going directly from denial to despair without an "action" phase.
I thinkif we ever got enough people into the sweet spot between denial and despair, we could change the world before breakfast.
Man (and especially the US administration) hasn't yet mentally reached the first stage of realization about this dire threat.
I agree with PJD, but if governments can't stretch their minds and imaginations as far as stage one, what hope is there that they would even consider stuff like biosphere engineering etc? They all need a swift kick up the behind from Mother Nature, they'll get it - but the trouble is, it will then probably be too late.
Capitalism can't solve the global warming crisis, or the problem of world hunger, or the problem of renewable energy. Nor will individual acts of conservation by well-meaning progressives be sufficient. It requires a thoroughgoing reworking of the way in which humans relate to the earth and produce their food and other necessities of life. This will not come so long as capitalists, with their ineluctable drive for profits and accumulation of capital, are in charge of the world.
It requires revolutionary change. Unless Hugo Chavez manages to prove otherwise, such change will not come through the ballot box.
JAN STEINMAN, you are absoluty correct. The termite fart story is just an attempt to interject a bit of humor.
We humans are the ones causing the problem and it really is not humerous at all. The first blogger here, PJD nailed it. The release of methane gas will do us in, world wide flooding could occur in our lifetimes if the methane doesn't kill us all first. If that doesn't wipe out humanity and all other life, loss of the phytoplankton most certainly will. The truth is, we very well may have already crossed the tipping point,___ if not we are going to before all of the major world leaders get together and attempt to figure a solution. Do you or any here, see that to be a possibility?
And if any took me seriously about breeding Aardvarks, please don't order a breeding pair,____ unless you have a lot of termites.
This is not good news.
This likely represents the start of a number of runaway warming mechanisms, most of which many scientists are aware of but avoid speaking of them in publis for fear of being called a "scaremonger" (The only exceptions being Steven Hawking and Lovelock). When all that ice-free water warms to the point of melting the methane clathrates on the sea bed - plus those in the melting permafrost, we will be faced with at a minimum, a repeat of the great Permian extinction. But there wasn't all that extra anthropogenic CO2 back then so ultimate Vesusification remains a possibility.
I wish I was kidding.
But we aren't dead yet. While massively cuts in CO2 are necessary - starting with ending all this elitist NIMBY opposition to wind power - and punitive restrictons in personal motor fuel usage, thay won't be enough.
The time has come to also consider the deployment of solar-blocking technologies - such as stratospheric SO2 injections, and biosphere engineerring methods, like iron fertilization of the oceans to promote phytoplankton growth and carbon absorbtion.
Virtually all of the consensus projections regarding how quickly we are crippling the physiology of the Earth are too long by an order of magnitude. Hansen has observed (in "Scientific Reticence and Sea Level Rise") that scientists tend to avoid sticking their necks out. This article's projection of an ice-free Arctic by 2030 also looks strangely cautious, given the behavior of Arctic sea-ice this summer.
The University of Illinois site "Cryosphere Today"
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
calibrates sea-ice extent differently than Colorado University: they measured the previous minimum extent at 4 million square kilometers, and the current extent (as of August 28) at 3 million - with another month of melting to go. At this rate Santa Claus will need to find new headquarters very soon indeed.
The Arctic and Antarctic are like batteries which fuel the all the ocean currents, and the whole Earth's climate system. No authority really has any idea what the result of this experiment (disconnecting the batteries) is going to be.
I give up. The human race deserves this hell we've made for ourselves. Global warming won't kill us fast enough, let's just nuke each other to hell.
Gore/Gravel/Green Party 2008
How about this (in fact someone here recently had a link on this topic with all sorts of awesome documents...)
Anyhow, Solar Combined with Mirrors.
The mirros can either: bounce onto the solar or bounce back out.
Then: More solar energy and less global warming.
Now: All we need to do is optimize......
Peace,
ken hausle
They have been filling our skies with "chem-trails" to diffuse sunlight but it is too little too late, a band-aid not a real solution, and adds more pollution, aluminum silicate, into the environment.
The auto industry is behind a lot of the disinformation on greenhouse gases, we could start by throwing them and all their people in jail, along with other lobbyists and politicians fighting global warming legislation. They have freedom of speech but fraud is illegal.
And trading "carbon credits" needs to be abolished, it is a stupid deal that only delays major polluters from making real changes.
In a time when the window of opportunity for doing something about global warming is closing we have a stupid, greedy leadership that you and I allow to stay in power. Ironic certainly. Coincidence? Maybe not.
Maybe God has finally had a belly full of the human race. I can't believe He has put up with our doings this long: Shitting in our idyllic home and on all other species.
"God gave Noah the rainbow sign: No more water, the fire next time".
Hey PJD,
What is Vesusification? I looked for it on the internet and couldn't find anything about it.
Clark,
You're right... it's simply disheartening not to see the ultra-conservatives screaming that there's no such thing as global warming, but instead to see all the moderates believing them, because they don't want to believe that anything will change.
Termite--
I think he meant Venusification. Making our atmosphere like that of Venus.
Its too bad other superior species(all the non human ones) have to pay the price for the failure of one.
And the polar bear is likely to go extinct just from being caught along side drilling. Since all the countries are thinking how they can make quick money off it.
Punitively limit your own fuel use. Refuse to travel more than a few miles for the dismally selfish desire to see relatives or go on vacation, neither of which are crucial to life. Refuse to buy products not guaranteed to be green, and refuse those from overseas because of the miles.
Quit sitting around waiting to be led like sheep to do what you already claim to want, and take your OWN action, TODAY, NOW.
It is much worse than this. The jet aircraft and their cloud-making are distorting the warming effect. It is about 50 percent worse than it seems due to global dimming. If and when the dimming clears, the heat-up will be instant due to increased solar radiation hitting the surface. This came out on a PBS Nova program last night. Here is the transcript:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3310_sun.html
I'm afraid the positive feedback loops which amplify the harmful effects of human actions in the world are going to continue to function in an accelerating manner. All the more reason to re-organize our society (the US to start with) with radical conservation and a shift to renewable energy resources. See www.rmi.org.
The US economy did an instant about-face in the period from 1942 to 1945. We can do it again in the quest to make the great turning and solve the global problematique.
While it is worthwhile to limit your own consumption of fossil fuels and anything produced using them--as mtnGoat suggests--few people are in a position to quit their jobs, stop heating their homes, and stop buying groceries.
On the other hand, you might be very wise indeed to begin positioning yourself so that you can survive without buying food or heating fuel--and without a job.
The situation is, I believe, urgent enough that we should all take steps to ensure our own survival. Even if we do this, it may or may not be too late to save the planet--or ourselves. But sheer self-preservation should be dictating that we make a start at self-sufficiency, as independnt as possible from fossil fuels.
TERMITE
yeah, what is that: vesusification. maybe it was a misspelling and should be venusification..........like we'll end up like venus. look that up. whatever, it's dismal.
I'm now looking into buying a Prius.
I fear "capitalism" is not equipped to deal with the changes that are necessary. There may not be a way to "save the planet" and make a profit from it. It's going to take more than polar bears starving to get business and political leaders to change their thinking.
But each individual can begin to make changes. When Hummers and Suburbans stop selling and electric cars become more popular, when people demand from their boss that they work from home at least one day a week, when people realize that travel by foot and bike function quite well, when people stop stigmatizing those who show up for work sweaty because they just walked to work, and when growing your own food is "fashionable"...maybe then the changes will begin to take hold.
"few people are in a position to quit their jobs, stop heating their homes, and stop buying groceries."
Then they'll just slowly wait for someone else to do something, adding to the harm every second of every hour of every day. What is more important, a job, a warm house, avoiding a diet of roots and beans...or the entire planet and the future of humanity?
For all the complaints about selfish people I read on this board, every single person who prefers to be comfortable, well fed, and mobile rather than acting to save the planet and humanity, need only look in the mirror to see a person making very selfish choices. IF you actually believe that all our lives must change, waiting one more second to drastically and radically alter your own because you prefer comfort or convenience is as selfish as selfish gets.
I own a prius and its a great car. I get over 50 miles to the gallon with mine and its a comfortable car to drive. Its the best car I've ever owned.
.............................................
The underlying problem is that some people (like Justice Scalia)are ignorant and refuse to learn about or listen to scientific thought. Its easier to have faith and to form religious groups than to learn about science (and I am a Christian) Some people in power believe they can make reality by manipulating others to believe as they do.
We have not applied scientific methods to decisions about politics or in how to deal with the human problems of interactions with each other.
The result is our hard technology is progressing while our care for one another is ignored.
Maybe we are just too flawed as a species and will go the way of the dinosaur.
Save the planet. But, also don't forget to talk about saving the planet.
I get odd looks just for taking my used grocery bags back to the store so I can re-use them again and thus eliminate that much more garbage...it's time for people to WAKE UP!!!
URGENT ISSUES like this seem to not be in the minds of the average public yet. I think, as much as anything, it takes personal dialogue for this info to get across. So let's get out there and keep a talkin'...
In only 23 years!
That's WAY ahead of schedule!
Good Job Exxon/Mobil!
Everyone give'em a hand.
PJD your comments were most appropriate. Excellent!
I too watched the global dimming program on Nova last night and came away scared as hell. I left the "denial" stage a few years back, but it is very hard not to go straight into the "despair" state. I try very hard to do my part (walking to work, ect), but it is hard that while I am walking to work someone drives by in their Suburban in their daily commute (alone in the vehicle).
Has Al Gore come out & endorsed anyone yet? Is there a "Draft Gore" movement out there? Does anyone have a web site to that effect?
As someone who lives in Iowa, I am attending all the presidential candidate events and pressing them on what they plan to do about global warming and if they will make it THE issue that they run on. I tell you what, after listening to the lip service that most of them spew out, I don't hold out much hope of any leadership on this issue from the politicians. If anything is going to happen, we the people must do it!
I am already doing a lot-
I haven't driven or ridden in a car at all in couple of weeks. I don't use AC. I use socialistic public transit or a personal electric vespa-style motor scooter (gets 395 equivalent mpg). I purchase locally-generated wind energy offsets form iberdola/Community Energy. (If it's humanity or an occasional ridge-soaring hawk, goodbye hawk). I selected my 1100 sq ft (me wife 2 cays - plenty big)home location in an older compact community - a walk to basic shopping and public transit, with work just 5 miles away - using the electric scooters an all by the worst weather days.
BUT, right now, it is all for naught, since I'm the only one doing these things, and in any voluntary system, there will always be lots of cheats, negating the effectiveness of the actions. That's why, just like any sport, societies have laws and regulations - to stop the cheats, eh, MtnGoat?
Carbon sequestration, monoterpene production, and alternative fuel production using Cannabis hemp may be a way to work with nature to fix nature.
"Yesterday's announcement will also increase political interest in the Arctic, with a number of countries currently jostling to exploit the oil and gas reserves believed to lie under the ocean, which could become more accessible as the icy cover retreats."
Great, so even global warming will be exploited to make new wealth for the oil and gas cartels! You idiots!
Not agreeing with you on an effect is not 'cheating'. And not one thing they can do eliminates the act of you not taking your own action...which I commend you for. Otherwise we wind right back in 'everybody does it territory'. *Regardless* of what anyone else does or does not do, reducing your own footprint in counts.
You should spend less time focussed on what people you don't know are doing when you don't know why, and more on what YOU do. You have no idea how long they have been alone for, where they live, what they do, or what else is in that rig. Let's cease the scapegoating of others as a replacement for our own actions.
We can get rid of fossil fuels and nuclear power in 30 to 50 years. I have just finished a study of this for the United States. See the summary at
http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/summary.pdf
Clark Kent says that "if we ever get enough people into the sweet spot between denial and despair, we could change the world before breakfast."
I suggest that we change the world WITH breakfast (add lunch and dinner, too). The "inconvenient truth" that Al Gore is missing is the fact that eating meat is the driving force (according to World Watch) "behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the future of humans - deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease."
A United Nations report stated that "raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined."
Just think of it, you can save the world (and yourself) with your fork by eating a healthy and delicious vegetarian or vegan diet. You don't have to wait for Congress or Big Business, you just have to find "the sweet spot between denial and despair."
Lets see, two years ago the best scientific predictions of the arctic ice melt, was from 80 to 120 years. Now the scientific prediction had dropped to only 23 years. At that rate of scientific "predicting" in two more years, it will be Uhhhhhhh,___ Oh-oh!! Wonder how long it will be, before the billions of tons of methane frozen in the perma-frost has thawed and our atmosphere catches on fire? Maybe this fall????? Maybe not? ____ Whenever, don't bother turning your computer off, it will shut down automatically.
What do you think it will take for Georgie to admit to global warming?
When the floodwaters crash through his bedroom window at the White House?
sharonvegan, You are right on.
All of us look everywhere for solutions except under our own noses. We don't want to stop doing what we have always done, just because we have always done it.
Our disrespect for ourselves spills over onto our brother species, and onto the earth that is our mother and sustains us. Without meat we would have all the benefits you mention plus, I believe with my whole heart, world peace would finally be a possibility.
Of course we are going to kill each other as long as we torture our food sources, attack and gorge ourselves on our food, and make sex a blasphemy.
Of course we are going to have drug problems as long as we continue to make the planet a hell on earth.
If you can't see it's because you don't want to see.
Hell, if we're going to go out in a blaze of climatological catastrophe let's at least get a big angry mob down at the White House and rip those freaks out of there. And while we're at it, let's do Congress and the oil company bigwigs too.
The show's over. No one in power will take the steps necessary to save the planet. They still think they can compromise with physics. By the time they figure out that physics and the planet don't give a damn, never did, never will, the catastrophe will be a done deal.
See you in Hell. Oh, wait, we're at the gates now.
Didn't they drop The Blob in the Arctic in the 1950s?
If the Artic thaws, won't we have another Blob-problem?
Could it be that Nuclear Energy is the lesser evil?
Could it be that Nuclear Energy is the lesser evil?
I thought that Hillary Clinton was the Lesser Evil! :?:
PS: I've always wanted to see Santa Claus in a Speedo.
sharonvegan. Really? Are these facts straight? A United Nations report stated that "raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined."
Then why the hell is everyone giving me shit about driving my car?
I could be guilt-free just by being a vegetarian.
But why stop there?
I researched into it and there is something worse than livestock. Yep, it's RICE.
Look. I read it on the internet.
"Significantly, the balance is largely the result of human activities such as rice cultivation (19 percent), livestock (11.5 percent), landfills (8 percent), biomass burning (11.5 percent), venting from oil and gas wells (4 percent), and coal mining (6 percent)."
All you need to do is type methane and rice.
So I say, "Let's abolish RICE first"!!!
It's not like anyone needs it or that it may be anyone's staple of food.
But; now, thinking in hindsight, they may resist. We could send troops to end this vulgar attack on our earth's climate.
I say, "Let them eat cake", which is from corn, I think.
KEM PATRICK - Like Earthian and MRFOAD I watched the NOVA program on global dimming last night - Really scary and Earthian gives a good link to it. But I wonder about something that wasn't mentioned - the decline of the phytoplankton count. With less actual sunlight reaching the earth (literally true, photons blocked by clouds and smog), the plankton aren't able to do their thing (photosynthesis) and thus sustain themselves and produce oxygen for the rest of us. This could explain the mysterious decline of the phytoplankton, which I know you've puzzled about. (Just connecting dots here -)
Oh my god, *everything* destroys the planet. I'm sure the problem is humanity and their evil ways. There are probably too many people of course, and I'm sure a huge proportion of them are greedy, mean, evil, stupid, or backwards, or some combination of all three. All this must be their fault.
Unless the USA, the largest emitter of carbon pollution, seriously undertakes the meaningful measures necessary to curtail our contribution to greenhouse gasses, the less industrialized & third world nations will have no incentives to control their emissions. This can never happen until Americans render ineffective the special interests and their supporting administrations that have prevented the necessary reforms through deception and fabricated science--albeit with the help of an apathetic populace and defaulting legislators. Contrary to their assertions, the measures to reduce carbon pollution can only improve our economy and security by reducing our oil imports while improving our health & quality of life.
By placing unlerned and corrupt individuals in the presidency over intelligent and principled candidates, those apathetic Americans deserve the worst government and environment that money can buy. Consider Regan (the great simple minded communicator to the simple minded electorate) over Jimmy Carter; and Bush (chartered by God and oil) over Al Gore. Need I say more?
It is the surface and underground coal fire's of China and India that are one of the biggest causes of the ice melt.I care about Polar bears that are drowning at sea because of no ice.I do not belive anything that the United Nations have to say about the ice melt.
that's all
good night and thank you
"Contrary to their assertions, the measures to reduce carbon pollution can only improve our economy and security by reducing our oil imports while improving our health & quality of life."
Sure, spending more to get less, creating all the pollution necessary to make the 'green' replacement systems, and spending money to replace what already exists, all the while intentionally forcing people to pay more, to force them to use less, really adds up to an improved economy. Next you'll tell us running around breaking windows improves economies too, because of the spending it generates.
Just had an idea. Since you are claiming global warming measures will improve the economy, how about we do this...we add a clause to any bills dealing with reducing emissions stating that they will be recinded if they result in lower productivity, reduced GNP, or increased cost per unit on commodities.
Since you are certain combating warming will not damage an economy, a bill with these terms will result in a permanent actions, right?