Most Popular This Week
- Not to Worry, Rape Victims Who Want An Abortion: We Won't Charge You With Felony Tampering With Evidence, Just Your Doctor
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Obama Administration Compromise Would Implement No-Cost Birth Control
- The Right of the People, Even At the Airport
- To End Extreme Poverty, Let’s Try Ending Extreme Wealth
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Don’t Put a Fork in It: On the Perils of Genetically Engineered Salmon
- Five Possibilities for the Next Great Progressive Push
- An Economic Alternative to Exploitative Free Market Capitalism
- As Hurricane Victims Freeze, Billionaire Mayor Gives Away $1 Billion to Wealthy Med School
Popular content
Today's Top News
Rising CO2 Will Cause Catastrophic Sea Level Rise Finds Antarctic Study
Sea levels could rise by up to six metres if the world fails to get pollution under control, according to the latest study in the Antarctic.
The British Antarctic Survey found that during past periods of high carbon dioxide, temperatures in Antarctica were up to 6C above current levels. This could cause a sea level rise of up six metres, threatening coastal cities like London, New York and San Francisco.
In this Nov. 5, 2009, photo provided by the Australian Antarctic Division, a large iceberg spotted off Macquarie Island, about 1,500 kilometers (930 miles) southeast of Australia, mid-way between Antarctica and Australia. It is a rare sight in waters so far north, Australian scientists said Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009.
(AP Photo/Australian Antarctic Division, Murray Potter) It is the latest research to warn of the consequences of increased greenhouse gases on the Earth's climate. Yesterday a study warned that carbon dioxide produced by man is now rising at record rates putting the world on a pathway for a 6C rise in temperature.
All the recent studies are adding pressure on world leader to agree in international deal on climate change at a UN summit in Copenhagen this December.
Louise Sime, lead of the British Antarctic Survey study, looked at ice cores to see how temperatures changed during periods of high carbon dioxide
She found that during the last period of high CO2, 125,000 years ago, temperatures were up to 6C higher than present day levels.
Such a hike in temperature could lead to a rise in sea levels of between 4 to 6 metres over hundreds of years as the ice sheets melt.
"We didn't expect to see such warm temperatures, and we don't yet know in detail what caused them. But they indicate that Antarctica's climate may have undergone rapid shifts during past periods of high CO2."
Dr Sime said the study suggests that current high levels of CO2 could also cause a rise in temperature. She said further research could predict the affect on sea level rise.
"If we can pin down how much warmer temperatures were in Antarctica and Greenland at this time, then we can test predictions of how melting of the large ice sheets may contribute to sea level rise."
A study out yesterday found that carbon dioxide levels rose by almost a third in the last seven years. The research in Nature Geoscience warned that if the world continues to pump out pollution at such a rate it will cause temperatures to rise by 6C, causing massive droughts, extinction of species and sea level rise.
Today another study added to the urgency by claiming that the oceans are losing their ability to absorb CO2. Samar Khatiwala of Columbia University, found that the proportion of fossil fuel emissions absorbed by the oceans since 200 may have decline by as much as 10 per cent.
"What our ocean study and other recent land studies suggest is that we cannot count on these sinks operating in the future as they have in the past, and keep on subsidising our ever-growing appetite for fossil fuels," he said.
But Dr Wolfgang Knorr, of Bristol University, who has been studying the same subject said there is not yet enough evidence to prove that the Earth is losing its ability to absorb CO2.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
67 Comments so far
Show AllI think you may be right ubrew12. We've all got a ticking time bomb siting in our backyard whether we know it or not: Greenland. If the Ice sheet breaks up all the way, it equates to an AVERAGE of global 20 feet of sea rise. That's just an Average. Some places would see a normal tidal rise of only ten feet, while others might be thirty. This means with the confluence of high astrological tide and low cyclonic pressure (hurricane) some places that are used to ten foot storm surges right now, on a two foot normal high tide might experience forty-foot surges which will destroy any city on any coast.
The general public has zero knowledge of tides and weather phenomenon and finds these known concepts of tidal basin activity impossible to grasp. Of course, my numbers could be wrong, but all boat captains understand tidal behavior is not uniform all over the world. It depends on the size and shape of the river or ocean basin, the moon, the sun, the weather and current. The geological record makes it plain that the ocean at one time was 400 feet higher than it is today.
Here's how I understand Greenland: The Sea Ice protects the Ice shelves, the Ice Shelves protect the Glaciers, the Glaciers hold up the Ice Cap where 90 percent of the fresh water ice is stored in the northern hemisphere. We need to access the speed of the glaciers rumbling into the sea. Google Earth has nice scientific plots and links of exactly that. The Jakobshavn glacier near Ilulissat, Greenland for example, has doubled in speed the last few years.
The grim reality is that scientist must significantly understate predictions to maintain credibility in the peer-reviewed world.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
USans enjoy applying science and facts toward such things as military advancement of the imperial agenda, putting a "man on the moon", and profitizing the weaknesses of human nature. But when it comes to applying science, facts and reason to realize universal equity/justice among people and the biosphere, umm well can we profitize that too? Ouch! The boss said forget it! (and scurried off behind closed doors to figure out how to co-opt it)
I find it interesting that Common Dreams would choose to publish the more moderate and somewhat weakened article from the Telegraph rather than the very pointed and straightforward article from the Guardian. You end with a scientist they found who was willing to say, "Hey, we can't be SURE the Earth is losing its ability to absorb CO2." And then we wonder why American's are getting less convinced that the climate is changing?
Get some balls folks.
Especially since they determined last year that the Southern Ocean (around Antarctica) has already lost its ability to absorb carbon.
I was up early on Friday, 0530, last week and checked into NWS satellite views of N hemisphere. Saw three cyclonic rotations equally spaced---off Vancouver, over Hudson Bay, and over Scotland--well formed, and the same size and latitudes (40-45N), with a messy one over Siberia, and in the fifth space NE of China, nothing much at all but water vapor.
Looked like a practice run for the big show. As the ecosphere gains temp and water vapor, wx systems will strengthen and organize into patterns appropriate for the tipping point event(s). For what its worth, I think Michael Creighton was spot on about this one in Day After Tomrrw, altho I think the ocean conveyer stoppage is only associated with things like the little iceage and younger Dryas, not the kick into a full IceAge.
If you're interested, check it out---NOAA/NWS, aviation forecasts, satelite observations, clik water vapor and loop.
S hemisphere is organizing a grande anticyclonic rotation around Antarctica. Great viewing, altho the visuals could be better.
INVESTMENT
The flood is not inevitable
But it is inexorable.
Be like Noah.
Warn everyone.
Every day!
Do not encourage the flood.
Don't lie to others
Or push them into the way of the water.
But turn to build a boat.
Welcome on board the useful good.
Select the innocent as keeps it safe.
Then firmly at the last
Lift the gangway from the dangerous desperate,
The weeping convert.
Reject those who would destroy you.
Refuse their gold to the end.
Repulse their consequent attack.
For they have long watched you watching them.
Lop off the grasping hands of the hordes of weeping innocent!
Mourn all them so drowned.
Look ahead.
Unlike the international scientific community; experts who deny global warming's existance such as Limbaugh, Bush, Cheney Palen, Beck, et al are not hampered with facts and logic, and are also endowed with devine guidance. Hence, we can feel assured that warming is of no concern.
I share the concern but hate the hysteria. Technology will solve the problem. Give it time.
There y'go John, let's just kick back and let technology run its course. Its been fine so far. Sorry for the sarcasm, I agree hysteria is useless, however the idea to rely on technology to "save us" makes me want to invent a new word that means MEGA-naive. Cheers
Yikes! Technology caused the problem.
The geologic record is loaded with sea level fluctuations on the order of 100's of meters. It is the norm. To think that we're going to escape this, despite pushing temperatures to the brink (most rapid increase in Temp. that this planet has seen)is foolish. How is technology going to get us out of this one? Barrier Islands (Long Island) are meant to move- just like a meandering river. We have locked in our civilizations to a Holocene stability that is much more an abaration than a norm (in terms of climatic statis).
Old story, faster time frame
Feedback loops compound the acceleration.
E=mc2
c=Capitalism=reason traded away
The scary questions:
are we past the tipping point
can the momentum be stopped
how long do we have
who really cares
Answer: Yes we are (past the tipping point) imho. But why accelerated toward the cliff? We're going to probably fall off, but any sane person would hit the brakes and try to get stopped before falling to our doom.
Conclusion: Obomber is not sane. Republicans are not sane. Democrats are not sane. Vote Third Party.
We should make efforts to accumulate knowledge, and hand this information to our neighbors and co-workers since Main Stream Media won't cover it.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
Maybe when NYC is under water and all the banksters are at the bottom of the ocean, they'll begin to pay attention
A problem I've noticed over the years: Every time there is a strong effort to push forth legitimate clean air legislation, it is effectively derailed by legislators who turn the public's attention to getting tough/hiking taxes on tobacco. It works, creating some (false) environmental cred while protecting the interests of those businesses that produce the products that are causing the crisis. The public is temporarily pacified, assuming that "this is a start."
The problem is that tobacco isn't the problem. Under 20% of US adults smoke, and restrictions are so stringent that most of us have NO exposure to tobacco smoke whatsoever. The most carcinogenic type of smoke is the kind that contains oil particles -- primarily (in the US) traffic fumes. This is the stuff that enables you to see cities in the distance by the yellowish-gray dome of haze on the horizon. That's what millions of people breath every day, coating the lungs with oily soot -- the same stuff that coats the outsides of city windows. This is what's melting polar ice and killing off the rain forests.
The only way we're going to get some control of this issue is by focusing on the cause -- our belief that we have a God-given right to drive as much as we want. We need to dispel the public notion that using public transportation is a sign of being too poor to own a car. We have got to do everything possible to discourage ALL unnecessary private driving -- even though it will inconvenience some.
And we have got to finally start getting serious about public transportation, bringing our train system up to the level of Europe's, for example.