Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- This Is What Happens When You Rip a Hole in the Safety Net
- So Your Groundwater's Poison and Your Tap Water's On Fire. Not to Worry: Fracking Chemicals Are Trade Secrets You Don't Need To Know About
- Exxon Tar Sands Spill Continues to Devastate Arkansas Community
- An Outpouring of Love and Support for Bradley Manning to Receive the Nobel Peace Prize
- More 'Corporate Welfare': Obama Signs 'Monsanto Protection Act' Into Law
Popular content
Today's Top News
Arctic Ice in Death Spiral
UXBRIDGE, Canada - The carbon dioxide emissions from burning such fossil fuels have now melted the Arctic sea ice to its lowest volume since before the rise of human civilisation and dangerously upsetting the energy balance of the entire planet, climate scientists are reporting.
The carbon dioxide emissions from burning such fossil fuels have now melted the Arctic sea ice to its lowest volume since before the rise of human civilisation and dangerously upsetting the energy balance of the entire planet, climate scientists are reporting. (AFP/File/Martin Bureau) "The Arctic sea ice has reached its four lowest summer extents (area covered) in the last four years," said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in the U.S. city of Boulder, Colorado.
The volume - extent and thickness - of ice left in the Arctic likely reached the lowest ever level this month, Serreze told IPS.
"I stand by my previous statements that the Arctic summer sea ice cover is in a death spiral. It's not going to recover," he said.
There can be no recovery because tremendous amounts of extra heat are added every summer to the region as more than 2.5 million square kilometres of the Arctic Ocean have been opened up to the heat of the 24-hour summer sun. A warmer Arctic Ocean not only takes much longer to re-freeze, it emits huge volumes of additional heat energy into the atmosphere, disrupting the weather patterns of the northern hemisphere, scientists have now confirmed.
"The exceptional cold and snowy winter of 2009-2010 in Europe, eastern Asia and eastern North America is connected to unique physical processes in the Arctic," James Overland of the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in the United States told IPS in Oslo, Norway last June in an exclusive interview. ' Paradoxically, a warmer Arctic means "future cold and snowy winters will be the rule rather than the exception" in these regions, Overland told IPS.
There is growing evidence of widespread impacts from a warmer Arctic, agreed Serreze. "Trapping all that additional heat has to have impacts and those will grow in the future," he said.
One local impact underway is a rapid warming of the coastal regions of the Arctic, where average temperatures are now three to five degrees C warmer than they were 30 years ago. If the global average temperature increases from the present 0.8 C to two degrees C, as seems likely, the entire Arctic region will warm at least four to six degrees and possibly eight degrees due to a series of processes and feedbacks called Arctic amplification.
A similar feverish rise in our body temperatures would put us in hospital if it didn't kill us outright.
"I hate to say it but I think we are committed to a four- to six-degree warmer Arctic," Serreze said.
If the Arctic becomes six degrees warmer, then half of the world's permafrost will likely thaw, probably to a depth of a few metres, releasing most of the carbon and methane accumulated there over thousands of years, said Vladimir Romanovsky of the University of Alaska in Fairbanks and a world expert on permafrost.
Methane is a global warming gas approximately 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2).
That would be catastrophic for human civilisation, experts agree. The permafrost region spans 13 million square kilometres of the land in Alaska, Canada, Siberia and parts of Europe and contains at least twice as much carbon as is currently present in the atmosphere - 1,672 gigatonnes of carbon, according a paper published in Nature in 2009. That's three times more carbon than all of the worlds' forests contain.
"Permafrost thawing has been observed consistently across the entire region since the 1980s," Romanovsky said in an interview.
A Canadian study in 2009 documented that the southernmost permafrost limit had retreated 130 kilometres over the past 50 years in Quebec's James Bay region. At the northern edge, for the first time in a decade, the heat from the Arctic Ocean pushed far inland this summer, Romanovsky said.
There are no good estimates of how much CO2 and methane is being released by the thawing permafrost or by the undersea permafrost that acts as a cap over unknown quantities of methane hydrates (a type of frozen methane) along the Arctic Ocean shelf, he said.
"Methane is always there anywhere you drill through the permafrost," Romanovsky noted.
Last spring , Romanovsky's colleagues reported that an estimated eight million tonnes of methane emissions are bubbling to the surface from the shallow East Siberian Arctic shelf every year in what were the first-ever measurements taken there. If just one percent of the Arctic undersea methane reaches the atmosphere, it could quadruple the amount of methane currently in the atmosphere.
Abrupt releases of large amounts of CO2 and methane are certainly possible on a scale of decades, he said. The present relatively slow thaw of the permafrost could rapidly accelerate in a few decades, releasing huge amounts of global warming gases.
Another permafrost expert, Ted Schuur of the University of Florida, has come to the same conclusion. "In a matter of decades we could lose much of the permafrost," Shuur told IPS.
Those losses are more likely to come rapidly and upfront, he says. In other words, much of the permafrost thaw would happen at the beginning of a massive 50-year meltdown because of rapid feedbacks.
Emissions of CO2 and methane from thawing permafrost are not yet factored into the global climate models and it will be several years before this can be done reasonably well, Shuur said.
"Current mitigation targets are only based on anthropogenic (human) emissions," he explained.
Present pledges by governments to reduce emissions will still result in a global average temperature increase of 3.5 to 3.9 C by 2100, according to the latest analysis. That would result in an Arctic that's 10 to 16 degrees C warmer, releasing most of the permafrost carbon and methane and unknown quantities of methane hydrates.
This why some climate scientists are calling for a rapid phaseout of fossil fuels, recommending that fossil fuel emissions peak by 2015 and decline three per cent per year. But even then there's still a 50-percent probability of exceeding two degrees C current studies show. If the emissions peak is delayed until 2025, then global temperatures will rise to three degrees C, the Arctic will be eight to 10 degrees warmer and the world will lose most its permafrost.
Meanwhile, a new generation of low-cost, thin-film solar roof and outside wall coverings being made today has the potential to eliminate burning coal and oil to generate electricity, energy experts believe - if governments have the political will to fully embrace green technologies.
- 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...

66 Comments so far
Show AllYes, maybe we need to bring Kem Patrick back from self-imposed exile on Mother Jones to fight the good fight against all the evil Global Warming Deniers! We must not let the Deniers divert the discussion (such as it is) from the article's doomsday hyperbole. We must not allow ourselves, the true believers, to risk having our faith in Global Warming challenged by any Climate Change Skeptics, the Evil Ones, The Deniers....
Attaboy Norm! The Arctic isn't melting, the earth is flat.
Lefty,
As usual, you missed my point, not that I'm surprised. The issue is not whether the Arctic ice is melting. The issue is whether this inexorably leads to Methane Apocalypse. Now, I like a good end of the world scenario as much as the next guy, and we're certainly overdue. Additionally, as Clint Eastwood said in Unforgiven "We've ALL got it coming." That includes me and YOU, despite your self-satisfied sense of superior intellect and morality and your simple minded ad hominem response.
On the other hand...
A word of caution on calling the minimum
Because of the variability of sea ice at this time of year, the National Snow and Ice Data Center determines the minimum using a five-day running mean value. We have now seen four days of gains in extent. It is still possible that ice extent could fall slightly, because of either further melting or a contraction in the area of the pack due to the motion of the ice. For example, in 2005, the time series began to level out in early September, prompting speculation that we had reached the minimum. However, the sea ice contracted later in the season, again reducing sea ice extent and causing a further drop in the absolute minimum. When all the data for September are in, we will confirm the minimum ice extent for the season.
Final analysis pending
In the beginning of October, NSIDC will issue a formal announcement with a full analysis of the melt season, and graphics comparing this year to the long-term record. We will also announce the monthly average September sea ice extent, the measure scientists rely on for accurate analysis and comparison over the long term.
(See current NSIDC website, one of KP's favorites.)
One of my favorites as well.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/index.html
After three days of observed rising extents, it appears that the we proceeded to get additional melt off and now appear on track for the second lowest extents since tracking began. There's a nice graph somewhere that shows the nice 8% annual decline since 1979. A picture is worth a thousand words and one only look at the annual time lapse satellite photographs that can be found all over the internet. Huge chunks of the Arctic are disappearing. Chunks the size of Alaska, here one summer, gone the next. Even that dim bulb Hawking warned of methane feedback mechanisms coming into play but we all know that to be doomsday hyperbole. As I point above, this melting is a great opportunity to move in with the rigs and drill for more oil.
CD is great. You read an article like this one, then you read some other article about projected fossil fuel consumption and how the Chinese are elbowing in on our oil imports. It's a massive disconnect. I can honestly say that business as usual isn't going to cut the mustard. From the corporate fascist point of view, this melting Arctic is nothing but good news. They can start drilling for oil.
Quote: "The exceptional cold and snowy winter of 2009-2010 in Europe, eastern Asia and eastern North America is connected to unique physical processes in the Arctic," James Overland of the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in the United States told IPS in Oslo, Norway last June in an exclusive interview. ' Paradoxically, a warmer Arctic means "future cold and snowy winters will be the rule rather than the exception" in these regions, Overland told IPS.
Funny thing, 2009-2010 here in the Northeast was exceptionally warm and medium amounts of snow. Lovely really, cause my zone 4 became a comfortable zone 5 and lots of tender plants made it through the Winter. So, lets have more of that, please.
Well, I guess we just capture the methane as it is released and use it for energy... :(
There's gotta be someone or someplace the US can bomb because of this. What'll we call it? Operation Free the Sleet?
"That would be catastrophic for human civilisation, experts agree. The permafrost region spans 13 million square kilometres of the land in Alaska, Canada, Siberia and parts of Europe and contains at least twice as much carbon as is currently present in the atmosphere - 1,672 gigatonnes of carbon, according a paper published in Nature in 2009. That's three times more carbon than all of the worlds' forests contain.'
Odd, but our best, maybe only, hope is the snap change into the next climate phase.
The IPCC/Gore chart shows abrupt change at the level of temperature-deviation-from-mean we can soon expect.
The mechanism for that change will alter civilization beyond recognition, but be survivable.
Obviously, we must do the thing(s) we can do to avoid pushing the system beyond natural norms.
Hydrocarbon burning must end. (Besides, they are too valuable to burn---they are the only hydrocarbons humanity will ever have.)
Adding heat to the ecosystem must end (nukes).
Remove from power those who do not realize this.
Stand up for rational human survival policy, or perish.
Pretty simple.