Eco Store
 
SEARCH   

Arctic Ice Melts to Second-Lowest Level

Posted September 18, 2008 12:33 by Karen in Climate Change
 
 
 

WASHINGTON - Arctic sea ice melted to its second-lowest level this summer, rising slightly from 2007's record but still showing a downward trend that is a key symptom of climate change, US scientists said on Tuesday.

 


The ice slipped to its minimum extent for 2008 on Sept. 12, when it covered 1.74 million square miles (4.52 million square km), and now appears to be growing as the Arctic starts its seasonal cooldown, the National Snow and Ice Data Center said.

This is 33 percent below the average summer ice cover in the Arctic since satellites began measuring it in 1979 and is less than 10 percent above last year's all-time record low, said Walt Meier, a research scientist at the ice center.

"We're not as low as we were last year, which was the real mind-blowing record, but we're well below anything else we've had in the past," Meier said in a telephone interview from Boulder, Colorado.

One channel of the Northwest Passage -- a long-sought water route between Europe and Asia -- was open in both 2007 and 2008. This year also saw the opening of the Northern Sea Route, which runs through the Arctic Ocean along the Siberian coast.

The ice center said last month that there was substantial ice melt in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast in the Eastern Siberian Seas off Russia's east coast, home to one of the world's largest polar bear populations.

Because polar bears use sea ice floes as platforms for hunting seals, they are forced to swim longer distances when the ice melts, making them more likely to tire and drown.

Arctic ice is a factor in global climate and weather patterns. The difference between the cool air at the poles and warm air around the Equator drives air and water currents, including the jet stream, Meier said.

Sea ice helps hold in the cold around the North Pole because its white color reflects sunlight. When sea ice vanishes, the newly exposed dark water absorbs more of the sun's rays, accelerating the heating effect.


DOWNWARD TREND "GETTING STEEPER"

Even though the ice did not shrink as dramatically in 2008 as it did in 2007, Meier said this year's conditions were remarkable because they occurred in a relatively cool year. Last year's sea ice melt happened in a "perfect storm" of conditions -- the skies were warm and clear and winds pushed the ice around, spurring the melting.

This year it was cooler, Meier said. There were no favorable winds, "and yet we still came pretty close to the record."

"In terms of long-term climate, it's not a recovery in any sense of the word," he said. "The long-term trend is still steeply downward and getting steeper."

Because the climate system is so interconnected to what happens in the Arctic, there are likely to be more widespread impacts, he said.

The emission of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide -- produced by burning fossil fuels as well as natural sources, including human breath -- is spurring global climate change, and its effects are amplified in the Arctic, he said.

The last seven years are among the seven lowest on record in terms of Arctic sea ice, Meier said.

"That's a real indication that this isn't any kind of temporary climate cycle. It's more an indication that we're heading toward the point where we're going to have that sea ice completely melt in the coming decades or perhaps sooner."

Graphic images of the Arctic sea ice are available online at http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews. (Editing By Ross Colvin)

 

 


Story by Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent

 


REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Republican Skeptics have all the answers!

Posted September 8, 2008 11:55 by Karen in

Each and every skeptic argument you've heard is embodied in the Republican Convention. Check out the video below. It'll make your heart race with the prospect that almost half of all American's fall into this category. 

Karen


Global Warming Heats up RNC

Video:
Presidential candidate John McCain thinks that global warming is created, in part, by humans, but his running mate, Sarah Palin, disagrees. Indeed the Republican Party Platform cautions people to be skeptical of the theory of global warming.
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1417423198/bctid1772030484

Currently rated 4.5 by 2 people

  • Currently 4.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

350 is the magic number

Posted July 29, 2008 13:17 by Karen in Active Living, Climate Change, Social Change

This viral video is terrific. It's hopeful, clear and in a format that has the potential to spread globally.

http://www.350.org/en/animation

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

The Next Wave of Skeptics

Posted July 9, 2008 11:34 by Karen in Climate Change, Sceptic Buster


Watch out for Energy Probe (see speech excerpt below) - it sounds here like their Director is pumping up the Petroleum Club to go on a major attack. 

His big argument, once again, is doubt about a "consensus". All scientist have doubts, there are always more questions to ask and answer.

Don't get me wrong, scientist have opinions, they have guesses, and political positions likely. But when they write their papers for peer reviewed journals their scientific method is described, the results are stated, the stats are done, then IN their final conclusions -  THAT is where they may extrapolate: What could the results mean? What might be the next questions to ask for clarification? If any part of this process is garbage it generally won't be published. 

The nature of the scientific process is that it is never quite done. The environment changes, species change and the questions can be re-asked time and again. Furthermore, methodologies (ways of collecting data) change as new technologies are introduced and questions can be asked and answered differently. The questions can and should be continually asked.... its never done.

The real focus for us is - Is there enough data for us to apply the "precautionary priciple" and set policy to protect species, ecosystems and human civilizations. Why wait until island countries sink below the waves, until all our glacial freshwater sources have melted away to set policy. Even if it turns out that slowing the burn of fossil fuels doesn't help, why wait until these energy reserves all gone to make the transitions to sustainable energy sources.

So, if you get tired of fighting the skeptics with science you can always fight them on strategy! How can we move to a sustainable world, if we rely on a finite resource like fossil fuels?

Also, be careful about the last paragraphs that plea for the dignity and rights of the petroleum worker. They are not our enemy. Unions all over the world are fighting for the just transition of workers from polluting industries to green industries. The transition must be made with policies that protect the workers, that help them retrain for greener jobs or simply protect their income in a transition. These industries are dirty and dangerous to workers. Our fight for sustainable economies is a fight for their health and safety. 

Karen 

 

Here is part of  what Solomon, Director of Energy Probe, told the
Petroleum Club in Calgary recently:


The fears of cataclysm over global warming are unfounded. There is no
consensus on climate change, despite what Al Gore and the UN's Panel on
Climate Change would have you believe.

Let me tell you why most people think that global warming is a serious
problem. It comes down to one number: 2500. That's the number of
scientists associated with the UN's Panel on Climate Change that the press
reports has endorsed the UN Panel's conclusions. These are the conclusions
that get released in the UN's mammoth reports every six years or so, and
that then dominate the media airwaves for weeks.< /p>

"2500 scientists can't be wrong," the press always says, explicitly or
implicitly. Without that number, it would have no basis for the claim that
they repeat over and over again -- that there's a consensus on climate
change.

2500 is an impressive number of scientists. To find out who, exactly, they
were, I contacted the Secretariat of the United Nations Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, and asked for their names. The Secretariat
replied that the names were not public, so I couldn't have them. And I
learned that the 2500 scientists were reviewers, not endorsers.

Those scientists hadn't endorsed anything. They had merely reviewed one or
more of the literally hundreds of background studies, some important and
some not, that were part of this immense United Nations bureaucratic
process. They did not review the final report or endorse it.

Their reviews weren't even all favorable. I know that from many sources,
including from among some of the scientists that I profiled -- several of
the deniers in my book are among those 2500. And those deniers, and
others, generally consider the UN's work a travesty.

There is no endorsement by 2500 top UN scientists. The press has been
taken. And so the public has been taken.

The extent to which the public has been taken may surprise you. Not only
is there no consensus, the scientists who are skeptics -- the deniers --
have extraordinary credentials, people at the very top echelons of the
scientific establishment. They are the Who's Who of Science.

Not only do they disagree with the UN conclusions, they often value CO2
for the benefits it provides the planet -- satellite data shows the planet
is now the greenest it has been in decades. Until recently, after all, CO2
was universally viewed as Nature's fertilizer.

If these top scientists are right, you are being attacked without
justification. You are being painted as criminals and your children are
being made to feel ashamed of what you do. You are being victimized, in a
modern form of shunning.

Your present strategy of lying low and hoping all this will pass has
gotten you nowhere. You need to make your case, factually and frankly. The
public will be skeptical of your arguments, as it should be. But if your
critics can't counter your factual arguments, it is your critics who will
fail.

You need to decide. Do you want to go on being attacked for something that
may be laudable, for producing CO2 may well be laudable? Do you want to go
on feeling guilty out of public ignorance of where scientists truly stand
on the global warming issue?

On global warming, the science is not settled. You have the facts on your
side. But facts will count for naught as long as you see the battle as
lost.

-Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe.

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Lead Indicator for Greenhouse Gas Trend

Posted June 6, 2008 17:53 by Karen in Climate Change

Release - June 5, 2008

Atmospheric CO2 reached 388.49 parts per million (ppm) in the month of May 2008, according to scientific data released yesterday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States. Carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas responsible for global warming and climate change.

The accelerating, upward trend for atmospheric CO2 remains clear. The concentration of CO2. It was 384.94 ppm in May 2006. Last year, in May 2007, atmospheric CO2.

The five year average annual rates of increase for May 2004 through until May 2008 ranged from 0.52% to 0.59% per year, or about 2.13 ppm per year. These rates of increases were all higher than the five year averages for any recorded month of May prior to 2004.

The last annual decline recorded in May was 43 years ago when CO2 dropped slightly from 322.23 in May 1964 to 322.16 in May 1965. Historical CO2 measurements, including ice core samples, indicate that atmospheric CO2 concentrations remained under 300 ppm for 650,000 years. Today's upward trend started at the beginning of the industrial era, about 250 years ago. The highest-ever CO2 levels were first recorded and reported at Mauna Loa for the month of April 2008 until surpassed again in May 2008. The annual CO2 cycle usually peaks in May.

The first high-precision measurements of atmospheric CO2 began in March 1958 at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. The Mauna Loa data set is the longest continuous record of atmospheric CO2. Measurements are made more than 2 miles above sea level, a location isolated from vegetation and civilization. The data is used by climate scientists and climate modellers from around the world.

Monthly CO2 data from Mauna Loa serves as the world’s most current, scientific indicator for the trend direction for the main greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. Mauna Loa data is published within a week after data collection has been completed for a given month.

Data for the latest month is preliminary and subject to quality control checks. Data revisions occur from time to time. Most revisions are small and do not affect the overall CO2 trend. Mauna Loa monthly mean data can be viewed directly at the NOAA website.

A global network of measuring stations provides additional sets of carbon dioxide data. Other data sources indicate regional trends and corroborate with data reported from throughout the network. Global mean data is made public two months after the Mauna Loa data is published.

This release is distributed independently by Fresh O2 Solutions, the Earth's first home page and site dedicated to the continuous display of current CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Launched in December 2007, the site is hosted privately from Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, to help make the direction of atmospheric CO2 visible for all.

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

K-12 Publisher Goes Green

Posted June 4, 2008 17:38 by Karen in Business, Climate Change

Short posting about a business taking the lead!! 

The B.C government recently signed an aggressive environmental policy mandating the decrease of greenhouse gasses by 33%. The policy pushes public sector organizations, including K-12 schools, to make greener decisions.

To aid in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, Etraffic Press has developed a publishing model that allows schools to reduce the required number of physical textbooks -- leading to a carbon and cost savings of 50% - 70%.

Etraffic Press is a British Columbia based K-12 publishing company that creates textbooks combined with online media for modern learning.

The Etraffic Press publishing model alone has the potential to save 41,859 tonnes of carbon emissions each year for schools in Canada.

To read the full press release, and learn more about the new environmental policy: http://etrafficpress.com/green2.php

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Cycling to Planetary Happiness

Posted June 4, 2008 16:20 by Karen in Active Living, Active Transporation, Climate Change, Green Living

I had to pass this great article along....

Cycling to Planetary Happiness
by Guy Dauncey EcoNews, June 3rd 2008
Two wheels on the road, the summer air in your face - it’s a wonderful way to travel!

When we look at the urgent need to eliminate our carbon emissions, plus the end of cheap oil and the benefits of being healthy and fit, cycling has to be one of the most important transport initiatives we should be investing in.
Coaches, transit, light rail, electric vehicles, ride-sharing, walking – these are all part of the answer.
But cycling should have a special place on the list, because it brings so many benefits. In Copenhagen, where 36% of the population commutes to work by bike, cycling has become such a style that they have invented a verb, “Copenhagenize”, to capture what’s happening. (www.copenhagenize.com)
And just look at the economics of it. They know from their health statistics that physically active people live five years longer and have four fewer years of lengthy illness than those who are non-active.
They know that cycling for four hours a week – 10 km a day, a typical Copenhagen bike ride – makes a person physically active.
They know that if Copenhageners cycled 10% more kilometres each year, their health system would save $12 million a year, and their economy would benefit from $32 million a year of production not lost to illness. There would be 57,000 fewer sick days in the workplace each year, 61,000 more person-years
 enjoyed, and 46,000 fewer person-years lost to lengthy illness.
They know that each additional kilometre of bike lane attracts 170,000 more cycle-kilometres a year, 19% more bikes on that stretch of road, a 9-10% drop in the number of cars, accidents and injuries, $51,000 in saved health care costs, and $134,000 in saved production costs. For every dollar they invest in the bike lane, they save 5 dollars. Knowing this, Copenhagen has set a goal that 50% of all work trips should be by bicycle by 2015. (For the study details, click here.)
Copenhagen has a 36% rate of bicycle-commuting, while Victoria has a 6% rate - and we boast that we are the cycling capital of Canada. And yes, it rains just as much as in Victoria. They get 71 cm a year; we get 66.5 cm.

So what would it take for Victoria – and other North American cities - to reach a 36% level of cycling, with all the multiple benefits it brings?
If I was the Premier – a game we all love to play – I would first ask all my Ministries to adopt integrated long-term co-budgeting, so that a $100 million investment in cycling that was known to generate long-term savings of $500 million in health care and business costs would win immediate approval from the Treasury Board mandarins.
Secondly, I would ask every municipality to prepare a long-term plan to increase the commuter cycling rate to 25% by 2020, drawing on the best examples from around the world.
What would such a future look like? Every major road would have a cycle lane, separated from traffic by a yellow rumble strip, like the ones that we have on highways to tell you when you’re veering off the road. Throughout the city, there would be a network of safe cycle routes where most traffic was not allowed, using a mixture of railway rights of way, back lanes, and quiet residential streets.
At every major intersection, cyclists would be allowed to gather in front of the traffic, and given 30 seconds to advance with all lights on red, before cars were allowed to go.
All over the city, there would be safe, sheltered, bicycle parking places.
As in Paris, where 24,000 VeLib bikes were placed on the city streets last year, there would be city-bikes bikes for rent by the half-hour, using a smartcard. To guard against theft, you would lose a $150 deposit if you didn’t return the bike to a bike station after use.
Every community would hire bicycle planners. Davis, California, which has a 17% cycle-commute rate, has two full-time cycling staff for a population of 64,000. A region of 300,000 people would employ ten full-time cycling staff.
For those not fit enough yet, or who can’t make the hills, electric bikes would become the norm, costing only one cent per 20 kilometres.
Every school would have its Safe Routes to School, and all parents would be strongly encouraged to stop driving their kids to school.
The magic of this is that the more cycling there is, the safer it becomes, because – from Denmark’s experience - when more motorists are also cyclists, they are better able to understand the cyclist’s needs.
And not just here, but all over the planet. When such a simple technology already exists with so many benefits, how foolish could we be not to make the most of it?
June 2nd to 8th is Bike to Work Week in BC – so let’s celebrate it, knowing that we are biking not just for our pleasure, but also for our planet, our health, and our children’s future.


From EcoNews, June 2008 - Promoting the Vision of a Sustainable Vancouver Island.
For the full issue, click here.

This article also ran in today's Victoria Times Colonist.

 

 

Currently rated 5.0 by 3 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

The Carbon Pricing Debate

Posted June 4, 2008 12:56 by Karen in Climate Change, Social Change

In order stop the media from running away with the issue, or miss the important questions, I think we all need to get on top of the Carbon Pricing question.

Two great pieces can help understand what questions to ask your MPs and MPPs/MLAs. The first is an article by Alan During of BC and the second is a primer of sorts, by the Pembina Institute and the Suzuki Foundation. Both are relatively short and will trigger greater discussion. My hope is that they lead to quick and effective action not prolonged debate, but lets know what we're talking about and take these politicians to task for their promises on action.

Cap and Trade or Carbon Tax? Both!

Carbon Taxes: Key Issues, Key Questions

Currently rated 3.7 by 3 people

  • Currently 3.666667/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Biofuel Production Ramping up in Canada

Posted May 29, 2008 17:50 by Karen in Business, Climate Change

The Government's legislation that will ramp up the production of biofuels, has passed through parliament yesterday.

There was some small hope that Stephane Dion would reconsider his position on increasing the content of ethanol in gasoline and vote down the governments Bill C-33.

The bill calls for a 5% ethanol content for gasoline by 2010 and 2% biodiesel in diesel and home heating oil by 2012.

A variety of concerns surround the increase in biofuel production, including its true value in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. When unsustainable agribusiness practices are used to grow biofuel crops a whole host of environmental issues emerge from pesticide contamination to soil erosion.

UN sources, human rights groups, and aid agencies have all voiced concern over the increasing use of limited arable biofuels as our global food stocks dwindle and the price of food staple sky-rocket.

This move will clearly ramp up Canada's current capacity to create ethanol and biodiesel before sustainable production guidelines have been put in place. These crucial guidelines would protect the environment, food supplies, and ensure maximum emission reductions from biofuel use.

The bill must now be approved by the Liberal dominated Senate.

Coming to the National Union's website soon: “Ten Reasons to be Concerned about Biofuels” leaflet. Also available is the 2007 publication Greener Transportation: Biofuels: The good and the bad”.

Currently rated 5.0 by 3 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5