Archive for the ‘Climate Change’ Category

Screwed by climate change: 10 cities that will be hardest hit

May 23, 2013

 

23 May 2013 7:22 AM


By Jim Meyer

Hot and Bothered - small x  200
Susie Cagle

Here at Grist, climate change is our bread and melting butter. But this month, we’re feeling especially hot and bothered. As part of our in-depth look at the warming planet, we’ve compiled a list of the U.S. cities that we think will be in the hottest water as the mercury rises — in some cases, up to their foreheads.

A quick note about New Orleans: It’s hard not to include a city that’s already lost so much, but the Big Easy’s new $14.5 billion, state-of-the-art levee system is finally up-and-running just eight short years after Katrina. Some warn that the new system, designed to stop a once-in-a-century storm — the kind that seem to be coming about every other Thursday these days – is already out of date. But it’s better than nothing, especially when compared to the rest of the country, so we’re giving New Orleanians credit as most-improved. That said, here we go!


Phoenix, Ariz. 

phoenix-sun-heat
maliciousmonkey

The founders of Phoenix spotted a particularly dry stretch of desert and thought, “You know what this place could use? Golf courses.” Unfortunately, this town of 4.5 million has been getting hotter by almost adegree a decade since 1961;  in 2011 Phoenix had 33 days over 110. In heat like that, air conditioning is a life-and-death issue, and that A/C runs on America’selectric gridThat’s scary enough, but the power on that grid comes from dams on the Colorado River — the same shrinking river that wets Phoenix’s enormous whistle. Then again, Phoenicians named their town after a bird that periodically bursts into flames, so they must have seen this coming.


Louisville, Ky.

louisville-derby
Ryan Freitas

The only major American city getting hotter faster than Phoenix is Louisville, where the temperature has risen a sweltering 1.67 degrees per decade since 1961. A big part of Louisville’s problem is the startling lack of trees. Trees shade a mere 10 percent of the urban center, just a quarter of what experts say the town needs. Imagining the Kentucky Derby when it gets too hot for horses is bad enough, but if global warming takes our bourbon, shit gets real.


Honolulu, Hawaii

honolulu-stormClick to embiggen.
Daniel Ramirez

Shocker alert: As sea levels rise around the globe, a tiny island in the middle of the Pacific might not be the ideal place to pitch your beach blanket — and because of the oddities of sea level rise, Honolulu could be looking at even more water than other coastal cities. At least climate models predict fewer typhoons, so that’s good for Honolulu, right? Wrong. The ones that hit will be bigger and last longer (that, I believe, is what shesaid), and paradise is square in the crosshairs. The only thing hotter than a Hawaiian Tropics sunscreen admay be the actual Hawaiian Tropics.


Miami, Fla.

miami-hurricaneClick to embiggen.
Claudio Lovo / Shutterstock

Like everywhere else on the Atlantic seaboard, Miami faces stronger and more frequent hurricanes, but that’s just the tip of the melting iceberg. If sea levels rise according to projections, Miami’s aging sewage system will be utterly destroyed, and the city’s famous South Beach neighborhood will be underwater in a few short decades. If Miami Vice were set in the year 2050, Crocket and Tubbs wouldn’t be driving a Ferrari down Ocean Ave. — they’d be rowing it through a heaving sea of human poop. For their sake, I just hope cocaine floats.


Barrow, Alaska

barrowClick to embiggen.
U.S. Coast Guard

You wanna talk tough? The Inupiat people have been living in Barrow, one of the most unforgiving parts of the planet, for 1,500 years. Have you seen Thirty Days of Night? They fought off a whole army of vampires – and not the pretty-boy Twilight kind. But climate change is a more frightening enemy. The Arctic is warming faster than the rest of the planet: Barrow’s ice is receding so quickly that the Mythical Northwest Passage has dropped the “Mythical” sobriquet, and traditional native foods are disappearing. The only thing thriving? Scientists, who arrive in droves to studythe catastrophe. I wonder if climatologists taste like seal?


San Diego, Calif.

san-diego-surfClick to embiggen.
Jeff Rivers

You know that giant statue of the sailor kissing a nurseon the San Diego waterfront? Good thing it’s 50 feet tall: They might be able to keep their heads above sea level. San Diego is a Navy town, but Coronado Island, across the water from downtown, will be underwater in most climate change projections. Die hard San Diegans may stay if Coronado goes, but the Navy may jump ship taking with it the 100,000 sailors and marinesbased there. Here’s hoping the town fathers have some tricks up their sleeves, because visiting Ron Burgundyreenactors won’t be enough to float that economy.


New York, N.Y.

new-york-flare
Michael Tapp

In a 1949 Marvel comic, pointy-eared, sometimes-super-villain Submariner flooded the New York City subways, bringing the city to its knees. In 2012, that villain was Superstorm Sandy. Climate models predictlarger and more frequent storms pummeling the Eastern Seaboard, and the world’s capital, built in a marsh over a system of thoughtfully placed tubes, makes it a hurricane playground. A proposed state-of-the-art levee system could save the city from future storms, but the price could be as high as $29 billion. Are we really expecting Congress to cough up $29 billion for climate change? More likely, the hipsters in Greenpoint will have to find some retro snorkels, slap on couture hip-waders, and double-wax their handlebar mustaches against a style-crushing tide.


The Entire State of Texas

texas-farm-droughtClick to embiggen.
agrilifetoday

Devastating droughts caused by rising temperatures have Texans’ ten gallon hats running on just a couple of quarts. Ranchers are struggling statewide, and farmers who once grew melons and cotton are looking to get by on algae. Meanwhile, ever more powerful hurricanes are a growing menace. And then there are the biblical plagues. It’s a veritable perfect storm for perfect storms. Yes, Texas, we know everything is bigger here, but can you build a wall big enough to keep out climate change? Can you shoot a hurricane? If any state could,it would be you, but let’s face it: One way or another,you’re getting messed with, big time.


South Paris, Maine

Click to embiggen.
Patrick
Click to embiggen.

Climate change would seem to be the last thing South Parisians had to worry about — they already live in South Paris, land of the disappointed tourist (“South Paris? I love buttermilk baguettes, Y’all! Wait, Southwest Maine?”). But South Paris is also home of the company that makes Flexible Flier sleds, andsledding sans snow isn’t nearly as much fun as it sounds. South Parisans might not be too worried about climate change, but as in Findlay, Ohio, where they make winter tires, and Batavia, Ill., where they make snow shovels, business-as-usual will cease to exist, and soon.


Park City, Utah

Click to embiggen.
Mark Stevens
Click to embiggen.

Visitors to Park City should probably prep for disappointment. Climate models predict the complete loss of Park City’s famous snowpack by 2100 – surely a painful notion for a town that once hosted Winter Olympic events. There is hope, though. Maybe tourists will keep coming for the 3.2 beer, or the odd chance of meeting an Osmond. Runners up for this spot include Vail, Colo., which might lose skiing, but will still have I-70, so people can stop by on their way east to Kansas City; and Columbia Falls, Mont., which may need a new motto, as “Gateway to Glacier National Park” loses its spark without the, y’know, glaciers. How does, “Gateway to Columbia Falls Aluminum Company,” look on a bumper sticker?

Coming next: The 10 cities that will be sitting pretty in a warming world.

Jim Meyer is a Baltimore-based stand-up comedian, actor, retired roller derby announcer, freelance writer, and web editor for the Baltimore City Forestry Board. Follow his exploits at his website and on Twitter.
Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.
READ MORE: CITIESCLIMATE & ENERGY

Scientific Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change

May 20, 2013

May 15, 2013 — A comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed articles on the topic of global warming and climate change has revealed an overwhelming consensus among scientists that recent warming is human-caused.

The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming — 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing human-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)

Led by John Cook at the University of Queensland, the study has been published 16 May, in IOP Publishing’s journal Environmental Research Letters.

The study went one step further, asking the authors of these papers to rate their entire paper using the same criteria. Over 2000 papers were rated and among those that discussed the cause of recent global warming, 97 per cent endorsed the consensus that it is caused by humans.

The findings are in stark contrast to the public’s position on global warming; a 2012 poll* revealed that more than half of Americans either disagree, or are unaware, that scientists overwhelmingly agree that Earth is warming because of human activity.

John Cook said: “Our findings prove that there is a strong scientific agreement about the cause of climate change, despite public perceptions to the contrary.

“There is a gaping chasm between the actual consensus and the public perception. It’s staggering given the evidence for consensus that less than half of the general public think scientists agree that humans are causing global warming.

“This is significant because when people understand that scientists agree on global warming, they’re more likely to support policies that take action on it.”

In March 2012, the researchers used the ISI Web of Science database to search for peer-reviewed academic articles published between 1991 and 2011 using two topic searches: “global warming” and “global climate change.”

After limiting the selection to peer-reviewed climate science, the study considered 11 994 papers written by 29 083 authors in 1980 different scientific journals.

The abstracts from these papers were randomly distributed between a team of 24 volunteers recruited through the “myth-busting” website  skepticalscience.com, who used set criteria to determine the level to which the abstracts endorsed that humans are the primary cause of global warming. Each abstract was analyzed by two independent, anonymous raters.

From the 11,994 papers, 32.6 per cent endorsed AGW, 66.4 per cent stated no position on AGW, 0.7 per cent rejected AGW and in 0.3 per cent of papers, the authors said the cause of global warming was uncertain.

Co-author of the study Mark Richardson, from the University of Reading, said: “We want our scientists to answer questions for us, and there are lots of exciting questions in climate science. One of them is: are we causing global warming? We found over 4000 studies written by 10 000 scientists that stated a position on this, and 97 per cent said that recent warming is mostly man made.”

*http://www.pewresearch.org/2013/04/02/climate-change-key-data-points-from-pew-research/

Share this story on FacebookTwitter, andGoogle:

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materialsprovided by Institute of Physics, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal Reference:

  1. John Cook, Dana Nuccitelli, Sarah A Green, Mark Richardson, Bärbel Winkler, Rob Painting, Robert Way, Peter Jacobs, Andrew Skuce. Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literatureEnvironmental Research Letters, 2013; 8 (2): 024024 DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:

APA

MLA

Institute of Physics (2013, May 15). Scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change.ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 20, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2013/05/130515203048.htm

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

What Will It Take for Us to Recognize That the Way We Live Could Be Destroying Life as We Know It?

May 16, 2013
  ENVIRONMENT

CO2 is at a level not seen in millions of years—if this happened in science fiction, the planet would pay attention.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com/Sangoiri

May 14, 2013  |

Say goodnight, Earthlings.

That message — plus the slimmest of shots at an eleventh-hour reprieve — was announced to the people of the world last week.

When this happens in science fiction — 1951’s “The Day the Earth Stood Still” is the classic — the planet pays attention.  The flying saucer lands; an alien, in this case played by Michael Rennie, emerges; a final warning is issued:  Stop it.  If you don’t, you’re doomed.

Back then, the “it” was violence — the Cold War, and the threat of nuclear midnight.  Last week, it was climate change — greenhouse gases, and the promise of ecological extinction.

“Heat-Trapping Gas Passes Milestone, Raising Fears,” ran the headline on the front page lead  story in Saturday’s New York Times, with this sub-head: “CO2 at Level Not Seen in Millions of Years, Portending Major Climate Changes.”

A headline like that — millions of years? really? — normally turns up in comic books and superhero movies, not in the paper of record.  In fiction, what usually comes next is a montage.  At breakfast tables and on street corners, in souks and igloos, in the Oval Office and at the U.N., the shocking news galvanizes humanity into action.

In the real world, it was pretty much a one-day story.

What does it take to grab us by the eyeballs?  Chris Christie’s waistline is guaranteed wall-to-wall coverage.  The next Jodi Arias is waiting in CNN’s wings.  The Benghazi circus will be in town at least through 2016.  Sure, disaster porn is always good for ratings, but though a Superstorm Sandy may momentarily raise the specter of climate change, daily bulletins on the parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere apparently aren’tNielsen enough.

It’s not that people who know our planet’s hair is on fire aren’t trying to get our attention. The  animated graph from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration‘s Earth Science Research Lab showing how atmospheric carbon dioxide has changed over the last 800,000 years should be as horrifying as any computer-generated imagery Hollywood has to offer.  Along with the news that we had hit the 400 ppm mark on the CO2 curve for the first time since the Pliocene epoch came scary quotes from  scientist after scientist calling this our last chance before the point of no return.  Unless we act, children born today will see temperatures rise irreversibly and sea levels rise catastrophically.  Weather patterns will be disrupted, deserts and  drought will spread and—in the  words of Lord Stern, head of the U.K.’s Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment—“hundreds of millions of people will be forced to leave their homelands because their crops and animals will have died …  [W]hen they try to migrate into new lands … [they will be brought] into armed conflict with people already living there.  Nor will it be an occasional occurrence.  It could become a permanent feature of life on Earth.”

If graphs and quotes aren’t sexy enough to warrant a permanent place in the news, there are other ways to hang on to the spotlight.   The Climate Reality Project’s website features 18 disturbing but entertaining videos about the price of carbon and our addiction to fossil fuels.  “ Do the Math,” the film that journalist Bill McKibben is using to spark his  350.org movement, has a dramatic narrative that’s compelling but not preachy.  “The Years of Living Dangerously,” Showtime’s climate change documentary series now being shot, has producers who know a little something about how to capture audiences: James Cameron, Jerry Weintraub and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The Fire Next Time: Media Advice for Reporting this Year’s Climate Change Stories

May 16, 2013

Published on Wednesday, May 15, 2013 by Common Dreams

by John Atcheson

It’s noon in Southern California… a place known for its friendly climate and pleasant temperatures.  But today, the thermometer already reads 97degreesA firefighter tried to extinguish a fire in Russia’s Ryazan region last August amid sweltering heat. (Photo: Reuters)

Not very hospitable.

Last week, freak Santa Anna winds swept a freak spring forest fire across LA county, while  snowpack and rainfall had reached unprecedented lows in the face of record demands for water … get used to that word: unprecedented.

Of course, it’s not just a southern California problem.  These kinds of events are  global.  Australia is alternately shriveling up like a dried prune and coping with biblical floods.  The Arctic ice is literally evaporating.  Habitats across the globe are shrinking and we seem headed for an  “extinction event” of a magnitude seen only rarely in geologic time.

“Extinction Event.”  Ponder that phrase a moment.  What we’re talking about is mass death – a kind of holocaust perpetrated on the natural world and all that inhabits it.

Here’s a news lead you can expect to be needing this year, again and again:  The unprecedented ______ continues into its ____, toppling records, spreading misery, and costing us _____. The cause of all this is ____ Relief can be expected ___.

So, mainstream media, save yourselves some work.  Set the text now.  Film the B-roll, and prepare to just fill in the blanks.   You’ll be set for the year.

Here’s some plug and play terms you can use to fill in blank number 1: Heat wave; drought; torrential rains; floods; fires; pandemic; mass migrations; desertification; melting … there are others, of course.  But this’ll get you ready for most.

For blank number 2 choose from a variety of timeframes – days, weeks, months, even years – as in the drought over much of the US which has been effectively going on since 2010, with as much as 80% of the land area labeled as abnormally dry, and 62% in a  full state of drought.  Of course, if you’re taking the long view, you’ll have to be ready with some handy phrases like “in recorded history” (as in rate of temperature increases) or “since humans have inhabited the planet” (atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, extent of Arctic ice, ocean acidity) …

Blank number 3 can be handled with “hundreds of billions of dollars (See Sandy, for example – and you might want to have a “trillions” in your hip pocket if the worst forecasts come a little early.

Which they seem likely to do.  Turns out, geologic records strongly suggest that the atmosphere is far more sensitive to carbon dioxide  than our models suggest.  Last time there was this much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was in the mid-Pliocene, a time when the Arctic was ice-free and sea-levels were 82 feet higher than today.   Compare this to IPCC forecasts, and you get an idea of how wide the gap between observed phenomena and modeling is in some cases.

As Joe Romm notes, throw in feedbacks and the nightmare scenarios from the paleo-climate record are more likely to be the future we face, than anything the IPCC models report.

So another thing you MSM folks can do is to prepare to greet the new IPCC assessment coming out this year with a little healthy skepticism. Not the kind you’ve  historically demonstrated – that is, repeating denier talking points from the fossil fuel industry and their paid Republican spokesmen as if they were credible.

OK, they’ve managed to buy off a lot of Democrats, too. But at least Democrats have the decency to skulk about in back rooms when they’re getting paid off.  Republicans are mounting an all out assault on science, reason, and reality, in plain view of the public.  In fact, a lot of them actually believe the shit they’re spewing. That’s scary.

But back to the issue of skepticism.  See, the IPCC is intentionally designed to provide the most conservative  — and therefore understated – characterization of the impacts of global warming.  Requiring a lengthy consensus process means the science will be only as bold and the meekest scientist will support, and it also means the data they rely upon will be out of date on date of issue.  Just as it has been historically for sea-level rise, droughts, temperatures and a host of other horror stories.

Of course, taking the long view is something you MSM folks don’t do often or well. Taking money from self-interested advertisers in exchange for spewing their propaganda?  That you do well.

Now those last two blanks.  They’re easy.   Blank number 4 is “climate change or global warming.” Blank number 5 is: “ when we stop burning fossil fuels and get the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide below 350 ppm.” There is one other answer to number 5 – you can continue to be “balanced,” equating the talking points of self-interested corporations and ignoramuses with those of scientists and realists.  Then the answer to number 5 is “never.”

It’s come to that. This is the time. You are the hope of civilization. You can rise to the ideals and canons that once shaped the field of journalism and help us save ourselves, or you can continue with irresponsible faux balance and infotainment and doom us all.

John Atcheson

John Atcheson is author of the novel, A Being Darkly Wise, an eco-thriller and Book One of a Trilogy centered on global warming. His writing has appeared in The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the San Jose Mercury News and other major newspapers. Atcheson’s book reviews are featured on Climateprogess.org.

Human Indifference on Climate Imperils 50,000 Species Worldwide: Study

May 15, 2013

Published on Monday, May 13, 2013 by Common Dreams

y

Biodiversity loss related to the impact of global warming will negatively effect 57 percent of plants and 34 percent of animal species across the planet

- Jon Queally, staff writer

Thanks to humankind’s enormous consumption of fossil fuels over the last century and its refusal to bring down carbon emissions, a new study says that 50,000 of the world’s common plant and animals species are now at severe risk of losing their natural habitat in the coming decades.

Scientists from Australia, the UK, and Colombia say that if if carbon emissions are not sharply reduced—and soon—huge areas of habitat will become unlivable. According to the study, 57 percent of plant species and 34 percent of animals are likely to lose somewhere near half of “their present climatic range by the year 2080s.”

Plants, reptiles, and amphibians are predicted to be hit hardest.

“Climate change will greatly reduce biodiversity, even for many common animals and plants,” said the study’s lead author Rachel Warren of the University of East Anglia in England.

It’s not too late, according to the study’s abstract, but action must be taken soon:

With mitigation[...] losses are reduced by 60% if emissions peak in 2016 or 40% if emissions peak in 2030. Thus, our analyses indicate that without mitigation, large range contractions can be expected even amongst common and widespread species, amounting to a substantial global reduction in biodiversity and ecosystem services by the end of this century. Prompt and stringent mitigation, on the other hand, could substantially reduce range losses and buy up to four decades for climate change adaptation.

Though the scienstists admit that predicting accurately the manner in which plants and animals will adapt to future climate change is difficult, their statements also contend that many of their estimates about biodiversity loss are “conservative” in light of the rapid changes seen by numerous studies in recent years.

Just days ago, new atmospheric data showed the world’s carbon levels have crossed the 400 parts per million threshold which scientists say indicates the dire nature of the climate change situation.

“It feels like the inevitable march toward disaster,” said Maureen E. Raymo, a Columbia University earth scientist, in response to the new emission numbers.

Reporting on the biodiversity loss study, Reuters puts the alarming findings in context:

Almost 200 governments have agreed to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees C (3.6F) above pre-industrial times. They plan to agree, by the end of 2015, a deal to curb emissions.

Global average surface temperatures have risen by 0.8 degree C (1.4F) since the Industrial Revolution.

The amount of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere topped 400 parts per million for the first time since measurements began in 1958, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said on Friday.

A U.N. panel of climate scientists says it is at least 90 percent likely that human activities, rather than natural variations, are the main cause of warming since about 1950.

Climate Change Will Cause Widespread Global-Scale Loss of Common Plants and Animals, Researchers Predict

May 14, 2013

May 12, 2013 — More than half of common plants and one third of the animals could see a dramatic decline this century due to climate change, according to research from the University of East Anglia.

Research published today in the journal Nature Climate Change looked at 50,000 globally widespread and common species and found that more than one half of the plants and one third of the animals will lose more than half of their climatic range by 2080 if nothing is done to reduce the amount of global warming and slow it down.

This means that geographic ranges of common plants and animals will shrink globally and biodiversity will decline almost everywhere.

Plants, reptiles and particularly amphibians are expected to be at highest risk. Sub-Saharan Africa, Central America, Amazonia and Australia would lose the most species of plants and animals. And a major loss of plant species is projected for North Africa, Central Asia and South-easternEurope.

But acting quickly to mitigate climate change could reduce losses by 60 per cent and buy an additional 40 years for species to adapt. This is because this mitigation would slow and then stop global temperatures from rising by more than two degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial times (1765). Without this mitigation, global temperatures could rise by 4 degrees Celsius by 2100.

The study was led by Dr Rachel Warren from UEA’s school of Environmental Sciences and the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. Collaborators include Dr.Jeremy VanDerWal at James Cook University in Australia and Dr Jeff Price, also at UEA’s school of Environmental Sciences and the Tyndall Centre. The research was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC).

Dr Warren said: “While there has been much research on the effect of climate change on rare and endangered species, little has been known about how an increase in global temperature will affect more common species.

“This broader issue of potential range loss in widespread species is a serious concern as even small declines in these species can significantly disrupt ecosystems.

“Our research predicts that climate change will greatly reduce the diversity of even very common species found in most parts of the world. This loss of global-scale biodiversity would significantly impoverish the biosphere and the ecosystem services it provides.

“We looked at the effect of rising global temperatures, but other symptoms of climate change such as extreme weather events, pests, and diseases mean that our estimates are probably conservative. Animals in particular may decline more as our predictions will be compounded by a loss of food from plants.

“There will also be a knock-on effect for humans because these species are important for things like water and air purification, flood control, nutrient cycling, and eco-tourism.

“The good news is that our research provides crucial new evidence of how swift action to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gases can prevent the biodiversity loss by reducing the amount of global warming to 2 degrees Celsius rather than 4 degrees. This would also buy time — up to four decades — for plants and animals to adapt to the remaining 2 degrees of climate change.”

The research team quantified the benefits of acting now to mitigate climate change and found that up to 60 per cent of the projected climatic range loss for biodiversity can be avoided.

Dr Warren said: “Prompt and stringent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions globally would reduce these biodiversity losses by 60 per cent if global emissions peak in 2016, or by 40 per cent if emissions peak in 2030, showing that early action is very beneficial. This will both reduce the amount of climate change and also slow climate change down, making it easier for species and humans to adapt.”

Information on the current distributions of the species used in this research came from the datasets shared online by hundreds of volunteers, scientists and natural history collections through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF).

Co-author Dr Jeff Price, also from UEA’s school of Environmental Studies, said: “Without free and open access to massive amounts of data such as those made available online through GBIF, no individual researcher is able to contact every country, every museum, every scientist holding the data and pull it all together. So this research would not be possible without GBIF and its global community of researchers and volunteers who make their data freely available.”

Share this story on FacebookTwitter, andGoogle:

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materialsprovided by University of East Anglia.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal Reference:

  1. R. Warren, J. VanDerWal, J. Price, J. A. Welbergen, I. Atkinson, et al. Quantifying the benefit of early climate change mitigation in avoiding biodiversity lossNature Climate Change, 2013 DOI: 10.1038/nclimate1887
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:

APA

MLA

University of East Anglia (2013, May 12). Climate change will cause widespread global-scale loss of common plants and animals, researchers predict. ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 13, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2013/05/130512140946.htm

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Researchers Find a Way to Make Steel Without Greenhouse-Gas Emissions

May 9, 2013

May 8, 2013 — Anyone who has seen pictures of the giant, red-hot cauldrons in which steel is made — fed by vast amounts of carbon, and belching flame and smoke — would not be surprised to learn that steelmaking is one of the world’s leading industrial sources of greenhouse gases. But remarkably, a new process developed by MIT researchers could change all that.

The new process even carries a couple of nice side benefits: The resulting steel should be of higher purity, and eventually, once the process is scaled up, cheaper. Donald Sadoway, the John F. Elliott Professor of Materials Chemistry at MIT and senior author of a new paper describing the process, says this could be a significant “win, win, win” proposition.

The paper, co-authored by Antoine Allanore, the Thomas B. King Assistant Professor of Metallurgy at MIT, and former postdoc Lan Yin (now a postdoc at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), has just been published in the journal Nature.

Worldwide steel production currently totals about 1.5 billion tons per year. The prevailing process makes steel from iron ore — which is mostly iron oxide — by heating it with carbon; the process forms carbon dioxide as a byproduct. Production of a ton of steel generates almost two tons of CO2emissions, according to steel industry figures,accounting for as much as 5 percent of the world’s total greenhouse-gas emissions.

The industry has met little success in its search for carbon-free methods of manufacturing steel. The idea for the new method, Sadoway says, arose when he received a grant from NASA to look for ways of producing oxygen on the moon — a key step toward future lunar bases.

Sadoway found that a process called molten oxideelectrolysis could use iron oxide from the lunar soil to make oxygen in abundance, with no special chemistry. He tested the process using lunar-like soil from Meteor Crater in Arizona — which contains iron oxide from an asteroid impact thousands of years ago — finding that it produced steel as a byproduct.

Sadoway’s method used an iridium anode, but since iridium is expensive and supplies are limited, that’s not a viable approach for bulk steel production on Earth. But after more research and input from Allanore, the MIT team identified an inexpensive metal alloy that can replace the iridium anode in molten oxide electrolysis.

It wasn’t an easy problem to solve, Sadoway explains, because a vat of molten iron oxide, which must be kept at about 1600 degreesCelsius, “is a really challenging environment. The melt is extremely aggressive. Oxygen is quick to attack the metal.”

Many researchers had tried to use ceramics, but these are brittle and can shatter easily. “I had always eschewed that approach,” Sadoway says.

But Allanore adds, “There are only two classes of materials that can sustain these high temperatures — metals or ceramics.” Only a few metals remain solid at these high temperatures, so “that narrows the number of candidates,” he says.

Allanore, who worked in the steel industry before joining MIT, says progress has been slow both because experiments are difficult at these high temperatures, and also because the relevant expertise tends to be scattered across disciplines. “Electrochemistry is a multidisciplinary problem, involving chemical, electrical and materials engineering,” he says.

The problem was solved using an alloy that naturally forms a thin film of metallic oxide on its surface: thick enough to prevent further attack by oxygen, but thin enough for electric current to flow freely through it. The answer turned out to be an alloy of chromium and iron — constituents that are “abundant and cheap,” Sadoway says.

In addition to producing no emissions other than pure oxygen, the process lends itself to smaller-scale factories: Conventional steel plants are only economical if they can produce millions of tons of steel per year, but this new process could be viable for production of a few hundred thousand tons per year, he says.

Apart from eliminating the emissions, the process yields metal of exceptional purity, Sadoway says. What’s more, it could also be adapted to carbon-free production of metals and alloys including nickel, titanium and ferromanganese, with similar advantages.

Ken Mills, a visiting professor of materials at Imperial College, London, says the approach outlined in this paper “seems very sound to me,” but he cautions that unless legislation requires the industry to account for its greenhouse-gas production, it’s unclear whether the new technique would be cost-competitive. Nevertheless, he says, it “should be followed up, as the authors suggest, with experiments using a more industrial configuration.”

Sadoway, Allanore and a former student have formed a company to develop the concept, which is still at the laboratory scale, to a commercially viable prototype electrolysis cell. They expect it could take about three years to design, build and test such a reactor.

The research was supported by the American Iron and Steel Institute and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Share this story on FacebookTwitter, andGoogle:

Rich Countries Drag Feet at Climate Talks

May 9, 2013

Stephan Leahy
Inter Press Service/News Analysis
Published: Wednesday 8 May 2013
“The main barrier to confronting the climate crisis isn’t lack of knowledge about the problem, nor is it the lack of cost-effective solutions.”
Article image

Another week of international climate negotiations ended in Bonn, Germany last Friday, but there was little mid-level bureaucrats could do when world leaders remain in thrall to the fossil fuel industry, say environmentalists.

“The main barrier to confronting the climate crisis isn’t lack of knowledge about the problem, nor is it the lack of cost-effective solutions,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“It’s the lack of political will by most world leaders to confront the special interests that have worked long and hard to block the path to a sustainable low-carbon future. Until this changes, we’re not going to see the action we need,” said Meyer, who has attended virtually every climate negotiation over the past 19 years.

Canada offers a perfect example. Its much-promoted strategy for future prosperity is based on pumping two billion of tons of climate-heating CO2 into the atmosphere. Tens of billions of dollars are being invested in the Alberta tar sands to increase production from 1.6 million barrels a day to four to five million a day by 2020.

That translates into one billion tons of CO2 a year from tar sands extraction and burning the resulting fuels.

Canada is also one of the world’s largest natural gas producers, with aggressive expansion plans estimated to result in adding 0.5 billion tons of CO2 annually by 2020 for production and burning.

 

Top this off with 80 to 100 million tons of CO2 from coal and Canada’s ‘normal’ domestic emissions of half a billion tons and Canada’s future prosperity will be based on profiting from dumping two billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. 

The science is clear that to have a good chance of keeping global temperature increases below two degrees C requires global emissions to decline at least six to 10 billion tons below 2011 levels by 2020. And this decline must continue to push emissions lower every year thereafter. Instead emissions are increasing each year.

At least 78 percent of Canada’s proven oil, bitumen, gas and coal reserves, and 89 percent of proven-plus-probable reserves would need to remain underground as part of Canada’s effort to stay below two degrees C, according to a recent study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).

“Business-as-usual for the fossil fuel industry is incompatible with the need to keep the global temperature increase to two degrees C or less,” said CCPA senior economist Marc Lee.

“We are in need of a ‘managed retreat’ from fossil fuel investments,” said Lee.

However, under the Stephen Harper government Canada has pulled out of the Kyoto climate treaty, and reduced its support for energy efficiency and clean energy while continuing to provide more than one billion dollars in annual subsidies or tax incentives for fossil fuel companies.

Despite propaganda that rich countries like Canada take the dangers of climate change seriously, it is absolutely clear they do not. “World leaders are acting like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” Meyer said in a statement.

Developed countries must look at the gap between where the science says their targets should be in 2020, which is 50 percent below 1990 levels, and their current commitments are of just 13 percent, said Augustine Njamnshi of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).

Despite all this the Bonn meeting ended with a positive dynamic, according to many participants. The Association of Small Island States launched a plan designed to have countries commit to deeper cuts in carbon emissions in the next few years. And there was much discussion around the issue ofequity or fairness in terms of emissions reductions for a new climate treaty to be signed in 2015.

However, there were no commitments or specifics, said Njamnshi in a statement.

These discussions will continue at a two-week meeting in June also in Bonn. In November, leaders are slated to attend the annual U.N. climate conference known as COP 19 in Warsaw. There they need to agree on action to shrink the gap between pledges and what science says is needed, said Jan Kowalzig of Oxfam Germany.

“We’re on track to four degrees of warming which will be disastrous for most countries,” Kowalzig told IPS.

In Bonn, there was good discussion on how to reduce the gap, including the Association of Small Island States’ plan to have governments make specific commitments on renewable energy and energy efficiency at COP 19, he said.

The Climate Action Network, a coalition of over 90 civil society organizations including Oxfam, “wholeheartedly support this initiative”, he said.

An action plan for phasing out fossil subsidies also needs to be agreed on at COP 19. In addition, developed countries like Canada, the U.S. and Australia must come prepared to increase “their pathetically low emissions reduction targets,” Kowalzig said.

U.S. Urban Trees Store Carbon, Provide Billions in Economic Value, Finds State-By-State Analysis

May 9, 2013

May 7, 2013 — From New York City’s Central Park to Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, America’s urban forests store an estimated 708 million tons of carbon, an environmental service with an estimated value of $50 billion, according to a recent U.S. Forest Service study.

Annual net carbon uptake by these trees is estimated at 21 million tons and $1.5 billion in economic benefit.

In the study published recently in the journal Environmental Pollution, Dave Nowak, a research forester with the U.S. Forest Service’s Northern Research Station, and his colleagues used urban tree field data from 28 cities and six states and national tree cover data to estimate total carbon storage in the nation’s urban areas.

“With expanding urbanization, city trees and forests are becoming increasingly important to sustain the health and well-being of our environment and our communities,” said U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell. “Carbon storage is just one of the many benefits provided by the hardest working trees in America. I hope this study will encourage people to look at their neighborhood trees a little differently, and start thinking about ways they can help care for their own urban forests.”

Tens of thousands of people volunteered to plant and care for trees for Earth Day and Arbor Day this year, but there are opportunities all year long. To learn about volunteer opportunities near your home, visit the Arbor Day Foundation.

The Forest Service partners with organizations like the Arbor Day Foundation and participates in programs like Tree City USA to recognize and inspire cities in their efforts to improve their urban forests. Additionally the Forest Service is active in more than 7,000 communities across the U.S., helping them to better plan and manage their urban forests.

Nationally, carbon storage by trees in forestlands was estimated at 22.3 billion tons in a 2008 Forest Service study; additional carbon storage by urban trees bumps that to an estimated 22.7 billion tons. Carbon storage and sequestration rates vary among states based on the amount of urban tree cover and growing conditions. States in forested regions typically have the highest percentage of urban tree cover. States with the greatest amount of carbon stored by trees in urban areas are Texas (49.8 million tons), Florida (47.3 million tons), Georgia (42.4 million tons), Massachusetts (39.6 million tons) and North Carolina (37.5 million tons).

The total amount of carbon stored and sequestered in urban areas could increase in the future as urban land expands. Urban areas in the continental U.S. increased from 2.5 percent of land area in 1990 to 3.1 percent in 2000, an increase equivalent to the area of Vermont and New Hampshire combined. If that growth pattern continues, … [read more]

Share this story on FacebookTwitter, andGoogle:

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materialsprovided by USDA Forest Service – Northern Research Station.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal Reference:

  1. David J. Nowak, Eric J. Greenfield, Robert E. Hoehn, Elizabeth Lapoint. Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States.Environmental Pollution, 2013; 178: 229 DOI:10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:

APA

MLA

USDA Forest Service – Northern Research Station (2013, May 7). U.S. urban trees store carbon, provide billions in economic value, finds state-by-state analysis. ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2013/05/130507195815.htm

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Climate Change, Not Human Activity, Led to Megafauna Extinction

May 8, 2013

May 6, 2013 — Most species of gigantic animals that once roamed Australia had disappeared by the time people arrived, a major review of the available evidence has concluded.

The research challenges the claim that humans were primarily responsible for the demise of the megafauna in a proposed “extinction window” between 40,000 and 50,000 years ago, and points the finger instead at climate change.

An international team led by the University of New South Wales, and including researchers at the University of Queensland, the University of New England, and the University of Washington, carried out the study. It is published in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“The interpretation that humans drove the extinction rests on assumptions that increasingly have been shown to be incorrect. Humans may have played some role in the loss of those species that were still surviving when people arrived about 45,000 to 50,000 years ago — but this also needs to be demonstrated,” said Associate Professor Stephen Wroe, from UNSW, the lead author of the study.

“There has never been any direct evidence of humans preying on extinct megafauna in Sahul, or even of a tool-kit that was appropriate for big-game hunting,” he said.

About 90 giant animal species once inhabited the continent of Sahul, which included mainland Australia, New Guinea and Tasmania.

“These leviathans included the largest marsupial that ever lived — the rhinoceros-sized Diprotodon- and short-faced kangaroos so big we can’t even be sure they could hop. Preying on them were goannas the size of large saltwater crocodiles with toxic saliva and bizarre but deadly marsupial lions with flick-blades on their thumbs and bolt cutters for teeth,” said Associate Professor Wroe.

The review concludes there is only firm evidence for about 8 to 14 megafauna species still existing when Aboriginal people arrived. About 50 species, for example, are absent from the fossil record of the past 130,000 years.

Recent studies of Antarctic ice cores, ancient lake levels in central Australia, and other environmental indicators also suggest Sahul — which was at times characterised by a vast desert — experienced an increasingly arid and erratic climate during the past 450,000 years.

Arguments that humans were to blame have also focused on the traditional Aboriginal practice of burning the landscape. But recent research suggests that the fire history of the continent was more closely linked to climate than human activity, and increases in burning occurred long before people arrived.

“It is now increasingly clear that the disappearance of the megafauna of Sahul took place over tens, if not hundreds, of millennia under the influence of inexorable, albeit erratic, climatic deterioration,” said Associate Professor Wroe.

Share this story on FacebookTwitter, andGoogle:

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materialsprovided by University of New South Wales.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal Reference:

  1. Stephen Wroe, Judith H. Field, Michael Archer, Donald K. Grayson, Gilbert J. Price, Julien Louys, J. Tyler Faith, Gregory E. Webb, Iain Davidson, and Scott D. Mooney. Climate change frames debate over the extinction of megafauna in Sahul (Pleistocene Australia-New Guinea)PNAS, 2013 DOI:10.1073/pnas.1302698110
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:

APA

MLA

University of New South Wales (2013, May 6). Climate change, not human activity, led to megafauna extinction.ScienceDaily. Retrieved May 7, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2013/05/130506181711.htm

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers