This is Bad.....Really Bad
 

I knew things were getting toasty....but didnt expect this to happen for a decade at least....shit, we are so screwed.

Warming hits 'tipping point'

Siberia feels the heat It's a frozen peat bog the size of France and Germany combined, contains billions of tonnes of greenhouse gas and, for the first time since the ice age, it is melting

Ian Sample, science correspondent
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian

A vast expanse of western Sibera is undergoing an unprecedented thaw that could dramatically increase the rate of global warming, climate scientists warn today.

Researchers who have recently returned from the region found that an area of permafrost spanning a million square kilometres - the size of France and Germany combined - has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age.

Article continues
The area, which covers the entire sub-Arctic region of western Siberia, is the world's largest frozen peat bog and scientists fear that as it thaws, it will release billions of tonnes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

It is a scenario climate scientists have feared since first identifying "tipping points" - delicate thresholds where a slight rise in the Earth's temperature can cause a dramatic change in the environment that itself triggers a far greater increase in global temperatures.

The discovery was made by Sergei Kirpotin at Tomsk State University in western Siberia and Judith Marquand at Oxford University and is reported in New Scientist today.

The researchers found that what was until recently a barren expanse of frozen peat is turning into a broken landscape of mud and lakes, some more than a kilometre across.

Dr Kirpotin told the magazine the situation was an "ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming". He added that the thaw had probably begun in the past three or four years.

Climate scientists yesterday reacted with alarm to the finding, and warned that predictions of future global temperatures would have to be revised upwards.

"When you start messing around with these natural systems, you can end up in situations where it's unstoppable. There are no brakes you can apply," said David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

"This is a big deal because you can't put the permafrost back once it's gone. The causal effect is human activity and it will ramp up temperatures even more than our emissions are doing."

In its last major report in 2001, the intergovernmental panel on climate change predicted a rise in global temperatures of 1.4C-5.8C between 1990 and 2100, but the estimate only takes account of global warming driven by known greenhouse gas emissions.

"These positive feedbacks with landmasses weren't known about then. They had no idea how much they would add to global warming," said Dr Viner.

Western Siberia is heating up faster than anywhere else in the world, having experienced a rise of some 3C in the past 40 years. Scientists are particularly concerned about the permafrost, because as it thaws, it reveals bare ground which warms up more quickly than ice and snow, and so accelerates the rate at which the permafrost thaws.

Siberia's peat bogs have been producing methane since they formed at the end of the last ice age, but most of the gas had been trapped in the permafrost. According to Larry Smith, a hydrologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, the west Siberian peat bog could hold some 70bn tonnes of methane, a quarter of all of the methane stored in the ground around the world.

The permafrost is likely to take many decades at least to thaw, so the methane locked within it will not be released into the atmosphere in one burst, said Stephen Sitch, a climate scientist at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter.

But calculations by Dr Sitch and his colleagues show that even if methane seeped from the permafrost over the next 100 years, it would add around 700m tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere each year, roughly the same amount that is released annually from the world's wetlands and agriculture.

It would effectively double atmospheric levels of the gas, leading to a 10% to 25% increase in global warming, he said.

Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, said the finding was a stark message to politicians to take concerted action on climate change. "We knew at some point we'd get these feedbacks happening that exacerbate global warming, but this could lead to a massive injection of greenhouse gases.

"If we don't take action very soon, we could unleash runaway global warming that will be beyond our control and it will lead to social, economic and environmental devastation worldwide," he said. "There's still time to take action, but not much.

"The assumption has been that we wouldn't see these kinds of changes until the world is a little warmer, but this suggests we're running out of time."

In May this year, another group of researchers reported signs that global warming was damaging the permafrost. Katey Walter of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, told a meeting of the Arctic Research Consortium of the US that her team had found methane hotspots in eastern Siberia. At the hotspots, methane was bubbling to the surface of the permafrost so quickly that it was preventing the surface from freezing over.

Last month, some of the world's worst air polluters, including the US and Australia, announced a partnership to cut greenhouse gas emissions through the use of new technologies.

The deal came after Tony Blair struggled at the G8 summit to get the US president, George Bush, to commit to any concerted action on climate change and has been heavily criticised for setting no targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...ticle_continue

That is very frightening. I really don't know what the average person can do though??

*moves to alaska*

I suppose...have your air conditioner checked.
I really don't know...

Heh.....typical


Kyoto wont solve this.....I am to the point where I dont think anything will. Thus I think we are totally screwed, as stated.

Nikki... here are some simple things that the average person can do to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas they create.

http://eartheasy.com/article_global_warming.htm

And the article was a typical political hit piece since it tries to tie the tenuous science into Blair-Bush.

The Earth's Climate changes, its has changed drastically over the millennia, and we may well be screwed, but since the Guardian went out of its way to tie this to human causes I am free to make fun of that tie in.

Yes....you are. But, you must admit....it was a typical response from you.

My intent was not to make a political statement (though I admit to the author placing such in the article). I simply did not feel the need to Edit out the "offending" material, for some reason I actually thought there might be some....oh....General Discussion about the effects of Global Warming. Had I wanted to get panties in a twist, I would have placed this in Politics.

Relax Ustwo....no one else in here thought to beat up Bush....but instead focused on the bulk of the article....you know....possible catastrophic climate change.

earth will be here millions of years from now. it may be a smoldering rock from nuclear fallout, or lifeless snowball, but it will still be here.

Will people? probably not.

The world is gonna go bye bye eventually anyway. I have no qualms with this. I've never really worried about what certain things do to affect the planet. Yeah it sounds pretty bad.. maybe it's my realism or maybe it's my assholism :shrug:

/not shitting on your thread.. just saying what I think about the whole environmental thing :)

Then perhaps you should have stated so in your discussion :)

Saying we are screwed and then inserting a political hit piece disguised as science leads one to the conclusion that you endorsed the hit piece.

The article itself does not contain enough science to really talk about how screwed we are. Hell if you want to feel screwed think about the methane hydrate. Last time it melted it was thought to have wiped out 98% of all life :)

(Edit added)
We ARE screwed in one way or another. I'll take global warming over the next ice age, but either way we are going to have issues. The question isn't IF the question is when. Part of the problem is we are getting a flood of information about things such as super volcanos, the Siberian lava flats, global warming, global cooling, past snowball earths etc, and we have very little ability to predict. So while we are screwed there is nothing to do but wait it out.

conserve, adapt, plan and understand that climate patterns has never been stable.

But have such large systems (our own) ever before been dependent on stable climate patterns? Is it time to swing some public conservation funds toward adaptation? Food production, changing shorelines, etc. As individuals we can work toward survival, but that will leave our societies like so much swiss cheese.

I was watching a program recently (I can't recall where, sorry) that explained a different theory of global warming. Yes, global warming does exist - it didn't try to argue against it. Yes, the ice caps will melt.


However. Our current climate depends largely on ocean currents to maintain the temperature. Warm water travels towards the ice caps, gets cold, sinks to the bottom, then returns, causing pressure changes that ultimately help to keep the world a fairly constant temperature. Once those ice caps melt, however, this theory speculates that those ocean currents will slow or stop entirely, and the result will be that the world ends up cooling significantly, likely driving us into another ice age. Apparently, a fairy large body of scientists is leaning towards this probable outcome.

I wish I could explain it better than I've done here, but I don't really remember specifics, just the basic idea.


But my point is - every area of climate science has a different perspective on things. The permafrost guys obviously have a very different view than the ocean current guys. Both of them have lots of evidence in their favor, but they're only looking at one piece of the picture. I don't propose that I know the answer; rather, I think it will be difficult to impossible to know for certain what will happen, simply because there are far too many factors to examine, and everybody has their own ideas.

Remember the guys that told us having too many cows would dangerously increase the methane in the ozone and thus increase global warming? Yeah, they're still around too. Along with ten million other theories. Who could possibly see the whole picture?

Thank you for that link, Charlatan. Ultimately we may be screwed, but I would prefer to act as part of the solution rather than contributing to the problem.

There have been arguments about the significance and reality of global warming for several decades.
The equator is slowly moving upward as the earth takes on a more egg-shaped appearance. Yet countries in South America are experiencing higher levels of UV rays.
Some reports have said that global warming began with the beginning of the Industrial Age, well over 100 years ago, thinning and eventually creating a 'hole' in the ozone layer. (Side note: Lewis Black, the comedian did a bit saying, 'we have the technology, we have Saran Wrap, FIX it!")
Debates will probably go on for decades as to whether the greenhouse effect is real, is man-made or a product of planetary evolution. Some things are done that are completely avoidable, ie: clear cutting forests. Vehicles can and do run on alternate fuels, producing far less pollutants and heat, but Oil Cartels have a death grip on that technology.
I won't be here when catastrophe strikes. I truly pray it won't as my children age either.

Well, while it may be true that, as a species, we are screwed, it would be best if collectively we found a way t ouse the planet on a level that di dnot ACCELERATE that fact. The devesatation caused by our non-sustainable use of this planets resources and our lack of understanding concerning the waste we emit back into it can only cause bigger and more expensive problems down the road, and may lead to huge populaiton losses which, in my opinion, would not necessarily be a bad thing.

Yes, the climate has always fluctuated and, yes, entire ecosystems and groups of flora and fauna have been wiped out during these events. However, these events have always been part of a global system. What we are witnessing now may well be he effects of our own economic/industrial complex where WE are tiggering massive global change.

What the hell, once we're gone the planet will continue to evolve without us, and might evne be better of. Sort of like having a fever, then getting better afterwards once the virus (humans in this case) are gone.

Peace,

Pierre

Life and change...

This discussion brings to my mind a statement my philosophy teacher made in a class one day. I can't remember it word for word however it was something like how we don't question some things, for example we go to bed and not think twice about the sun coming up the next day. We take that for granted. But when we really sit back and think about it, what is to say that it will? What is to say that something won't happen to change that?

This planet has been evolving and changing since it's creation. We may have accelerated this warming process but with the discovery of these peat bogs perhaps naturally this was always going to happen. In my mind, given the history of the planet, I can't see how we can expect everything to stay as stable as it has been in our history.

One thing I do hope for is that during this time of discovery and realisation, we can become more conscientious toward the consequences of our actions, and see how our attitudes and careless thought impacts the global system.

What we do affects not only others... it affects more than we could ever imagine...

For years while in elementary school and high school I kept track, on graph charts taped together, the temperature every morning between 8:00 and 8:30. I did not see a general warming trend. Instead I saw a consistant record breaking temperatures every year both extreme cold and extreme hot. I know what scientists have seen and I don't know entirely what they've based their conclusions on but I tend to believe that the temperatures are just tending towards extremes in both directions not just warmth.

On the paranoid side of things - there are prophecies saying that the world will end in fire. It's going to end eventually, I just hope I and/or my children don't burn up slowly.

raeanna, global climate is a tricky thing. A larger temperature in one arear will result in a record low in another - you have to look globally and worry about the areas that affect most of the world.

No wonder the administration is pushing for a Mars landing.

All shennigans aside, I think we're long overdue for global clansing. There's far too many idiots running around mucking up the planet. We're human: we cannot stop. We could end industrial pollution tomorrow, but somehow, someway the planet will continue to cleanse itself. This is a natural response to an out of control population.

So hang on and hope you're one of the lucky ones to make it through. Here's a hint: Stay away from my lifetime supply of Ramen and you'll do fine.

Here you go-- just eat more beef:

Link

I'm so very terribly worried about climate change.

But if you really want something to agonize over, consider the pesky chupacabra; now there's something everyone should be losing sleep over! Yuck!
http://hellgates.com/chupacabra.gif

This is why we need to get behind NASA and its foreign counterparts more often, so we can expand 'out' while we work to fix our 'in'.

The problem there is that half the time, NASA seems to be trying to find new ways/places to exploit. But what other large organizations (like NASA) are really trying to work on what we're doing here? Maybe I'm missing something here, so I'd like to be more informed. The EPA just really doesn't seem to have the funding nor the support as NASA does. They spend an exorbitant amount of money for tiles on a launch pad for a shuttle to go see if there's clean water somewhere else, but no one around here seems to be cleaning up their own messes or preventing new ones. Perhaps I am jaded, due to living in the middle of Maxwell House, Budweiser, Bacardi, military bases, gravel plants and paper mills. Even NASA was cited for problems with the "nature preserve" that they launch out of in Merritt Island about 6 or 7 years ago, if I remember correctly. I'm watching an alarming number of children in a certain area of town dying from cancer. Here, there are Head Start programs where the neighborhood actually become so angry at the EPA for allowing it to continue on polluted land that the EPA reps had to leave the town meeting because they couldn't record the conversations due to noise level. People are angry about the effects on other people, but leave out the effects on global warming and the environment. At least around here. Well, when the ice caps melt, Florida's a goner anyway.

/steps off soapbox and sits down.

Seeing that this is not the political forum, I won't get in to Jeb, Tecoyah. :D But you should see the environmental bills he's passing right now!

Um.. it was mentioned at the very end, in two sentences. The entire rest of the article was scientific, not speculatory, and contained nothing but data and opinions from experts on the matter. I hardly think that's a political piece.

If your opinion is that 2 sentences at the very end of a long, scientific article makes it a "political piece", then my opinion is you're grasping at straws, looking to dismiss anything you disagree with.

Reread the article. The "humans are causing this" was all over it. It wasn't until the last that it focused on a target. It was a mix of science, speculation, and then followed by political hit.

If I have to point out where in the article they started the speculation I'll be very disapointed..

Edit:As a side note there really was almost zero science in the article, this is normal for a newspaper of course, they don't want science, science is boring, so if anyone has a link to the real paper they could share that may be useful.

If you want something that tells you far more about climate change, read this..


That to me is science, and paints a very interesting picture.link

You can't talk about the world's ecosystem, and it's decline, without including the words "humans have caused this"... because we did... and I see no way how that would have anything to do with the very short comment at the very end about blair and bush. It's easy to see what you're looking for when you want to see it badly enough.

And yes, it's obviously not a fucking term paper or encyclopedia, but presented in a way that most people would read and readily understand. To the notion that it "wasn't very scientific", then, I have only to respond with "DUH."

I'm sorry you can't see that perhaps not everything that happens to the climate on planet earth is due to humans. Try reading the abstract I posted above. It has a lot of scientific jargon in it, but it shows how climate in a region has changed in the last 6000 years +- 4.2 degrees. Glaciers had melted, and reformed. Vegitation levels changed. And all of this pre-industrial revolution.

Of course it could have been due to the Pyramid building, or perhaps Roman expansion.

Did I say "everything, for ever and ever, throughout all time"? No.

The fact of the matter is that to correctly identify the world's current ecological problems, you MUST consider the impact humans and their technology have had on it, in addition to all the other factors. Ignoring or margainalizing our role in our planet's "health" would be foolish and short-sighted.

Wow. Way to completely misinterpret a totally obvious statement and use the syntax to bicker with me and be petty since your other arguments have already been shot down. Good Job.

What has always gotten me about the whole global warming argument is that at this point, it does not matter one dick why it's happening, but that it is happening.

We can spend the next several years bickering over whether it's the burning of fossil fuels, a natural change of course for the earth, a vast left-wing conspiracy, or we can accept that we need to do something to adapt to it. Otherwise, we're gonna start having to sign our leases, deeds, titles, etc. over to the cockroaches.

A more 'scientific' article dealing with the same findings:
http://www.newscientist.com/article....mg18725124.500

I cannot be sure that humans have not contributed to the global warming (even the scientists do not agree with each other) but human activity certainly has the potential to affect the climate.

I think it would be better to be on the safe side and cut emissions anyway. Current action being taken does not have a large effect and I doubt more action will be taken. The decision on wether to act has to occur now because IF it is later discovered that we are the cause of global warming and we haven't acted it mayl be too late.

Then again, I think climate change will take place regardless (because of the no will to act or acting too late or having no power to change anything because it wasn't us in the first place etc). Hopefully nothing too catastrophic will take place and it will be a gradual change.

Actually I thought to beat up Bush, but that thought passes through my mind every couple of minutes. All I can say in relation to this article is: I feel sorry for our kids.

I don't feel sorry for anybody. As a firm believer in evolution, I don't really feel concerned for anybody else but me. My survival is all that really matters. Once I die, and my carcass rots, what happens to the world or the environment, or you, holds no meaning to me. If humans all die, that's no big deal, that's just part of the plan. We'll evolve from amoeba's again in a few million years anyway, right?

I hadn't thought about that. I got to searching and found this link. I think it has relevant information on the subject. I found the information very interesting myself. It looks to me as though I live in one of the areas that has experienced the constant cooling instead of the warming. Apparently though the places experiencing the warming cover a larger portion of the earth. I have mentioned my experience to several meterologists but none of them really knew what I was talking about it seems.

My point in posting this article was to try to bring awareness to the "Fact" that global warming is indeed occuring, and focus on the detrimental effects it will create for humans on this planet. Honestly there were signs, if not proofs of this 60 yrs ago and it was ignored. These indicators have fluctuated over the decades due to the complexities of global climate but, the Data overwhelmingly suggests the heating of our atmosphere/oceans is real.
I just think it is time we accepted this as fact, in order to begin discussion on where we go from here and how to deal with what is a Major issue for our children, if not ourselves. It is likely we, as humans, have not contributed heavily to the change in Earths climate, but we are the ones who will be most damaged by it and are the only species that is capable of understanding it, let alone attempting to change with it.
The article I posted simply grabbed me because of the implications it presents, and the obvious physical changes taking place due to increased temperatures in our world.

Thanks for the article (I tried to access that site last night and it was down), and it does give a better picture of what is going on.

You are correct that current action does not have a large effect. As expensive as the Kyoto protocol is, even in a best case 100% compliance situation it does almost nothing to change the global CO2 levels.

To cut emissions low enough to maybe matter, it would have a drastic effect on the quality of life in the western world, and unless you gave the developing world a 'pass' (which would defeat the purpose) they would have no hope of economic improvement.

To do this based on something we don't understand seems like folly.

CO2 levels must be increased 500% before the eggs inside your brains will hatch.
Soon it will be time for harvest.
Resistance is my favored form of entertainment.