Category: Uncategorized

  • Glacier impact on sea-level rise depends on its shape

    Glacier impact on sea-level rise depends on its shape

    31 May 2013, by Harriet Jarlett

    Four of Greenland’s most important glaciers could contribute up to 5cm to sea-level rise if global temperatures increase by 4.5oC by the end of the 22nd century, say scientists.

    Ice

    As glaciers shrink because of melting and the formation of icebergs, the ice they lose contributes to sea-level rise. Over the past decade the glaciers across Greenland have, been retreating at an accelerating rate and scientists were increasingly concerned about runaway losses causing marked sea-level rise in the future.

    But without a better understanding of the processes that form icebergs and whether the recent rise in calving – chunks of ice breaking off where the glacier meets the ocean – is due to climate change, scientists couldn’t accurately predict how much melting glaciers would add to sea-level rise in the future, until now.

    An international team of scientists created computer models of the four most important glaciers in Greenland, chosen as together they drain around 22 per cent of Greenland’s ice sheet into the ocean. The team then used these models to predict how Greenland’s glaciers could contribute to sea-level rise by 2200.

    The research, published in Nature, shows that how fast a glacier retreats depends on the shape and the landscape it flows over. While all four glaciers are retreating, because of their different shapes they accelerate at different rates and in different ways. By understanding the processes which affect different glaciers, scientists are able to better predict how they will react to warming oceans and atmosphere and can then use models to show how much each individual glacier will contribute more or less to sea level under different warming scenarios.

    Iceberg

    For these four glaciers, the study showed that their shape’s suggest their retreat is unlikely to continue accelerating at the same pace. Instead, under a mid-range climate scenario, where carbon emissions increase through the 21st century so global temperatures rise by 2.8oC, the four glaciers could contribute up to three centimetres to sea-level rise by 2200– less than previous estimates based on current rates of retreat.

    ‘We were mainly interested in understanding the behaviour of these glaciers; is it the warmer ocean currents controlling their rapid retreat, or a warmer atmosphere resulting in more surface melt runoff, or is it a combination of these forcings resulting in icebergs being calved off faster? We wanted to see which of these caused the recent acceleration,’ says Dr Faezah Nick, of the Université Libre de Bruxelles and the lead author of the paper. ‘We tried to model the glaciers so we could see how things would change over the next century and how glaciers would react to different forcing.’

    Ice falls

    The computer model showed that the shape of the glacier and its fjord – the seawater-filled valley it leaves behind – can alter how it responds to a changing climate.

    Two of the four glaciers studied, Helheim and Kangerdlugssauaq, were found to be most sensitive to changes happening where they meet the ocean, which results in large amounts of calving. The area in front of these glaciers is filled with floating chunks of broken ice, and sea ice called ice mélange. Ice mélange may protect the glacier front from calving, but as ocean temperatures rise it melts and more calving occurs.

    This means the glacier can move faster down into the ocean, which in turn results in surface crevasses opening and even more calving.

    Glacier

    Because of its shape, the Petermann glacier’s retreat was unaffected by ice calving. Instead its retreat was mostly affected by the amount of ice melting underneath it. The Petermann glacier has a very long and thin ice shelf so changes happening at its front, where it meets the ocean, affect it much less. Instead, because the glacier has so much ice in contact with seawater along its base, rising ocean temperatures can cause that ice to melt and accelerate its retreat.

    ‘In Summer 2012 and 2010 two large icebergs broke off of the Petermann glacier, but neither had a big influence on the ice flow. There was no speed up because that kind of glacier has a very long and thin shelf and the glacier flow is insensitive to changes at the front,’ says Nick.

    The team are now confident that, despite the rapid changes observed for these glaciers over the last decade, the accelerated retreat is unlikely to continue. But they warn that other glaciers, which have not shown rapid changes yet, may start retreating.

    ‘It’s now clear that each glacier behaves different depending on the geometry of land they sit on and whether they have an ice shelf or not. So if we really want to understand how much sea level rise will be in the next century we need to study each of the major outlet glaciers individually, therefore it is necessary to measure the topography beneath them,’ Nick concludes.


    Nick, F.M., Vieli, A., Andersen, M.L., Joughin, I., Payne, A.J., Edwards, T.L., Pattyn, F. and Roderik van de Wal. (2013) Future sea-level rise from Greenland’s major outlet glaciers in a warming climate. Nature 497, 235-238


    There are no keywords associated with this story.

  • weaken Atlantic ocean currents

    NEWS TO YOUR INBOX

    Sign up for our website and get news each week in our FREE email newswire as well as FREE access to all our premium content. You can also receive a 25% discount on publication of your paper in ERL.

    Sign up now

    Corporate partners

    For maximum exposure, become a Corporate partner. Contact our sales team.

    Buyer’s Guide

    erl.iop.org

    News

    May 30, 2013

    Carbon-dioxide ‘overshoots’ could weaken Atlantic ocean currents

    What is the best way to reduce our carbon-dioxide emissions? Should we wean ourselves off fossil fuels slowly but steadily over the next 100 years, or aim for a sharp exit over the next 50 years? Ultimately both options would release similar amounts of carbon dioxide overall, but the sharp exit would produce a large pulse of carbon dioxide now, whereas the weaning option would be more of a slow exhale of the gas. Which leads to greater climate change: a steady trickle or a big bubble of carbon dioxide? A new model indicates that, in most cases, this timing is irrelevant; what matters is the overall cumulative emissions. However, one scenario was found to affect regional climate change, particularly over Europe.

    Daisuke Nohara from the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry in Japan and colleagues used a fully coupled climate-carbon cycle model to evaluate the dependency of climate and carbon-cycle change on carbon-dioxide “emission pathways” – the timing of carbon-dioxide release. They studied five different pathways, all of which levelled off to final cumulative emissions of 2000 gigatonnes of carbon. One of these scenarios included an “overshoot” where emissions temporarily peaked at 4000 GtC, but subsequently reduced to 2000 GtC as a result of continuous negative emissions, from carbon-capture technology, for example.

    In most cases the model supported the idea that climate change is independent of carbon-dioxide emission pathway. However, Nohara and his colleagues found that temporary “overshoots” of carbon dioxide had a significant impact on regional climate. Despite the eventual cessation in emissions they found that any temporary pulses of carbon dioxide led to a weakened Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC). “This change in AMOC has a major impact on the northward heat transport in the North Atlantic, leading to regional climate change, in particular, over Europe,” explained Nohara. These findings are published in Environmental Research Letters (ERL).

    It seems that the overshoot of carbon dioxide triggers rapid warming in the Arctic region, which enhances a weakened AMOC. And a weakened AMOC induces falling air temperatures and falling rainfall over the northern Atlantic and Europe. The model indicated that this regional variation would persist for at least 150 years after the cessation of carbon-dioxide emissions.

    So it seems that in most cases the way in which we emit our carbon dioxide is irrelevant; it is the cumulative amount that matters. But crucially there are exceptions, which could have serious long-term regional implications. Exactly what these implications are, and how we should adapt our future mitigation strategies, is not yet clear. “We need to carry out more comprehensive analysis of multi-climate model ensembles, rather than basing our results on one single climate model,” said Nohara.

    Related links

    Related stories

    About the author

    Kate Ravilious is a contributing editor for environmentalresearchweb.

  • Global warming is changing Arctic seas from where CO2 is absorbed to where it is produced, new study warns

    Global warming is changing Arctic seas from where CO2 is absorbed to where it is produced, new study warns

    By Damien Gayle

    PUBLISHED: 15:29 GMT, 19 June 2012 | UPDATED: 16:10 GMT, 19 June 2012

     

    The Arctic coastal seas are changing from a sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide to a source of the greenhouse gas because of global warming, new research warns.

    Research into two seas bordering the polar region has shown that they are absorbing ever smaller amounts of atmospheric CO2 and, at points of the year, even becoming a source of the gas.

    The shock finding suggests that climate change could be fast becoming a vicious, inescapable cycle which can only further accelerate the damage to the environment.

    Source of greenhouse gases: In some months of the summer, the Laptev Sea warms so much that it begins releasing CO2 into the atmosphereSource of greenhouse gases: In some months of the summer, the Laptev Sea warms so much that it begins releasing CO2 into the atmosphere

    Most scientists agree that changes to the Earth’s climate are caused by increasing amounts of greenhouse gases released by humans from, for example, the combustion of fossil fuels.

    Carbon dioxide plays a major role in this process. But, until 1994, approximately half for the world’s CO2 emissions from human combustion of fossil fuels was absorbed by the oceans.

    As the amount of carbon dioxide in the oceans rises, however, their capacity to absorb the gas falls, and it remains in the atmosphere.

    Iréne Wåhlström, a marine researcher from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, investigated two of the coastal seas off Siberia, the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea, in a ship-borne expedition, and – in the case of the Laptev Sea – by mathematical modelling.

  • Coalition will ‘get around’ new law on coal seam gas

    Coalition will ‘get around’ new law on coal seam gas

    Environmental assessments will be done by states, says shadow resources minister, speeding up approval process for CSG wells

    Coal seam gas protesters

    Coal Seam Gas protesters blocking a road leading to a CSG operation near Tara, 300km northwest of Brisbane Photograph: Facebook/PR IMAGE

    The Coalition says it will ‘get around’ a new law to force the federal government to take responsibility for coal seam gas, giving power for environmental assessments to the states to speed up the approval process and boost the CSG industry.

    In June the Senate is likely to pass the Gillard government’s legislation requiring the federal government to take account of the cumulative impact on the water table of developments like coal seam gas wells.

    The bill, which inserts water as a trigger under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, was amended in the lower house at the initiative of Independent Tony Windsor. The amendement was intended to “put beyond doubt” that the commonwealth had to give the final approvals for coal seam gas wells, taking into account their impact on water, and that it could not hand this power over to state governments. The Coalition opposed the amendment, but did not oppose the bill, which passed.

    But Coalition resources spokesman Ian Macfarlane says that the new law, even with Windsor’s amendment, “contains nothing to prevent” the Coalition from proceeding with its stated policy intention to hand over environmental assessments to the states, including for gas wells, under strict standards set by the commonwealth.

    “We can get around it,’ he said. ‘We want a one stop shop, and that’s what we will achieve. We’ll delegate approvals to the states. We already have an expert panel to assess water impacts. Labor is assuming the state governments are incompetent and don’t have processes in place to deal with it,” he said.

    “The only thing they will actually achieve is a slower approval process for no environmental benefit, because if the state is handling an assessment and approval they will have to add this to their process”.

    At the same time Macfarlane is pressing NSW to approve more CSG wells because of a looming “gas crisis” in the state.

    He attacked the NSW Government for broad restrictions that have caused a virtual investment freeze on new CSG projects and told a conference this week that NSW “better get busy. They’re facing an enormous crisis”.

    “The pressure we can put on is to make sure the O’Farrell government understands that it’s likely to be in power when Sydney runs out of gas,” Macfarlane said.

    “Gas is either going to get so expensive that some users will stop using it, the price will make it uneconomical or there might not be enough to go around.”

    The chief executive of the Victorian Environmental Defenders’ Office, Brendan Sydes, said Macfarlane was wrong when he said that the new law would not force the commonwealth to make the final decision on projects.

    “The whole intent is to remove the ability to delegate those powers to the states…it is hard to see how you could get around that,” he said.

    And Greens Senator Larissa Waters, a former environmental lawyer, also believes Macfarlane is mistaken.

    “As a former practising environmental lawyer with ten years in this field, I am confident that the amendment moved by Mr Windsor would prevent future federal governments from delegating the decision on whether to approve projects covered by the water trigger to state governments. Any attempt to delegate powers without the explicit statutory power to do so would leave the federal government open to challenge in court for breach of statutory duty and possibly on other grounds too,” she said.

    The coal seam gas industry has been fighting back since escalating community concerns over the environmental impact of CSG prompted the federal government to give in to Mr Windsor’s lobbying for a water trigger. It also prompted the NSW Liberal Government to impose a 2km exclusion zone around residential areas and bans on CSG wells in the Hunter Valley, which is prime agricultural land.

    The NSW Resources and Energy Minister, Liberal Chris Hartcher, said the CSG debate had been captured by a “hard core” of opponents who wanted to shut down all energy from fossil fuels and said the industry had not done enough to explain its case.

    “Industry did not engage in the debate, industry stood back and allowed the debate to happen in the early stages and that vacuum was very quickly filled by the extremist Greens, of which Sydney has its fair share,” he said.

    “The great mass of the community are interested in seeing the community progress. The great mass of the community want economic development, want jobs, want income, want secure life for their families and themselves.”

    Federal resources minister Gary Gray also told companies at the conference that they should work together to argue their case, rather than allow activists to spread “fear and confusion”.

    The Gillard Government also had a policy of handing over environmental assessments to the states in order to cut “green tape” but abandoned it in the face of a backlash from environment groups and failure to get uniform agreements with all states.

    CSG is likely to be a big issue in several NSW seats, in particular New England where Mr Windsor is being challenged by high-profile Nationals candidate, now Senator, Barnaby Joyce.

  • Frequently Asked Questions for Renovators and Homeowners What is ASBESTOS

    Frequently Asked Questions for Renovators and Homeowners

    What is asbestos?
    Asbestos is the generic term for a number of fibrous silicate minerals. Products made from asbestos cement – bonded asbestos material – include fibro sheeting (flat and corrugated) as well as water, drainage and flue pipes, roofing shingles and guttering.

    Only fibro products made before 1987 contain asbestos. In NSW, for example, the use of asbestos was discontinued in fibro sheets by 1982, in corrugated sheets by 1984 and in all other products by 1986. The manufacture and use of asbestos products was banned nationally from 31 December 2003.

    How can asbestos affect my health?
    Breathing in asbestos fibres can cause asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma. The risk of contracting these diseases increases with the number of fibres inhaled and the risk of lung cancer from inhaling asbestos fibres is also greater if you smoke. People who get health problems from inhaling asbestos have usually been exposed to high levels of asbestos for a long time. The symptoms of these diseases do not usually appear until about 20 to 30 years after the first exposure to asbestos.

    What are the health risks for renovators?
    Most people are exposed to very small amounts of asbestos as they go about their daily lives and do not develop asbestos-related health problems. Finding that your home or workplace is made from fibro products does not mean your health is at risk. Studies have shown that these products, if in sound condition and left undisturbed, are not a significant health risk. If the asbestos fibres remain firmly bound in cement, generally you do not need to remove the fibro or even coat it.

    Health problems can occur when people are unaware of the hazards of working with fibro and do not take appropriate precautions. The important point is to always work to avoid or minimise the release of dust or small particles from asbestos material. If you use commonsense and follow basic safety guidelines, working with fibro products should not be a problem.

    How do I know if my fibro contains asbestos?
    The most accurate way to find out if your fibro contains asbestos is to have a licensed asbestos removal contractor inspect and test it. You can’t tell by looking at it. If in doubt, assume asbestos is present and take the necessary precautions.

    How do I find a contractor?
    For a listing of licensed asbestos removal contractors in your area, refer to your local telephone directory or the Yellow Pages.

    How do I check if a contractor is licensed?
    WorkCover NSW’s Asbestos & Demolition Unit can provide license checks on asbestos and demolition contractors. Contact the Asbestos and Demolition Unit on (02) 8260 5885 . For areas out side of the CBD or for further information, contact WorkCover Assistance Service on 13 10 50.

    Where can I get a guide to asbestos removal?
    WorkCover NSW has a guideline on asbestos removal. Contact the WorkCover Assistance Service on 13 10 50 for a copy or visit www.workcover.nsw.gov.au and download a copy of the publication.

    If I want to demolish a shed or building lined with fibro, what do I need to do?
    If you use a contractor to assist you and the area of bonded asbestos sheeting (fibro) is over 10 square metres, then you need to have it removed by a licensed asbestos removal contractor. If under this amount, then a license is not required.

    How do I remove asbestos in a safe manner?
    If fibro sheeting:

    • Do not use power tools. Asbestos fibres can be released if power tools are used for anything other than the removal of screws.
    • Wear an Australian Standards Protection Level 2 (P2) minimum half face disposable mask and disposable coveralls. These are generally available from hardware suppliers. Non-Australian Standards certified masks should not be used where asbestos is present.
    • Wet sheets down to reduce dust generation and movement.
    • Take the sheets off whole (again, do not use power tools as this may create dust movement).
    • Seal sheets in construction grade plastic. (This should be 200 microns thick.)
    • Contact your Local Council for a licensed disposal point in your area. Waste Service NSW on (02) 9934 7000 will be able to help if you live in the Sydney metropolitan area. Contact the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Pollution Line on 13 15 55 for information on legally transporting and disposing of asbestos waste.

    Should the asbestos be in powder form or can be crumbled, pulverized or reduced to powder by hand pressure when dry, then an asbestos removal contractor with an AS1 Licence is required for its removal.

    WorkCover NSW has a guideline on asbestos removal. Contact the WorkCover Assistance Service on 13 10 50 for a copy or visit www.workcover.nsw.gov.au and download a copy of the publication.

    Where do I dispose of asbestos sheeting?
    Contact your Local Council for a licensed disposal point in your area. Waste Service NSW on (02) 9934 7000 will also be able to help if you live in the Sydney metropolitan area. Contact the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Pollution Line on 13 15 55 for information on legally transporting and disposing of asbestos waste.

    I have concerns about the neighbours (or a contractor working for them) taking down a shed or demolishing a house and the dust generated. Are they doing it safely?
    Your neighbour, or their contractor, should be:

    • wearing personal protective equipment
    • taking the sheets off whole and not using power tools to minimise dust
    • not working on windy days
    • wetting down the sheets
    • putting them in a plastic-lined skip.

    If you are worried that they are not doing things safely, contact your Local Council. WorkCover NSW does not have jurisdiction over asbestos removal being performed by individual homeowners on the residential property in which they are living. They should remove asbestos sheeting in line with the guidelines provided by WorkCover to ensure a safe approach to asbestos removal.

    WorkCover NSW does have jurisdiction over contractors and commercial ventures should asbestos removal be performed in an unsafe manner. Contact the WorkCover Assistance Service on 13 10 50 to report an unsafe situation.

    How do I know if my neighbour’s fibro shed or other building has asbestos in it?
    Any inquiries for analysis of suspected asbestos should be directed to NATA – The National Association of Testing Authorities. For a NATA Lab List call (02) 9736 8222 or refer to their website at www.nata.asn.au.

    OR

    Contact a consultant in occupational hygiene who deals with asbestos issues. The Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists has a list of consultants in occupational hygiene on its website at www.aioh.org.au. You can also call the institute on (03) 9335 2577 for further information.

    I may have been exposed to asbestos. My skin and eyes are irritated, what can I do?
    Asbestos does not irritate skin or eyes. It is purely a respiratory problem. However, if you are worried about respiratory damage, you can contact your own doctor or the Dust Diseases Board on (02) 8223 6600 or 1800 550 027.

  • Mapping The 31 Million People Displaced By Climate Change So Far

    Mapping The 31 Million People Displaced By Climate Change So Far

    This is what it looks like when floods, hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons force millions of people to flee their homes.

    When natural disasters strike, people are forced move. The map here shows all the people displaced in 2012–mostly from floods, hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones. The map was created by Norwegian Refugee Council’s Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, which for the last five years has been tracking movements following disasters.

    You can see, for example, that monsoon floods displaced 1.9 million people in Pakistan, and that Hurricane Sandy caused 776,000 people in the U.S. to be evacuated. More than 32.4 million were displaced in 2012, with a good chunk of that coming in northeast India (6.9 million) and Nigeria (6.1 million), both of which saw major flooding. Over the last five years, Asia has seen 81% of the displacement, with five countries consistently seeing the most: China, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Nigeria.

    N.R.C. attributes 98% of the disasters to “climate- and weather-related events.” It expects things to only get worse as climate change increases “the frequency and severity of weather-related hazards.”

    Both rich and poor countries are affected by extreme weather, but the former will cope better, it notes. “In the U.S. following Hurricane Sandy, most of those displaced were able to find refuge in adequate temporary shelter while displaced from their own homes,” says Clare Spurrell, spokesperson for the group, in a press release. “Compare this to communities in Haiti, where hundreds of thousands are still living in makeshift tents over three years after the 2010 earthquake mega-disaster, and you see a very different picture.”

    It’s bad enough that climate change will cause forced movement and migration. It’s deeply unfair that the poorest will see the worst of it.