Author: Neville

  • Migrating Animals Add New Depth to How the Ocean ‘Breathes’

    Migrating Animals Add New Depth to How the Ocean ‘Breathes’

    June 24, 2013 — The oxygen content of the ocean may be subject to frequent ups and downs in a very literal sense — that is, in the form of the numerous sea creatures that dine near the surface at night then submerge into the safety of deeper, darker waters at daybreak.


    Share This:

    Research begun at Princeton University and recently reported on in the journal Nature Geoscience found that animals ranging from plankton to small fish consume vast amounts of what little oxygen is available in the ocean’s aptly named “oxygen minimum zone” daily. The sheer number of organisms that seek refuge in water roughly 200- to 650-meters deep (650 to 2,000 feet) every day result in the global consumption of between 10 and 40 percent of the oxygen available at these depths.

    The findings reveal a crucial and underappreciated role that animals have in ocean chemistry on a global scale, explained first author Daniele Bianchi, a postdoctoral researcher at McGill University who began the project as a doctoral student of atmospheric and oceanic sciences at Princeton.

    “In a sense, this research should change how we think of the ocean’s metabolism,” Bianchi said. “Scientists know that there is this massive migration, but no one has really tried to estimate how it impacts the chemistry of the ocean.

    “Generally, scientists have thought that microbes and bacteria primarily consume oxygen in the deeper ocean,” Bianchi said. “What we’re saying here is that animals that migrate during the day are a big source of oxygen depletion. We provide the first global data set to say that.”

    Much of the deep ocean can replenish (often just barely) the oxygen consumed during these mass migrations, which are known as diel vertical migrations (DVMs).

    But the balance between DVMs and the limited deep-water oxygen supply could be easily upset, Bianchi said — particularly by climate change, which is predicted to further decrease levels of oxygen in the ocean. That could mean these animals would not be able to descend as deep, putting them at the mercy of predators and inflicting their oxygen-sucking ways on a new ocean zone.

    “If the ocean oxygen changes, then the depth of these migrations also will change. We can expect potential changes in the interactions between larger guys and little guys,” Bianchi said. “What complicates this story is that if these animals are responsible for a chunk of oxygen depletion in general, then a change in their habits might have a feedback in terms of oxygen levels in other parts of the deeper ocean.”

    The researchers produced a global model of DVM depths and oxygen depletion by mining acoustic oceanic data collected by 389 American and British research cruises between 1990 and 2011. Using the background readings caused by the sound of animals as they ascended and descended, the researchers identified more than 4,000 DVM events.

    They then chemically analyzed samples from DVM-event locations to create a model that could correlate DVM depth with oxygen depletion. With that data, the researchers concluded that DVMs indeed intensify the oxygen deficit within oxygen minimum zones.

    “You can say that the whole ecosystem does this migration — chances are that if it swims, it does this kind of migration,” Bianchi said. “Before, scientists tended to ignore this big chunk of the ecosystem when thinking of ocean chemistry. We are saying that they are quite important and can’t be ignored.”

    Bianchi conducted the data analysis and model development at McGill with assistant professor of earth and planetary sciences Eric Galbraith and McGill doctoral student David Carozza. Initial research of the acoustic data and development of the migration model was conducted at Princeton with K. Allison Smith (published as K.A.S. Mislan), a postdoctoral research associate in the Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, and Charles Stock, a researcher with the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

    Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:
  • The Wrong State ( Monbiot )

    Monbiot.com


    The Wrong State

    Posted: 24 Jun 2013 12:36 PM PDT

    The police spy scandal shows that mass surveillance will be used against us.

     

    By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 25th June 2013

    “If you are a law-abiding citizen of this country, going about your business and your personal life, you have nothing to fear.”(1) That’s how William Hague, the foreign secretary, responded to the revelations of mass surveillance in the US and the UK. Try telling it to Stephen Lawrence’s family.

    Four police officers were deployed to spy on the family and friends of the black teenager murdered by white racists(2). The Lawrences and the people who supported their fight for justice were law-abiding citizens going about their business. Yet undercover police were used, one of the spies now tells us, to hunt for “disinformation” and “dirt”. Their purpose? “We were trying to stop the campaign in its tracks.”

    The two unfolding spy stories resonate powerfully with each other. One, gathered by Paul Lewis and Rob Evans, shows how police surveillance has been comprehensively perverted. Instead of defending citizens and the public realm, it has been used to protect the police from democratic scrutiny and stifle attempts to engage in politics.

    The other, arising from the documents exposed by Edward Snowden, shows that the US and the UK have been involved in the mass interception of our phone calls and use of the internet. William Hague insists that we should “have confidence in the work of our intelligence agencies, and in their adherence to the law and democratic values”(3). Why?

    Here are a few of the things we have learnt about undercover policing in Britain. A unit led by a policeman called Bob Lambert deployed officers to spy on peaceful activists. They adopted the identities of dead children then infiltrated protest groups. Nine of the eleven known spies formed long-term relationships with women in the groups, in some cases (including Lambert) fathering children with them(4). Then they made excuses and vanished.

    They left a trail of ruined lives, fatherless children, women whose confidence and trust have been wrecked beyond repair. They have also walked away from other kinds of mayhem. On Friday we discovered that Lambert co-wrote the leaflet for which two penniless activists spent three years in the high court defending a libel action brought by McDonalds(5). The police never saw fit to inform the court that one of their own had authored it.

    Bob Lambert has been accused of using a false identity during a criminal trial(6). And, using parliamentary privilege, the MP Caroline Lucas alleged that he planted an incendiary device in a branch of Debenhams while acting as an agent provocateur(7). The device exploded, caused £300,000 of damage. Lambert denies the allegation.

    Police and prosecutors also failed to disclose, during two trials of climate change activists, that an undercover cop called Mark Kennedy had secretly taped their meetings, and that his recordings exonerated the protesters. Twenty people were falsely convicted(8).

    If the state is prepared to abuse its powers and instruments so widely and gravely in cases such as this, where there is a high risk of detection, and if it is prepared to intrude so far into people’s lives that its officers live with activists and father their children, what is it not prepared to do while spying undetectably on our private correspondence?

    Already we know that electronic surveillance in this country has been used for purposes other than the perennial justifications of catching terrorists, foiling foreign spies and preventing military attacks. It was deployed, for example, to spy on countries attending the G20 meeting the UK hosted in 2009(9). If the government does this to other states, which might have the capacity to detect its spying and which certainly have the means to object to it, what is it doing to defenceless citizens?

    It looks as if William Hague might have misled parliament a fortnight ago. He claimed that “to intercept the content of any individual’s communications in the UK requires a warrant signed personally by me, the Home Secretary, or by another Secretary of State.”(10) We now discover that these ministers can also issue general certificates, renewed every six months, which permit mass interception of the kind that GCHQ has been conducting. Among the certificates issued to GCHQ is a “global” one authorising all its operations(11), including the trawling of up to 600 million phone calls and 39 million gigabytes of electronic information a day(12,13). A million ministers, signing all day, couldn’t keep up with that.

    The best test of the good faith of an institution is the way it deals with past abuses. Despite two years of revelations about abusive police spying, the British government has yet to launch a full public inquiry. Bob Lambert, who ran the team, fathered a child by an innocent activist he deceived, co-wrote the McDonalds leaflet, is alleged to have lied in court and has been accused by an MP of firebombing, was awarded an MBE in 2008. He now teaches at St Andrews University, where he claims to have a background in “counter-terrorism”(14).

    The home office minister Nick Herbert has stated in parliament that it’s acceptable for police to have sex with activists, for the sake of their “plausibility”(15). Does this sound to you like a state in which we should invest our trust?

    Talking to Sunday’s Observer, a senior intelligence source expressed his or her concerns about mass surveillance. “If there was the wrong political change, it could be very dangerous. All you need is to have the wrong government in place.”(16) But it seems to me that any government prepared to subject its citizens to mass surveillance is by definition the wrong one. No one can be trusted with powers as wide and inscrutable as these.

    In various forms – Conservative, New Labour, Coalition – we have had the wrong government for 30 years. Across that period its undemocratic powers have consolidated. It has begun to form an elective dictatorship, in which the three major parties are united in their desire to create a security state; to wage unprovoked wars; to defend corporate power against democracy; to act as a doormat to the United States; to fight political dissent all the way to the bedroom and the birthing pool. There’s no need to wait for the “wrong” state to arise to conclude that mass surveillance endangers liberty, pluralism and democracy. We’re there already.

    www.monbiot.com

    References:

    1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2013/jun/09/data-snooping-law-abiding-citizens-nothing-fear-hague-video

    2. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/23/stephen-lawrence-undercover-police-smears

    3. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/01/police-spy-fictional-character

    4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/20/undercover-police-children-activists

    5. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/mclibel-leaflet-police-bob-lambert-mcdonalds

    6. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/undercover-with-paul-lewis-and-rob-evans/2011/oct/21/second-undercover-officer-accused-misleading-court

    7. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/20/undercover-police-children-activists

    8. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jul/19/power-station-activists-win-appeal

    9. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/16/gchq-intercepted-communications-g20-summits

    10. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm130610/debtext/130610-0001.htm#13061011000001

    11. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/legal-loopholes-gchq-spy-world

    12. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-mastering-the-internet

    13. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secret-world-communications-nsa

    14. http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~cstpv/staff/boblambert/boblambert.html

    15. http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2012-06-13/nick-herbert-its-important-police-are-allowed-to-have-sex-with-activists/
    (or go to source)

    16. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/23/mi5-feared-gchq-went-too-far

  • Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment

    Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment

    Phase: Operating

    Start Date: 2012

    Mission Project Home Page

    Program(s):Earth System Science Pathfinder

    Pin it

    Investigation Homepage

    The carbon budget of Arctic ecosystems is not known with confidence since fundamental elements of the complex Arctic biological-climatologic-hydrologic system are poorly quantified. Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment (CARVE) is collecting detailed measurements of important greenhouse gases on local to regional scales in the Alaskan Arctic and demonstrating new remote sensing and improved modeling capabilities to quantify Arctic carbon fluxes and carbon cycle-climate processes. Ultimately, CARVE will provide an integrated set of data that will provide unprecedented experimental insights into Arctic carbon cycling.

    AirMOSS mission graphic CARVE is using the Arctic-proven C-23 Sherpa aircraft to fly an innovative airborne remote sensing payload. It includes an L-band radiometer/radar and a nadir-viewing spectrometer to deliver the first simultaneous measurements of surface parameters that control gas emissions (i.e., soil moisture, freeze/thaw state, surface temperature) and total atmospheric columns of carbon dioxide, methane, and carbon monoxide. The aircraft payload also includes a gas analyzer that links greenhouse gas measurements directly to World Meteorological Organization standards. Deployments occur during the spring, summer and early fall when Arctic carbon fluxes are large and change rapidly. Further, at these times, the sensitivities of ecosystems to external forces such as fire and anomalous variability of temperature and precipitation are maximized. Continuous ground-based measurements provide temporal and regional context as well as calibration for CARVE airborne measurements.

    CARVE science fills a critical gap in Earth science knowledge and satisfies high priority objectives across NASA’s Carbon Cycle & Ecosystems, Atmospheric Composition, and Climate Variability & Change focus areas as well as the Air Quality and Ecosystems elements of the Applied Sciences program. CARVE complements and enhances the science return from current NASA and non-NASA satellite sensors.

    Principal Investigator: Charles Miller
    NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA

    Project Manager: Steve Dinardo
    NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA

    Mission Manager:Anthony Guillory@nasa.gov
    Langley Research Center (LaRC), Hampton, VA

    HomeBig QuestionsEarthHeliophysicsPlanetsAstrophysicsMissionsTechnologyScience News
    For ResearchersFor EducatorsFor KidsCitizen ScientistsAsk a Scientist

  • Coalition plans to punish those who boycott Israel

    Find More Stories

    25 June 2013

    Protest held against Israel

    Coalition plans to punish those who boycott Israel

    Be first to comment

    Jake Lynch

    Jake Lynch

    The charge that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel is anti-semitic fails its only salient test. The target of BDS is not Jews or Judaism, but militarism and lawlessness, argues Jake Lynch.

    The number two in the incoming government has vowed to use the coercive power of the state to stifle dissent on a contested policy issue.

    In Uzbekistan? Equatorial Guinea? No – Australia.

    According to Julie Bishop, shadow foreign minister and deputy Liberal leader, I and other supporters of an academic boycott of Israel will be penalised under the Coalition, by having our access to public research funds summarily cut off.

    It appears to be a gesture to pro-Israel groups, who are backing what they – like everyone else – assume will be the winner in September’s federal election. Prominent members of both main parties, including Prime Minister Julia Gillard, have signed the ‘London declaration on combating anti-semitism‘, but Labor has resisted calls to use the machinery of government to enforce its claims.

    Chief among them are that calls for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions on Israel are themselves a form of anti-semitism.

    That can easily be disproved. Imagine a Venn diagram with four circles. In one: states occupying territory recognised as not their own. Armenia would be there, for its seizure of Nagorno-Karabakh, and Morocco in Western Sahara.

    The second contains countries whose military actions give rise to well-founded allegations of war crimes, in particular the indiscriminate targeting of civilians. Of recent concern have been the bloody end to Sri Lanka’s civil war, and US drone strikes in Pakistan.

    In a third, we would find nuclear-armed states that refuse to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, with its transparency requirements and onus to negotiate eventual disarmament. Obvious residents: South Asian neighbours India and Pakistan.

    The fourth circle is partly shadowed, since it concerns violations of the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of Apartheid. Iran, for one, might qualify, with its persecution of the Bahá’í as Exhibit A, but the question has never been systematically studied.

    The one country that sits unambiguously in the overlap of all four circles, is Israel. There is no non-Jewish state in that central domain, so Israel is not being discriminated against. The charge of anti-semitism fails its only salient test. The target of BDS is not Jews or Judaism, but militarism and lawlessness.

    A systematic study by an international expert panel found that discriminatory laws and practices, confining non-Jews to second-class status, do indeed put Israel in breach of the Apartheid Convention. That obliges governments to “co-operate to end the violation; not to recognise the illegal situation arising from it; and not to render aid or assistance to the State committing it”, as the report – commissioned by the social science research council of South Africa – points out.

    As with Israel’s other transgressions, however, it incurs no meaningful cost. Governments point to the ‘peace process’, periodically revived from Washington and officially the responsibility of the ‘Quartet’ of the UN, US, EU and Russia, as a fig leaf to cover quiescence and inaction. But whatever tattered credibility it retained is now being ripped away by increasingly candid statements from Israeli politicians, ruling out a Palestinian state.

    Its besetting weakness has been to treat Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory not, essentially, as inadmissible but instead on the terms favoured by successive Israeli governments: a ‘fact on the ground’, to be used as a bargaining chip.

    Meanwhile, ever more Palestinians are driven from their homes.

    This must change, according to the European Eminent Persons Group on the Middle East Peace Process, which includes four former Prime Ministers. Europe should instead demand that Israeli settlements be dismantled forthwith.

    Last November’s motion at the UN General Assembly, in which many EU members voted to give Palestine the status of ‘non-member observer state’, proves the need for a new approach.

    Gillard wanted Australia to join just eight other countries in rejecting this resolution, but a furious Labor Party caucus ‘rolled’ her into backing abstention, instead. This gave the Liberals their opening, to appear even more pro-Israel than Labor – with their move against boycott advocates, a way of proving it.

    Universities come into BDS because Israel uses academic exchange as a distraction from its lawless and militaristic behaviour. The Neaman Report on public diplomacy, published by Technion University Haifa and commissioned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recommends targeting “educational organisations” as “beneficial clients” in efforts to sanitise its image abroad.

    It was when Professor Stephen Hawking rumbled this plan that he withdrew from a conference in Israel last month. The British Committee for the Universities of Palestine, which recently fended off an anti-semitism case in court, now believes “it will likely be only a matter of time” before the UK’s University and College Union backs a boycott.

    Peace advocates in Israel will never make headway as long as the alternative – tightening the screw on the Palestinians – appears cost-free. Why bother to negotiate seriously if you can simply hang on to your ill-gotten gains, while everyone else turns a blind eye?

    It is to challenge such impunity that the BDS call was issued.

    When the case wins a chance to be heard and considered, it gains widespread support. That is why its opponents want to suppress it.

    Jake Lynch is director of the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and conflict Studies. View his full profile here.

    The Centre recently refused to assist Israeli academic Dan Avnon on a visit to Australia in line

  • Is Arctic Permafrost the “Sleeping Giant” of Climate Change?

    Is Arctic Permafrost the “Sleeping Giant” of Climate Change?

    Inbox
    x
    NASA Science News <noreply@nasascience.org>
    1:03 PM (1 hour ago)

    to NASA
    NASA Science News for June 24, 2013Arctic permafrost soils contain more accumulated carbon than all the human fossil-fuel emissions since 1850 combined. Warming permafrost, poised to release its own gases into the atmosphere, could be the “sleeping giant” of climate change.VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZSM8GcmJKg

    FULL STORY: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/24jun_permafrost/

    You are currently subscribed to snglist as: nevilleg729@gmail.com.

    YouTube – Videos from this email
  • Solar power still better than nuclear in the fight against climate change

    Solar power still better than nuclear in the fight against climate change

    I concede I’ve lost the £100 bet, but it’s a folly to put faith in costly reactors to cut emissions

    Solar power :  56 photovoltaic (solar) panels at the roof of his house

    The price of residential solar PV has fallen by 60% in three years, according to industry data. Photograph: Michaela Rehle/Reuters

    George Monbiot claims in a gentlemanly article to have won our £100 bet, made three years ago, that solar PV would be at grid parity – the same cost as conventional retail electricity – by 2013.

    The very good news is that over the past three years, the actual average price of installed residential solar PV has come down some 60%, while the cost of new nuclear has gone up 70% and is still rising. I base the former on the real achievement at my company Solarcentury and the latter on a recent compilation in Le Monde of data for EDF’s Flamanville EPR reactor, the type of nuclear plant nuclear advocates like George want to foist on the UK economy at great cost to the public, starting at Hinkley Point.

    The slightly bad news is that I probably lost my bet. Solar-industry people have been e-mailing me pleading that I argue the toss, pointing out that solar markets like the Netherlands are already at grid parity, and that by using somewhat lawyerly points I can defend my ground when it comes to the UK. I can’t be bothered, because anyone studying the pattern of play in any detail will know that if I lost, it wasn’t by much.

    By way of illustration, read this extract of what Dave Edwards of Solarcentury said below George’s article. I can’t better it:

    Grid parity has a clear and widely accepted definition: when the levelised cost of solar (falling rapidly) crosses the cost of grid electricity (rising rapidly). The average retail price of electricity in the UK is 14.5p according to EST or Decc’s own statistics. Plenty of anecdotal evidence would suggest higher. ….Levelised cost of solar … is 15.3p, at a 5% discount rate. If you used the risk free rate of 3.5%, as some energy economists would argue you should, it is substantially less. So in my view, you [Monbiot] win this battle, if only by a matter of months; but PV is winning the war, at least on paper.

    Lest anyone think that this is an employee who has fallen victim to the prejudiced view of his chairman, let me bring in consultancy McKinsey, better known for its work for Big Energy than support of the solar industry. In its 2012 report Solar Power, Darkest Before the Dawn, their team concluded that big as the solar cost-down had been over the period in question, costs will continue to fall at about 10% a year, some markets already are at grid parity, many more will be by 2015, and that by 2020 fully a thousand gigawatts of solar PV could be installed around the world. This, they said, will change the face of the energy industry. I could have picked similar statistics out of reports from other old economy stalwarts such as Bloomberg, UBS or Lazard. Solar PV will be a key player in national energy mixes beyond 2020, in other words, including in the UK. EDF still won’t even be close to connecting their Hinkley Point version of Flamanville by 2020, by their own admission, even if they get the go ahead from the government for the huge subsidies they will need.

    George says I wouldn’t agree terms of the bet with him. I didn’t do so because he for his part never accepted my multiple invitations to come and visit Solarcentury, see solar engineers at work, and hear their voice on this. Had he done that, maybe his perspective might have been adjusted a little, or even changed.

    And so to George’s thoughtful point that we have both lost the bet, because the government is so bad on this and related issues. We are almost on the same page here.

    Clearly people like environment secretary, Owen Patterson, whose opinion he cites, are delusionists, intent on betraying their country’s long-term interests in defence of their dangerous belief system. But we have to hope that not all government ministers are in that camp. Some, Conservative and Lib Dem, do seem to be fighting for sanity. And Labour is showing way more form on these matters in opposition than it did in government.

    There is all to fight for, still, with the varied allies we have in the complex civil war that is the struggle to survive climate change. Solar and other green industries really could be cutting emissions meaningfully while taking disenfranchised young people off the streets and into fulfilling jobs.

    So for my part, £100 is on its way to my charity of choice, SolarAid, with no regrets. For his part, perhaps George would like to visit Solarcentury now? We are open tomorrow. Hinkley Point C won’t be for many years, if at all.

    Comments

    Click here to join the discussion.

    We can’t load the discussion on guardian.co.uk because you don’t have JavaScript enabled.