Display:
 LIVING OFF THE PLANET 
 Environment, Energy, Agriculture, Food 


The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 12:01:48 PM EST
Snowball Earth: New evidence hints at global glaciation 716.5 million years ago

ScienceDaily (Mar. 5, 2010) -- Geologists have found evidence that sea ice extended to the equator 716.5 million years ago, bringing new precision to a "snowball Earth" event long suspected to have taken place around that time.

Led by scientists at Harvard University, the team reports on its work in the journal Science. The new findings -- based on an analysis of ancient tropical rocks that are now found in remote northwestern Canada -- bolster the theory that our planet has, at times in the past, been ice-covered at all latitudes.

"This is the first time that the Sturtian glaciation has been shown to have occurred at tropical latitudes, providing direct evidence that this particular glaciation was a 'snowball Earth' event," says lead author Francis A. Macdonald, an assistant professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard. "Our data also suggests that the Sturtian glaciation lasted a minimum of 5 million years."

The survival of eukaryotic life throughout this period indicates sunlight and surface water remained available somewhere on the surface of Earth. The earliest animals arose at roughly the same time, following a major proliferation of eukaryotes.

Even in a snowball Earth, Macdonald says, there would be temperature gradients on Earth and it is likely that ice would be dynamic: flowing, thinning, and forming local patches of open water, providing refuge for life.



The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 12:17:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Note that the multi-cellular organisms only appeared around 600 million years ago. A snowball Earth might well kill all complex land-based life, and by causing anoxia in the oceans, a lot of ocean-based complex life as well.

It is theorised that there was a second snowball-Earth period 620 to 640 million years ago.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 05:10:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
dvx:

The survival of eukaryotic life throughout this period indicates sunlight and surface water remained available somewhere on the surface of Earth. The earliest animals arose at roughly the same time, following a major proliferation of eukaryotes

I don't really see how that follows - Eucaryotic life can survive on abyssal geothermal chimneys...

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 09:16:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Methane releases from Arctic shelf may be much larger and faster than anticipated

ScienceDaily (Mar. 5, 2010) -- A section of the Arctic Ocean seafloor that holds vast stores of frozen methane is showing signs of instability and widespread venting of the powerful greenhouse gas, according to the findings of an international research team led by University of Alaska Fairbanks scientists Natalia Shakhova and Igor Semiletov.

The research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is leaking large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.

"The amount of methane currently coming out of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf is comparable to the amount coming out of the entire world's oceans," said Shakhova, a researcher at UAF's International Arctic Research Center. "Subsea permafrost is losing its ability to be an impermeable cap."



The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 12:21:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
eek
by ATinNM on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 05:38:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
[ATinNM's Crystal Ball of Doom™ Technology]

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 05:42:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I have seen the future

and it really, really, sucks.

by ATinNM on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 06:07:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why is your palantir on fire?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 06:18:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why is your palantir planet on fire?

Fixed.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 06:54:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
These types of investigations commonly find methane releasing. Atmospheric methane has to come from somewhere, otherwise the atmosphere will be depleted quickly.

The catch generally is that they've just begun monitoring something that was previously not monitored. In other words: There is little known about the baseline situation. Was there methane releasing in the sixties? The 1930s? The 1890s? The first of the present studies was done in 2003. Is the rate bigger than it was before - well, we can't say. There were no measurements before that time of that particular area, just assumptions.

Flux in, flux out. The only real indicator for increased methane fluxes to the atmosphere is the global atmospheric methane concentration, which showed an upward bump since 2007, after a decade of mysteriously stable values. And if I recall correctly, it wasn't even sure if the 2007/2008 bump was because of more methane coming into the atmosphere, or because rate of methane breakdown had slowed.

Figures for 2009 atmospheric methane are probably forthcoming soon, or may already have been released.

by Nomad on Mon Mar 8th, 2010 at 03:40:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
For some good news:

Stratospheric Water Vapor is a Global Warming Wild Card

A 10 percent drop in water vapor ten miles above Earth's surface has had a big impact on global warming, say researchers in a study published online January 28 in the journal Science. The findings might help explain why global surface temperatures have not risen as fast in the last ten years as they did in the 1980s and 1990s.

...

Since 2000, water vapor in the stratosphere decreased by about 10 percent. The reason for the recent decline in water vapor is unknown. The new study used calculations and models to show that the cooling from this change caused surface temperatures to increase about 25 percent more slowly than they would have otherwise, due only to the increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

An increase in stratospheric water vapor in the 1990s likely had the opposite effect of increasing the rate of warming observed during that time by about 30 percent, the authors found.

The more we learn the more we learn we have to learn more.

by ATinNM on Mon Mar 8th, 2010 at 01:26:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In Aftermath of Ash Spill, a New Round of Challenges - NYTimes.com

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (AP) -- More than a year after a Tennessee coal ash spill created one of the worst environmental disasters of its kind in United States history, the problem is seeping into several other states.

It began on Dec. 22, 2008, when a retaining pond burst at a coal-burning Tennessee Valley Authority power plant, spilling 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash across 300 acres into the Emory River and an affluent shoreline community near Knoxville. It was enough ash to cover a square mile five feet deep.

While the T.V.A.'s cleanup has removed much of the ash from the river, the arsenic- and mercury-laced muck or its watery discharge has been moving by rail and truck through three states to at least six sites. Some of it may end up as far away as Louisiana.

At stops along the route, new environmental concerns are popping up. The muck is laden with heavy metals linked to cancer, and the federal Environmental Protection Agency is considering declaring coal ash hazardous.

"I'm really concerned about my health," said James Gibbs, 53, a retiree who lives near a west-central Alabama landfill that is taking the ash. "I want to plant a garden. I'm concerned about it getting in the soil."



The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 12:29:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Growing low-oxygen zones in oceans worry scientists | McClatchy

WASHINGTON -- Lower levels of oxygen in the Earth's oceans, particularly off the United States' Pacific Northwest coast, could be another sign of fundamental changes linked to global climate change, scientists say.

They warn that the oceans' complex undersea ecosystems and fragile food chains could be disrupted.

In some spots off Washington state and Oregon, the almost complete absence of oxygen has left piles of Dungeness crab carcasses littering the ocean floor, killed off 25-year-old sea stars, crippled colonies of sea anemones and produced mats of potentially noxious bacteria that thrive in such conditions.

Areas of hypoxia, or low oxygen, have long existed in the deep ocean. These areas -- in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans -- appear to be spreading, however, covering more square miles, creeping toward the surface and in some places, such as the Pacific Northwest, encroaching on the continental shelf within sight of the coastline.

"The depletion of oxygen levels in all three oceans is striking," said Gregory Johnson, an oceanographer with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Seattle.

In some spots, such as off the Southern California coast, oxygen levels have dropped roughly 20 percent over the past 25 years. Elsewhere, scientists say, oxygen levels might have declined by one-third over 50 years.



The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 7th, 2010 at 12:54:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

BG Says U.K. Forecast for Natural-Gas Demand Too Low

March 3 (Bloomberg) -- BG Group Plc said U.K. natural-gas demand will be 30 percent higher than government forecasts by 2020 as wind-energy projects are delayed and aging electricity plants close, requiring more gas-fired power generation.

"The projections from the U.K. government are based on an optimistic potential of renewables to deliver by 2020 and the installation of thousands of offshore wind turbines in particular," Roger Tucker, BG's senior vice president for Europe, said today at the Flame conference in Amsterdam.

Britain will consume 95 billion cubic meters of gas a year by 2020, about a third more than the government's forecast, he said.

The U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change has said annual demand will be "managed down" to 73 billion cubic meters in 10 years time as offshore wind farms are built.

Britain, facing dwindling North Sea gas output and aging nuclear resources, has begun a $120 billion offshore wind program to help avert an energy shortfall and meet emission targets. RWE AG, Statoil ASA and Centrica Plc were among winners of wind-farm permits in the country's January licensing round, which is designed to add 32,200 megawatts of capacity.

"This is an engineering challenge equivalent to building eight channel tunnels in 10 years," Tucker said, referring to the 30-mile rail tunnel underneath the English Channel and citing Carbon Trust data.



In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon Mar 8th, 2010 at 04:27:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
that there have already been built the equivalent of several "channel tunnels" in wind-farms previously? Or am I wrong here?

Also, how can there be talk of "delays" of wind-energy projects, when the licensing rounds for the North Sea parks were just in January? Are these different wind-farms than the wind-farm projects in the North Sea?

by Nomad on Mon Mar 8th, 2010 at 04:55:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was wondering what the initials BG stood for. Something cool like the planetary colours Blue and Green?

But no. Imagine my disappointment when I learned that BG was a hand-me-down from British Gas.

BG Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BG Group's main business is exploration for and the extraction of natural gas, liquefied natural gas and to a lesser extent oil.

They couldn't possibly be spreading lies narratives in favour of their own interests, could they?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Mar 8th, 2010 at 05:24:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series