Green Earth Africa

Image courtesy of NRDC 

When it comes to global warming, humans have certainly felt the effects, and this year more than ever.  With one weather disaster after another hammering the globe (there were a dozen in the U.S. alone that topped the billion-dollar mark for damages), there’s no denying that the natural course of the climate has been altered due to the many greenhouse gas emissions we spew into the air courtesy of industry and transport.  And the results of our pollution are not only affecting us, but also the many species of wildlife that call this planet home.  The question is: how is our negligent attitude towards the protection of the environment affecting wild animals?

1. The warming trend.  Warmer temperatures are only one part of the extreme weather conditions that global warming is responsible for, but they are a biggie.  In the Arctic Circle, melting polar ice caps have taken away the hunting grounds that support polar bears as well as the cool waters that salmon depend on for breeding.  Eventually, this could spell disaster for both species.  And in the deserts of the world, nomadic animals like elephants that have trekked the same migratory paths for centuries are finding watering holes dried up thanks to higher temperatures and drought conditions.
2. The cooling trend.  Although climates near the equator are more likely to suffer from extreme heat, their neighbors to the far north and south are struggling with longer, colder winters that see animal populations dwindling.  Thanks to plummeting temperatures and a surge in winter storms, many animals that can’t find adequate shelter are freezing while others starve due to winters that seem to last longer.
3. Storms.  Human have suffered not only monetary damages in the last year, but also a fairly high death toll thanks to extreme storms like tornadoes, hurricanes, blizzards, and fires (brought on by drought).  Animals, too, have suffered.  Many have lost their habitat, which means they have had to wander closer and closer to the dangers of human civilization in search of basic sustenance, breeding grounds, and a place to raise their young.
4. Ocean acidification.  This is a side effect of greenhouse gas pollution that few people have heard about, and although it isn’t directly linked to global warming, it is related to the same pollutants that cause climate change.  When hydrocarbons are absorbed by the waters of the ocean, it causes the pH levels to drop, which affects bottom feeders like lobster, shrimp, and clams (not to mention corals).  It renders them unable to form the hard outer shells (or exoskeletons) that they rely on for survival.  The result is that these populations will begin to die out, followed by a chain reaction (up the food chain) that could deplete marine life across the globe.
5. Overall.  If you thought mining operations, mountaintop removal, and crop dusting were detrimental to surrounding ecosystems, multiply that damage by a thousand (and you still won’t come close to the destruction that continues to be wrought by global warming).  Not only are animals all over the world finding themselves short of food and water, the situation is also upsetting migratory patterns and breeding cycles, which mean some species could be heading rapidly towards extinction.

Group of leading scientists urge investment in sustainable agriculture to solve hunger crisis and reduce global warming

Agricultural farmland in Ukraine being prepared for planting wheat. Photograph: Vincent Mundy/Bloomberg /Getty Images

Climate change poses “an immediate, growing and grave threat” to health and security around the world, according to an expert conference in London.

Food security was interwoven with the climate issue, speakers told the conference

Officers in the UK military warned that the price of goods such as fuel is likely to rise as conflict provoked by climate change increases.

A statement from the meeting adds that humanitarian disasters will put more and more strain on military resources.

It asks governments to adopt ambitious targets for curbing greenhouse gases.

The annual UN climate conference opens in about six weeks’ time, and the doctors, academics and military experts represented at the meeting (held in the British Medical Association’s (BMA) headquarters)argue that developed and developing countries alike need to raise their game.

Scientific studies suggest that the most severe climate impacts will fall on the relatively poor countries of the tropics.

UK military experts pointed out that much of the world’s trade moves through such regions, with North America, Western Europe and China among the societies heavily dependent on oil and other imports.

Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, climate and energy security envoy for the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD), said that conflict in such areas could make it more difficult and expensive to obtain goods on which countries such as Britain rely.

“If there are risks to the trade routes and other areas, then it’s food, it’s energy,” he told BBC News.

“The price of energy will go up – for us, it’s [the price of] petrol at the pumps – and goods made in southeast Asia, a lot of which we import.”

Coffee climate

A number of recent studies have suggested that climate impacts will make conflict more likely, by increasing competition for scare but essential resources such as water and food.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies, for example, recently warned that climate change “will increase the risks of resource shortages, mass migration and civil conflict”, while the MoD’s view is that it will shift “the tipping point at which conflict occurs”.

Armed forces are “the gas-guzzlers of the world”

Alejandro Litovsky, founder of the Earth Security Initiative, said that even without the increasing effect of conflict, prices of essential goods were bound to rise.

“From the year 2000 onwards, we have been seeing commodity prices climb, and this is not likely to stop,” he said.

“It is primarily driven by resource scarcity, and the trends suggest that depletion of these natural resources is unlikely to be reversed in the near future without drastic interventions.”

He also said that degradation of natural resources such as forests and freshwater was removing much of the resilience that societies formerly enjoyed.

Last week, multinational coffee house Starbucks warned that climate change threatened the world’s coffee supplies in 20-30 years’ time.

Compromised by carbon

The military officers at the meeting also emphasised the interest that armed forces have in reducing their own carbon footprint.

In Afghanistan, for example, fuel has to be delivered by road from Pakistan.

By the time it reaches its destination, it can cost 10 times the pump price. And the convoys are regularly targeted by opposing forces.

Several officers admitted that armed forces were “the gas-guzzlers of the world” – and while that was sometimes necessary in operations, reducing fossil fuel use and adopting renewables wherever possible made sense from economic and tactical points of view.

Rear Admiral Morisetti recalled that when commanding an aircraft carrier, it took a gallon of oil to move just 12 inches (30cm), while as many as 20 tonnes per hour were burned during a period of intensive take-off and landing.

“You can do that [with oil prices at] $30 a barrel, but not at $100 or $200,” he said.

Health gains

On the health side, doctors warned of a raft of impacts, particularly in developing countries.

Hunger and malnutrition were likely to increase, and some infectious diseases were likely to spread, they said.

Poorer societies could expect to see an unholy symbiosis between the two, with under-nourished people more prone to succumb to infections.

Tackling carbon emissions, by contrast, would bring a range of health benefits, they argue in their statement.

“Changes in power generation improve air quality.

“Modest life style changes – such as increasing physical activity through walking and cycling – will cut rates of heart disease and stroke, obesity, diabetes, breast cancer, dementia and depressive illness.

“Climate change mitigation policies would thus significantly cut rates of preventable death and disability for hundreds of millions of people around the world.”

No cause for optimism

As the UN summit in South Africa approaches, the statement here calls on the EU to increase its ambition and pledge to reduce emissions by 30% from 1990 levels by 2020, rather than the current target of 20%.

Currently, there does not appear to be political consensus for such a move within EU governments, however.

Additional recommendations are that developing country governments should analyse climate threats to their health and security, and that all governments should stop construction of new coal-fired power stations without carbon capture and storage (CCS) – which, as commercial CCS systems do not exist, would as things stand amount to a complete ban.

Without urgent action, carbon emissions could rise to levels that should cause major alarm, said Chris Rapley, professor of climate science at University College London.

Already, he noted, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has risen to about 380 parts per million [ppm] – whereas in the millions of years before the pre-industrial era, it fluctuated between about 180ppm during Ice Ages and about 280ppm in the warm interglacial periods.

“If we don’t do something, then at the rate we’re going, carbon emissions will continue to accelerate, and the atmospheric concentration is not going to be 450ppm or 650ppm by the end of the century, but 1,000ppm,” he said.

“That is 10 times the difference between an Ice Age and an interglacial; and you have to be a pretty huge optimist to think that won’t bring major changes.”

Scandinavian shipowners say cargo routes through the Arctic, made possible by warmer temperatures, would save money and emissions 

The image above was made from observations collected by the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer and shows the extent of sea ice melt. The yellow outline shows the median minimum ice extent for 1979/2000. Photograph: Aqua/NASA

Supertankers and giant cargo ships could next year travel regularly between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans via the Arctic to save time, money and emissions, say Scandinavian shipowners.

New data from companies who have taken advantage of receding Arctic sea ice this year to complete several voyages across the north of Russia shows that the “northern sea route” can save even a medium-sized bulk carrier 18 days and 580 tonnes of bunker fuel on a journey between northern Norway and China. The voyage would normally take upwards of 40 days.

Even bigger fuel and time savings have been reported this week by Danish shipping company Nordic Bulk Carriers which says it saved a third of its usual costs and nearly half the time in shipping goods to China via the Arctic.

The route, which cuts around 4,000 nautical miles off the southern Suez route from the Atlantic to the Pacific, has barely needed an ice-breaker since July as annual sea ice melted to a near record low extent. “We saved 1,000 tonnes of bunker fuel – nearly 3,000 tonnes of CO₂ – on one journey between Murmansk and north China,” said Christian Bonfils, a director of Nordic Bulk Carriers in Oslo.

The shipowners, who anticipate that the northern route could gradually be opened for four to six months a year as air and sea temperatures increase, are exploring the possibility of regular summer passages through the Arctic ocean. This could save them €180,000-300,000 on each voyage, they say.

“The window for sailing the route is four months now, but the Russians say it is seven [if the cargo ships are accompanied by Russian atomic icebreakers]. When we can save 22 days on transportation, it is very good business for us,” said Bonfils.

Apart from time savings, the shipowners can avoid Somali pirates and the high insurance premiums they attract if their ships pass through the Suez canal.

The Russian prime minister, Vladimir Putin, last week predicted that the route would soon rival the Suez canal as a quicker trade link from Europe to Asia. “The Northern sea route will rival traditional trade lanes in service fees, security and quality,” he told a conference organised by the Russian Geographical Society in Arkhangelsk in September.

This is seen as wildly optimistic by the Scandinavian shipowners, who are nevertheless encouraged by the speed of change in high latitudes. The Arctic was crossed in a record eight days in August by an STI Heritage tanker on a route between the US and Thailand, and on 20 August, a 160,000 tonne supertanker with 120,000 tonnes of gas made the passage, becoming the largest commercial ship ever to sail the route.

The route, which used to be known as the North-east passage, runs along the Russian Arctic coast from Murmansk on the Barents Sea, along Siberia, to the Bering Strait. Environment groups have warned that an Arctic shipping rush could accelerate global warming. While they accept that ships would burn less fuel and emit less CO₂, they fear oil spills and other maritime accidents, as well as “black carbon”, the sooty residue of partly burned fuel which is deposited on ice and is a short-lived but powerful “forcer” of climate change.

“The prospect of the creeping industrialisation of the high north is deeply worrying. More ships bring more chance of major accidents and will mean more climate pollutants on the back of more melting of the ice,” said Ben Ayliffe, Arctic campaigner with Greenpeace.

But shipowners cautioned that special ice-strengthened ships were needed and it is too early to build ships especially for the journey.

In a further sign that the Arctic was opening up, Russian atomic icebreakers received 15 requests to escort Arctic voyages in 2011, against four in 2010.

Canadian and American maritime experts have estimated that 2% of global shipping could be diverted to the Arctic by 2030, rising to 5% by 2050.

Cost of damage may exceed that caused by Typhoon Ketsana exactly two years ago

Damage caused by the two typhoons that battered the Philippines last week was estimated at $228 million (PHP 10 billion) by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) on Wednesday.

Hardest hit was the region of central Luzon with an estimated damage of $161.7 million (PHP 7.092 billion), of which $137.8 million (PHP 6.044 billion) were agricultural crops. Heavy rainfall from typhoons Nesat and Nalgae and water released by dam operators resulted in several provinces in the region still chest-deep in waters.

NDRRMC Executive Director Benito Ramos said cost of damage may exceed that caused by Typhoon Ketsana exactly two years ago.

Among the infrastructure affected by the floods are 66 bridges and road sections in the Ilocos, Cagayan, Central Luzon and Cordillera administrative regions.

Since thousands of residents had to be evacuated, 115 schools were used as temporary shelters, disrupting classes.

To provide relief to the flood victims, several government agencies pooled a total of $1.9 million (PHP 83 million) in funds, which is being augmented by private donations and relief operations carried out by several private organizations.

The Philippine Crop Insurance Corp. said Wednesday that it will speed up the release of $5 million (PHP 223 million) to Luzon farmers affected by the typhoons. It is the largest payout the PCIC has made to date, according to the agency.

Based on a preliminary assessment of the damages, the PCIC said $7.6 million (PHP 333.93 million) worth of crops, mostly palay, were insured in 30 Luzon provinces. It covers almost 27,000 farmers who till a combined farm area of 40,000 hectares.

Researchers at Brown University in the US have combined predictions of climate change with the geographic ranges of well-studied amphibians.

While the animals will try to migrate to areas with more suitable weather, short-term temperature fluctuations can cut them off.

The findings suggest more effort should be made to relocate vulnerable species.

It has been recognised for the past decade that the continuing future trend of global warming may drive species to permanently migrate in order to stay in an ideal habitat.

Amid concerns that this long-term migration may be disrupted by towns and cities, scientists at Brown University Dr Regan Early and Prof Dov Sax set out to predict the shifts in species’ ranges over the next century.

Predictions of global climate change generally show warming trends, though both global annual oscillations and local climatic effects will play a role for given species.

The researchers combined these climate models with information on the ranges and tolerances of various species of frogs, toads and salamanders in the western US, with results that “really surprised”, said Dr Early.

While they set out to find the disrupting effect of urban areas, they instead saw that the short-term climate fluctuations were enough to stop a species’ migration in its tracks, cutting it off from ideal habitats and driving it to extinction.

They have published their results in the journal Ecology Letters.

Physical tolerance

Fifteen species of amphibians native to the western US were modelled in the study, as their ranges are well-known and their tolerances to physical extremes have been well-studied.

While none of these species is currently at risk, they predicted that over half of them would become extinct or endangered in the next 100 years due to these climate fluctuations.

Among the factors determining whether a species would survive were the speed at which it can migrate and its persistence, or robustness, in the face of climatic change.

For example, the models suggested that the Foothill Yellow-Legged frog would be able to make it into a new area, despite climate fluctuations, while the California newt would not fare so well in its migration across the Californian Central Valley.

Dr Early said: “This species isn’t endangered now, and in the future there is more than enough suitable habitat for it to remain safe, but…the newt has a really hard time following its climate path to its future range because repeated climatic fluctuations cause it to retreat over and over again.”

The tolerance of an animal to less-than-ideal climatic conditions will determine whether it can survive long enough to complete its migration.

“There is a lot of uncertainty in the ability of species to persist, and this is an under-appreciated factor,” said Dr Early.

“For example, if an animal lives for a long time, it may fare better,” she said. “If its eggs don’t survive one year, being able to lay again the following year will increase the chances of survival.”

Managed relocation

While the study was carried out on only a few species in a limited geographic range, the researchers are confident that the global climate fluctuations will drive similar patterns all around the world.

Small mammals, insects and plants are expected to react in a way similar to the amphibians, as they have similar tolerances to climate change; larger mammals may be less affected as their habitats are less climate-specific, the researchers believe.

The findings from this research are expected to add some clarity to discussions on whether to actively relocate species at risk from climate change.

There is concern over this “managed relocation” from conservation groups and governmental organisations, as the reactions of an ecosystem to the sudden introduction of a non-native species are poorly understood.

But research published in the journal Nature in 2004, which suggested that climate change-driven habitat loss could result in the extinction of 15-37% of all species, lends support to the idea of managed relocation as a way of maintaining biodiversity.

This new study from Dr Early and Prof Sax highlights the specific risks to species from climate fluctuations cutting off their migration paths.

“There are a lot of species that won’t be able to take care of themselves,” Prof Sax said. “We may instead need to consider using managed relocation more frequently than has been previously considered.”

Ozone loss over the Arctic this year was so severe that for the first time it could be called an “ozone hole” like the Antarctic one, scientists report.

The Arctic ozone hole lay over over populated regions for parts of winter and spring 

About 20km (13 miles) above the ground, 80% of the ozone was lost, they say. The cause was an unusually long spell of cold weather at altitude. In cold conditions, the chlorine chemicals that destroy ozone are at their most active. 

It is currently impossible to predict if such losses will occur again, the team writes in the journalNature. Early data on the scale of Arctic ozone destruction were released in April, but the Nature paper is the first that has fully analysed the data. 

“Winter in the Arctic stratosphere is highly variable – some are warm, some are cold,” said Michelle Santee from Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).  “But over the last few decades, the winters that are cold have been getting colder. 

“Winter in the Arctic stratosphere is highly variable – some are warm, some are cold,” said Michelle Santee from Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).  

“But over the last few decades, the winters that are cold have been getting colder.”So given that trend and the high variability, we’d anticipate that we’ll have other cold ones, and if that happens while chlorine levels are high, we’d anticipate that we’d have severe ozone loss.”

 Ozone-destroying chemicals originate in substances such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that came into use late last century in appliances including refrigerators and fire extinguishers. Their destructive effects were first documented in the Antarctic, which now sees severe ozone depletion in each of its winters. Their use was progressively restricted and then eliminated by the 1987 Montreal Protocol and its successors. The ozone layer blocks ultraviolet-B rays from the Sun, which can cause skin cancer and other medical conditions. 

Ozone destruction takes place within polar stratospheric clouds, with chlorine the main culprit 

Longer, not colder

Winter temperatures in the Arctic stratosphere do not generally fall as low as at the southern end of the world. No records for low temperature were set this year, but the air remained at its coldest for an unusually long period of time, and covered an unusually large area. In addition, the polar vortex was stronger than usual. Here, winds circulate around the edge of the Arctic region, somewhat isolating it from the main world weather systems. 

“Why [all this] occurred will take years of detailed study,” said Dr Santee. “It was continuously cold from December through April, and that has never happened before in the Arctic in the instrumental record.” 

The size and position of the ozone hole changed over time, as the vortex moved northwards or southwards over different regions. Some monitoring stations in northern Europe and Russia recorded enhanced levels of ultraviolet-B penetration, though it is not clear that this posed any risk to human health. While the Arctic was setting records, the Antarctic ozone hole is relatively stable from year to year. This year has seen ozone-depleting conditions extending a little later into the southern hemisphere spring than usual – again, as a result of unusual weather conditions. Chlorine compounds persist for decades in the upper atmosphere, meaning that it will probably be mid-century before the ozone layer is restored to its pre-industrial health.

Alun Hubbard, a researcher at Aberystwyth University’s Center for Glaciology in Wales, recently returned from Greenland’s Petermann Glacier. Polar scientists last photographed the glacier, located in the northwest corner of the country, in the summer of 2009. They went back this summer to see how much ice it has lost in just the last two years, and the results were dramatic.

“Although I knew what to expect in terms of ice loss from satellite imagery, I was still completely unprepared for the gob-smacking scale of the breakup, which rendered me speechless,” Hubbard said in response to the images. Below, you can see the original shots from 2009 beside those taken this summer:

It’s too darn hot. From Maine to Hawaii, the mercury has been rising relentlessly. The oven-like conditions in the United States are just the latest in a series of extreme weather events over the past year – epic floods in Pakistan and Australia, record heat waves in Moscow, the heaviest snowfall in more than a century in South Korea. These extremes are pushing the limits of human experience. What is driving this phenomenon? And rather than just complain, what can we do about it?

1. This summer is much hotter than normal

It feels hot for a reason, and not just in the United States. Last month’s global average land surface temperature was the fourth warmest on record. And July is doing its best to outdo June. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 49 states—all except Delaware—have had record highs in the past three weeks. In Washington, a heat wave sweeping the East Coast is pushing temperatures into the triple digits.

However, while suffering Washingtonians might be forgiven for regarding this summer as an aberration, they would be wrong. Globally, June was the 316th month in a row that had a higher temperature than the 20th century average. So, while it is indeed much hotter than it used to be, we may be witnessing a new normal in heat and other extreme weather. This month’s temperature records may not stand for long.

2. “Hundred year” weather events happen only once every 100 years.

Hundred-year weather events no longer live up to their name. In 2005, for instance, a devastating “once a century” drought hit the Amazon, only to be followed by another in 2010. Globally, previously rare weather events have been occurring with startling frequency. Consider the massive floods that inundated a fifth of Pakistan last year, and submerged eastern Australia, and America’s heartlands this year. It’s time for meteorologists to come up with a new, more accurate term.

Of course, what scientists actually mean by “one in 100 years” is not that a major flood, drought or hurricane will strike a given place only once a century, but rather that there is a 1 percent chance of such an event in any given year. Either way, the fact that what were once considered hundred-year events seem to be happening more often is consistent with climate models projecting that rising global average temperatures will lead to more frequent and severe extreme weather.

3. Extreme droughts and extreme floods can’t both be due to climate change

It seems counter-intuitive that climate change could cause both withering droughts and devastating floods. Yet it does.Scientists have found that climate change can trigger periods of intense and heavy rainfall that can be followed by long periods of dry weather, marked by little precipitation. This combination of severe rainstorms and droughts can, in turn, lead to more flooding, landslides, soil erosion, and associated disasters. There are signs in some places that this may already be underway.

For example, from 1951 to 2000, heavy monsoons in India became more frequent and intense, while more moderate rains happened less often. Similarly, in China, severe droughts this spring were followed by massive flooding, which has killed nearly 200 people and caused more than 1.5 million to be evacuated.

4. An extra one or two degrees in temperature is no big deal

When it’s already 100 degrees outside, one degree more doesn’t seem like much. But in terms of the global average, a one-degree temperature rise has huge implications for people and the planet.

Since pre-industrial times, the global average surface temperature has increased by 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit—with more than one degree of that warming happening in the past three decades. And we are already witnessing significant changes. In many parts of the world, cold days and nights have become rarer, and hot days and nights more common, over the past half-century. Arctic sea ice, Greenland’s ice sheet, and glaciers in the Alps and the Antarctic Peninsula are all melting faster. The oceans have become more acidic as a result of the buildup of greenhouse gases, and the warming of rivers and lakes is affecting freshwater fish and other species. As are result, animals and plants are migrating toward poles or higher elevations in search of more hospitable habitats.

And all this is happening with just 1.4 degrees of warming. What’s more, this is just an average, with actual temperatures rising at different rates, and with varying impacts, around the world. Without action to reduce carbon emissions, many leading climate scientists are projecting that the planet’s average temperature could rise as much as 11.5 degrees by the end of the century. The consequences are hard to imagine.

5. Everyone complains about the weather, but no one does anything about it

We all love to complain about the weather. But the old saying is not quite accurate. There is, in fact, a lot that governments, businesses and people around the world can do—and are already doing—to cut back on heat-trapping gases and prepare for extreme weather.

At least 85 nations have pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or limit their growth by 2020 by shifting to renewable energy, increasing energy efficiency and protecting forests, among other efforts. Similarly, some Fortune 500 companies and even the U.S. military are working to reduce their carbon emissions. A good start, but not nearly enough.

Many countries, cities and communities are preparing for the impact of rising global temperatures. In Bangladesh, for example, the government’s actions to improve disaster preparedness have helped reduce death tolls from cyclones. Cyclone Sidr in 2007 claimed 3,400 lives, whereas a similar cyclone in 1991 led to roughly 140,000 deaths. And Vietnam has invested in mangrove restoration to rebuild a natural barrier to protect coastlines from flooding. The World Resources Report 2010-2011, produced by the World Resources Institute, the United Nations Development Program, the United Nations Environment Program and the World Bank, highlights how governments are planning for climate change and extreme weather.

But we can do much more to reduce the carbon emissions that contribute to the problem in the first place. When it comes to our warming planet, it’s time for less hot air and more action.

Gore evokes the Iraq war, credit crunch, civil rights and emancipation to argue the US electoral system is broken and only a mass movement can deliver reason on global warming

Al Gore, pictured in Florida in September 2010, argues in a news article that people pressure on politicians is key to solving the climate crisis. Photograph: Joe Raedle/Getty Images