CONSEQUENCES

Some 3.8 billion years ago was a mystery that scientists have long attempted to solve.

Way back then, the Earth was a completely different place, and so was the solar system. The sun shined with less luminescence – as much as 30 percent weaker – which meant the Earth should have been really cold. So cold, in fact, that liquid water would not have existed.

11 Year Solar Cycle

But the geologic record shows that water was, indeed, present and provided the foundation for the proverbial “primordial soup” that gave rise to life. How come? This is what’s called the “faint young sun problem.”

There are many theories… Clearly more went on than we know.

Why does this matter to modern day climate change?

“One thing that paleoclimate research definitely does do is to put modern day climate change into perspective,” Geochemist James Kasting of Penn State University points out.

The disappearance of glaciers goes hand in hand with warming temperatures. But it turns out that the process may be more complicated than rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere. For insight, we look to the past.

Dr. M. Vizcaino Trueba

What kept the ice sheets at bay has been explored in a recent paper in the journal Paleoceanography by UC Berkeley geographer M. Vizcaino and colleagues.

The scientists believe that during the Pliocene, a permanent “El Nino state” may have been taking place.

In a permanent El Nino, sea temperatures remain constant across the Pacific, and the cold water upwelling, known poetically as the “cold tongue” goes limp. As a result, warmer air invades North America, Greenland, and part of Eurasia around the Black Sea, raising temperatures by as much as 9 degrees Fahrenheit. Conversely, temperatures become the coolest in much of northeast Eurasia. This overlaps nicely with where glaciers would otherwise exist, northeast Eurasia being glacier-free. The researchers write:

The climate reorganization caused by a permanent El Nino results in temperature anomalies over the northern high latitudes remarkably coincident with known locations of ice sheet growth.

The “cold tongue” could be more important than we thought.

Please read the article in full here: http://www.terradaily.com/reports/A_History_Of_Climate_Change_999.html

Source: Terra Daily – by Staff Writers – Moffett Field CA (SPX) Jun 22, 2010

Photo Credit: Steele Hill, SOHO, NASA/ESA

Numerous studies are documenting the growing effects of climate change, carbon dioxide, pollution and other human-related phenomena on the world’s oceans. But most of those have studied single, isolated sources of pollution and other influences.

Dr Scott Doney, WHOI

Now, a marine geochemist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) has published a report in the latest issue of the journal Science that evaluates the total impact of such factors on the ocean and considers what the future might hold.

“What we do on land — agriculture, fossil fuel combustion and pollution — can have a profound impact on the chemistry of the sea,” says Scott C. Doney, a senior scientist at WHOI and author of the Science report. “A whole range of these factors have been studied in isolation but have not been put in a single venue.”

He concludes that climate change, rising atmospheric carbon dioxide, excess nutrient inputs, and the many forms of pollution are “altering fundamentally the…ocean, often on a global scale and, in some cases, at rates greatly exceeding those in the historical and recent geological record.”

Scott Doney is calling for “a deeper understanding of human impacts on ocean biogeochemistry…”.

Please read a more detailed summary of this paper’s findings here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100617185131.htm

Journal Reference:

1.Scott C. Doney. The Growing Human Footprint on Coastal and Open-Ocean Biogeochemistry. Science, 2010; 328 (5985): 1512-1516 DOI: 10.1126/science.1185198

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. “Comprehensive Look at Human Impacts on Ocean Chemistry.” ScienceDaily 21 June 2010. 21 June 2010 <http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2010/06/100617185131.htm>.

Credit: Photo by John Bullister, NOAA/PMEL)

Image of a dying ocean or image of a dying planet?

The first comprehensive synthesis on the effects of climate change on the world’s oceans has found they are now changing at a rate not seen for several million years.

In a report published June 18, 2010 in Science, scientists reveal that growing atmospheric concentrations of man-made greenhouse gases are driving irreversible and dramatic changes to the way the ocean functions, with potentially dire impacts for hundreds of millions of people across the planet. These findings have enormous implications for mankind, particularly if the trend continues.  The Earth’s ocean, which produces half of the oxygen we breathe and absorbs 30% of human-generated CO2, is equivalent to its heart and lungs.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, lead author of the report and Director of The University of Queensland’s Global Change Institute, says “We are entering a period in which the very ocean services upon which humanity depends are undergoing massive change and in some cases beginning to fail”. “Further degradation will continue to create enormous challenges and costs for societies worldwide.”

He warned that we may soon see “sudden, unexpected changes that have serious ramifications for the overall well-being of humans,” including the capacity of the planet to support people. “This is further evidence that we are well on the way to the next great extinction event.”

The authors conclude: “… Ignoring the science is not an option.”

Please continue to read and to pass along the complete article here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100618103558.htm

Journal Reference:

1.Hoegh-Guldberg et al. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystems. Science, 2010; 328 (5985): 1523 DOI: 10.1126/science.1189930

Global Change Institute. “Ocean Changes May Have Dire Impact on People.” ScienceDaily 19 June 2010. 21 June 2010 <http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2010/06/100618103558.htm>.

Photo Credit: Image courtesy of Global Change Institute

The Bering Sea Project June 18 2010

Posted on behalf of Wendee Holtcamp, blogging for Nature aboard the research vessel Thomas G. Thompson.

RV Thomas G. Thompson

I’m flying in a 30-seater SAAB 340 turboprop to the international port of Dutch Harbor on Unalaska Island, part of the Aleutian Island Chain, and the number one commercial fishing port in the United States. For the next 28 days, I’ll be the sole journalist on the research vessel Thomas G. Thompson, reporting on the science being done by 29 scientists, grad students, and technicians as we venture into notoriously rough and wildly productive Bering Sea.

The Bering Sea Project partners the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) with Alaska’s North Pacific Research Board (NPRB) in a comprehensive, multi-year and multi-disciplinary study of how climate change is affecting the Bering Sea ecosystem from top to bottom. NSF oversees the portion known as the Bering Ecosystem Study (BEST) which examines how changing sea ice conditions affect chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of the region. NPRB oversees the Bering Sea Integrated Ecosystem Research Program (BSIERP), which focuses more on how marine organisms, such as fish, marine mammals and seabirds, are being affected by both natural and human-induced changes to the Bering Sea, particularly related to climate change.

This is year four of the six-year project, in which more than 100 scientists having received funding to study various aspects of the Bering Sea. I’m joining the “summer” cruise of the Thompson’s 2010 expedition.

Please read the complete report by Wendee on the Nature blog: The Great Beyond for June 18, 2010

Source: Nature blog: The Great Beyond for June 18, 2010

Photo credit: Wendee Holtcamp

Check in regularly for Bering Sea Project Updates: http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/

See the link under Expeditions in the sidebar —————>

Debate continues over whether human actions or natural events are primarily responsible for these global climate changes.

Climate Change graphic

Some people argue that rising levels of human-produced greenhouse gases are warming the planet and causing the climate to change.  Others argue that reported greenhouse gas increases are too small to change the climate, and that 20th century warming has been the result of natural processes such as fluctuations in the sun’s heat and ocean currents.  ProCon.org’s newest and 34th website explores the pros and cons in this debate.

Those who believe humans are causing substantial climate change… state that greenhouse gas levels rise mainly from human activities. They argue these increases are amplified by natural feedback loops, leading to significant global warming and climate change that will detrimentally affect human civilization, causing flooding, water shortages, hotter summers and colder winters, and decreased crop harvests.

Those who believe humans are not substantially contributing to climate change,… argue that the amount of human-generated greenhouse gas increases are too small to substantially change the climate. They state that the earth’s forests and oceans are capable of absorbing these small increases, and that 20th century warming has been the result of natural processes including fluctuations in the sun’s heat and ocean currents.

This debate is discussed at length on Climate Change Pro Con . Org at http://climatechange.procon.org/ complete with stastitics, facts, backgrounders, images and videos as well as reader comments, footnotes and sources. It is a MUST READ for anyone interested in the debate over climate change (which should only concern about 7 billion people).

Climate Change Pro Con . Org: http://climatechange.procon.org/

June 15, 2010

Once again, U.N. climate change talks ended without a clear result, further hampering chances for a successful outcome of a major climate summit in Cancun, Mexico, in December.

Lagoons of New Caledonia

The 2-week-long negotiations in Bonn, Germany, failed to bring the more than 180 nations together. Not that there hadn’t been hope for a breakthrough. The 4,500 delegates came up with a draft treaty that was lauded by environmental groups but some last-minute changes to it at the request of Russia angered developing nations, which then refused to agree to it.

Meanwhile, poor nations complained that they haven’t yet seen anything of the $30 billion pledged in “fast-start” aid to help developing countries cope with climate change, to be delivered from now until 2012.

Outgoing U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer was nevertheless optimistic, vowing that the two additional talks scheduled before Cancun — one more in Bonn in early August and another one in Beijing in October — will produce an ambitious draft treaty holding a potential for consensus.

Climate negotiations have been deadlocked since Cop 15 in Copenhagen ended in acrimony.

Please read the full article here:  http://www.terradaily.com/reports/No_consensus_at_climate_talks_999.html

by Staff Writers

Bonn, Germany (UPI) Jun 14, 2010

Image credit: NASA/Lagoons of New Caledonia

Note: China recently overtook the United States as the world’s biggest emitter of heat-trapping greenhouse gases but still emits far less on a per capita basis.