From carbon to coffin.
 |
| Click image for larger view. Source Mina Lee |
 |
| Source: NASA |
 |
| Source: Mina Lee |
 |
| Source: Mina Lee |
 |
| Source: Mina Lee |
 |
| Source: Mina Lee |
Links
28/08/2016
Four Infographics That Show How Climate Change Is Affecting Your Health
ThinkProgress - Jeremy Deaton | Mina Lee
From carbon to coffin.
The dog days of summer were particularly dogged this year. July clocked in as the hottest month on record, marking the midpoint of what is likely to be the hottest year on record. With sweltering temperatures came a litany of crummy climate news — floods in Louisiana, Zika in Miami, searing heat waves across the Northeast — with dire implications for human health.
Last year's Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change
warned that the carbon crisis could undo the last half-century of
progress in public health. And yet, for many, it remains unclear how
climate change could land them in the hospital. Just one in four Americans can identify the ways that rising temperatures threaten their health.
To clarify that link, Climate Nexus and the American Public Health Association
developed a series of infographics that illustrate the connection
between climate change and all manner of life-threatening illness.
[Disclosure: Climate Nexus and Nexus Media are both sponsored projects of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.]
Let's
begin with air quality. Climate change is producing shorter winters and
longer summers, extending allergy season. Warmer weather is also
worsening pollution by fueling the formation of ozone. Heat and drought
are setting the stage for wildfires, like the blaze recently seen in California, which produce smoke, threatening respiratory health.
Rising temperatures are also producing longer and more severe heat waves, like the scorcher
that just descended on the East Coast. Extreme heat can lead to
dehydration and stroke. Children and the elderly are most vulnerable.
With extreme heat, expect to see more mosquitos. According to an analysis from Climate Central,
climate change is extending mosquito season across the United States,
expanding the range of vector-borne diseases, like Zika, which just made
landfall in Florida.
Finally, severe storms, like the torrent that just hit Louisiana, are damaging infrastructure, leaving those many of those affected without food, shelter or access to clean water.
The good news is that slashing planet-warming carbon pollution would be a boon for public health. The Lancet Commission
said that tackling climate change "could be the greatest global health
opportunity of the 21st century." Drastically reducing emissions from
cars, planes, and power plants wouldn't just curb the rise in
temperatures. It would also prevent millions of deaths from air
pollution.
As
the country shifts to clean energy, we can expect big measurable gains
in public health. For Americans currently sweating it out in the summer
heat, that might offer a little consolation.
Links
From carbon to coffin.
Links
27/08/2016
Big Oil’s Nightmare Comes True
EcoWatch - Carl Pope
"This was retail politics and oil lost," was how Adrienne Alvord of Union of Concerned Scientists summed up the stunning environmental victory Tuesday in the California legislature, a victory which cemented the state's commitment to a 40 percent reduction in climate pollution by 2030.
Only a few weeks ago there was a strong consensus that the oil
industry, by spending millions of dollars on behalf of a cadre of
moderate Democrats in the Assembly, had blocked just such a doubling
down on the state's existing 2020 goals. For the oil industry, victory
was an existential necessity. Only by holding future climate
commitments hostage could the industry hope to get Gov. Brown to
abandon the state's existing mandate that by 2020 the carbon content of
fuels be cut by 10 percent. As a practical matter, the requirement means
roughly 20 percent of California's more vehicles will be driving on
something other than oil—electricity, natural gas or biofuels.
And oil knows it cannot withstand a competitive transportation fuels market. Once California creates such a market and builds businesses that can produce low carbon fuels at scale, fuels competition will go global and oil's empire will wither. But it looked like oil had survived to fight another day. Gov. Brown had signaled his next move by forming a ballot committee for a (high-risk) initiative for the fall of 2018. But a small group of climate and environmental justice advocates refused to let the Assembly moderates off the hook. Demanding a vote, they re-energized their broad coalition of main-line businesses, EJ advocates, labor, climate greens, the faith community, clean tech and clean fuels businesses, local government and public health advocates.
Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon told them he would give them a vote once they had the votes—and on Tuesday he pulled the trigger, giving the oil industry, which thought it had won, only 24 hours to regroup. It wasn't enough and the Assembly passed SB32 by 47 votes, a six vote margin over the 41 needed. The California Nurses Association was heard from, but so was Ebay. Gov. Brown and the White House weighed in, but a lone Republican, Assemblywoman Catherine Baker joined them in supporting progress. Wednesday the Senate concurred and the bill, linked to an environmental justice focused companion bill, went to the governor for his signature.
Why the victory? Quite simply, retail politics. Clean energy now provides far more stimulus and creates far more jobs than fossil fuels. Clean power is seen by the public as the linch-pin of the state's economic future. Jobs on the ground trump oil industry ads on the screen. It's not accidental that states providing climate leadership are the states with the biggest clean energy sectors—California, Washington, Nevada, Oregon—and Iowa, with its nation leading wind sector and a public utility, Mid-America, that is planning to shortly hit 85 percent renewables and go on to 100 percent.
And it's cheaper.
The oil industry is in a state of shock. Their press release bizarrely asserted that Rendon had scheduled the vote to "cover up" the fact that the state's latest auction for carbon emission permits had attracted few buyers—a result oil called "terrible." The auction simply reflected the fact that emitters, uncertain if the law would be extended past 2020, did not know how many permits they needed to buy. The oil industry conceded as much, saying "Today's miserable auction result reflects the market's lack of certainty." But it is revealing that oil called it "terrible" and "miserable" that the cost of carbon permits was low—demonstrating again that what they fear is not that decarbonizing will cost too much and hurt the economy, but that it will prove irresistibly cheap and strand them. Also revealing—SB32 was written precisely to provide the certainty whose absence the oil industry allegedly deplores!
(In fact, the legislature is going home next week and Rendon had to bring the bill up more or less when he did. The short notice was tactical—but hardly conspiratorial).
Ideological, right-wing opponents of climate progress and clean energy stayed more on message, releasing a poll purporting to show that the public, all the other evidence to the contrary, didn't really favor tougher clean-up of carbon pollution or California climate leadership after all.
Read carefully, however, the poll says something quite different. It confirms that most Californians want to move forward on clean energy and climate, believe that such progress is good for California even if others do not lead and want action. Even California Republicans are part of this consensus. Sixty-two percent of California Republican voters think that climate change is either a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the state. Again, of Republicans, 67 percent expect the changes resulting from global warming to occur in their lifetimes. A majority favor the state's current climate goals and a plurality favor the longer-term, more ambitious goals just passed.
It is true that, if nudged to believe that after such action, "hundreds of local manufacturing facilities would be shut down and thousands of middle-class jobs would be lost in California" large majorities of Republicans, and Democrats and Independents, lose their appetite. But if you said to the same sample that ambitious climate progress would mean "continued economic growth, an end to air pollution, cheaper gas and billions of dollars of new exports for California industries" the supportive numbers among Republicans would probably jump from a plurality to a super-majority. The latter statement is the true one, it turns out—and, more or less, it is what most California voters are experiencing—which explains why, un-manipulated, even Republicans are happy that the state continues to move forward.
But California is not the only arena where oil's long regime is coming to an end. Investors are watching warily as the majors—Chevron, Exxon, BP and Shell have now accumulated an unprecedented $184 billion in debt, fallen far short ($40 billion short in the first half of 2016) of their promised goals of paying their dividends from profits, not borrowing. Shell, Chevron, Exxon and BP have all seen their previous platinum grade credit ratings cut a notch. To placate investors, the majors pledge that they have new (but far from transparent) business plans to someday make money again—if only oil will stay at some magic level. For BP it's $50-55/barrel. Unfortunately, it has not been in that range since 2014.
Many of the independent oil producers, of course, have gone bankrupt. Oil remains stubbornly below $50. Most independent analysts believe that for the oil majors, prices in the $75 range are required to compete with Persian Gulf and other OPEC members in the long term. And those prices, unequivocally, require one thing: a continuation of oil's monopoly in transportation fuel.
California this week called the question. That monopoly is going away. Oil has lost before, but never because the retail politics of its competitors proved more compelling. This was no decisive battle. There may be none, just as there is no moment when the fate of the Roman Empire was sealed.
But the sands of time are running. Oil's empire is in its decline and fall.
Links
"This was retail politics and oil lost," was how Adrienne Alvord of Union of Concerned Scientists summed up the stunning environmental victory Tuesday in the California legislature, a victory which cemented the state's commitment to a 40 percent reduction in climate pollution by 2030.
 |
| It's not accidental that states providing climate leadership are the states with the biggest clean energy sectors, including California. |
And oil knows it cannot withstand a competitive transportation fuels market. Once California creates such a market and builds businesses that can produce low carbon fuels at scale, fuels competition will go global and oil's empire will wither. But it looked like oil had survived to fight another day. Gov. Brown had signaled his next move by forming a ballot committee for a (high-risk) initiative for the fall of 2018. But a small group of climate and environmental justice advocates refused to let the Assembly moderates off the hook. Demanding a vote, they re-energized their broad coalition of main-line businesses, EJ advocates, labor, climate greens, the faith community, clean tech and clean fuels businesses, local government and public health advocates.
Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon told them he would give them a vote once they had the votes—and on Tuesday he pulled the trigger, giving the oil industry, which thought it had won, only 24 hours to regroup. It wasn't enough and the Assembly passed SB32 by 47 votes, a six vote margin over the 41 needed. The California Nurses Association was heard from, but so was Ebay. Gov. Brown and the White House weighed in, but a lone Republican, Assemblywoman Catherine Baker joined them in supporting progress. Wednesday the Senate concurred and the bill, linked to an environmental justice focused companion bill, went to the governor for his signature.
Why the victory? Quite simply, retail politics. Clean energy now provides far more stimulus and creates far more jobs than fossil fuels. Clean power is seen by the public as the linch-pin of the state's economic future. Jobs on the ground trump oil industry ads on the screen. It's not accidental that states providing climate leadership are the states with the biggest clean energy sectors—California, Washington, Nevada, Oregon—and Iowa, with its nation leading wind sector and a public utility, Mid-America, that is planning to shortly hit 85 percent renewables and go on to 100 percent.
And it's cheaper.
The oil industry is in a state of shock. Their press release bizarrely asserted that Rendon had scheduled the vote to "cover up" the fact that the state's latest auction for carbon emission permits had attracted few buyers—a result oil called "terrible." The auction simply reflected the fact that emitters, uncertain if the law would be extended past 2020, did not know how many permits they needed to buy. The oil industry conceded as much, saying "Today's miserable auction result reflects the market's lack of certainty." But it is revealing that oil called it "terrible" and "miserable" that the cost of carbon permits was low—demonstrating again that what they fear is not that decarbonizing will cost too much and hurt the economy, but that it will prove irresistibly cheap and strand them. Also revealing—SB32 was written precisely to provide the certainty whose absence the oil industry allegedly deplores!
(In fact, the legislature is going home next week and Rendon had to bring the bill up more or less when he did. The short notice was tactical—but hardly conspiratorial).
Ideological, right-wing opponents of climate progress and clean energy stayed more on message, releasing a poll purporting to show that the public, all the other evidence to the contrary, didn't really favor tougher clean-up of carbon pollution or California climate leadership after all.
Read carefully, however, the poll says something quite different. It confirms that most Californians want to move forward on clean energy and climate, believe that such progress is good for California even if others do not lead and want action. Even California Republicans are part of this consensus. Sixty-two percent of California Republican voters think that climate change is either a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the state. Again, of Republicans, 67 percent expect the changes resulting from global warming to occur in their lifetimes. A majority favor the state's current climate goals and a plurality favor the longer-term, more ambitious goals just passed.
It is true that, if nudged to believe that after such action, "hundreds of local manufacturing facilities would be shut down and thousands of middle-class jobs would be lost in California" large majorities of Republicans, and Democrats and Independents, lose their appetite. But if you said to the same sample that ambitious climate progress would mean "continued economic growth, an end to air pollution, cheaper gas and billions of dollars of new exports for California industries" the supportive numbers among Republicans would probably jump from a plurality to a super-majority. The latter statement is the true one, it turns out—and, more or less, it is what most California voters are experiencing—which explains why, un-manipulated, even Republicans are happy that the state continues to move forward.
But California is not the only arena where oil's long regime is coming to an end. Investors are watching warily as the majors—Chevron, Exxon, BP and Shell have now accumulated an unprecedented $184 billion in debt, fallen far short ($40 billion short in the first half of 2016) of their promised goals of paying their dividends from profits, not borrowing. Shell, Chevron, Exxon and BP have all seen their previous platinum grade credit ratings cut a notch. To placate investors, the majors pledge that they have new (but far from transparent) business plans to someday make money again—if only oil will stay at some magic level. For BP it's $50-55/barrel. Unfortunately, it has not been in that range since 2014.
Many of the independent oil producers, of course, have gone bankrupt. Oil remains stubbornly below $50. Most independent analysts believe that for the oil majors, prices in the $75 range are required to compete with Persian Gulf and other OPEC members in the long term. And those prices, unequivocally, require one thing: a continuation of oil's monopoly in transportation fuel.
California this week called the question. That monopoly is going away. Oil has lost before, but never because the retail politics of its competitors proved more compelling. This was no decisive battle. There may be none, just as there is no moment when the fate of the Roman Empire was sealed.
But the sands of time are running. Oil's empire is in its decline and fall.
Links
- Mount Everest Climbers May One Day Climb Ice-Free
- Biofuels Worse for Climate Than Gasoline, New Study Finds
- Delaware-Sized Chunk of Ice Could Dislodge from Antarctic Shelf
- Renewable Energy Generation Breaks Records Every Month in 2016
- Bill Nye: 'There's Enough Wind and Solar' to Power the World
- 97% of Most Species-Rich Places on Earth Have Been Seriously Altered by Humans
26/08/2016
Letter Signed By 154 Australian Experts Demands Climate Policy Match The Science
The Guardian* - James Whitmore
Leading climate and environmental scientists urge Malcolm Turnbull to take urgent action ‘while there is still time’
More than 150 Australian experts have signed an open letter to the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, demanding urgent action on climate change that matches the dire warnings coming from climate scientists.
The letter, organised by the Australian National University climatologist Andrew Glikson, calls on the federal government to make “meaningful reductions of Australia’s peak carbon emissions and coal exports, while there is still time”.
The 154 signatories include leading climate and environmental scientists such as the Climate Council’s Tim Flannery, Will Steffen and Lesley Hughes, as well as reef scientists Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Charlie Veron.
They point out that July 2016 was the hottest month on record, and followed a nine-month streak of record-breaking months. Average carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere reached 400 parts per million in 2015, and are rising at a rate of nearly 3 ppm each year.
The world is already witnessing the effects of climate change, the letter argues, including an increase in extreme weather events, melting of the polar ice sheets and ocean acidification.
Australia, along with 179 other countries, has signed the climate treaty brokered in Paris last year, aiming to limit average global warming to “well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C”.
But Glikson warned that “the Paris agreement, being non-binding, is in danger of not being fulfilled by many of the signatories”. The deal will not enter into force until it is ratified by 55 countries accounting for at least 55% of the world’s greenhouse emissions.
Glikson called for action to “transition from carbon-emitting technologies to alternative clean energy as fast as possible, and focus technology on draw-down (sequestration) of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere”.
Australia’s current greenhouse gas target, which it took to December’s Paris climate summit, calls for emissions to be reduced by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030. It has been widely criticised by experts as not ambitious enough.
Andrew Blakers, professor of engineering at ANU, said Australia could reduce emissions by two-thirds by 2030 “at negligible cost”.
He said the falling cost of renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, the replacement of gas with electricity for heating, and the advent of electric vehicles would eliminate most emissions. Solar and wind installation, now at 1 gigawatt each year, would need to be increased to 2.5 gigawatts each year to reach 100% renewable energy by 2030.
Remaining emissions, from shipping, aviation, and industry, could be eliminated after 2030 at slightly higher costs.
Lesley Hughes, a member of the Climate Council and professor at Macquarie University, said there were a number of factors causing the gap between science and policy, including vested interests, perception of economic downsides of climate action, ideological biases and inertia in the system from investment in fossil fuels. But she said the “most important issue” was the difficulty in convincing people to act to reduce risk decades in the future.
The Climate Change Authority, which advises the government on climate policy, in 2014 recommended Australia adopt a target of 40% to 60% below 2000 levels by 2030.
In a report released on Wednesday, the Climate Institute highlighted that aiming for 1.5C instead of 2C would avoid longer heatwaves and droughts, and give the Great Barrier Reef a better chance of survival.
The institute recommended that Australia adopt an emissions reduction target of 65% below 2005 levels by 2030 and phase out coal power by 2035.
*This article is reproduced from The Conversation.
Links
Leading climate and environmental scientists urge Malcolm Turnbull to take urgent action ‘while there is still time’
 |
| The Great Barrier Reef from space. Reef scientists are among the leading experts who have written to Malcolm Turnbull stressing that the world is already in the grip of climate change. Photograph: International Space Station/Nasa/ESA |
The letter, organised by the Australian National University climatologist Andrew Glikson, calls on the federal government to make “meaningful reductions of Australia’s peak carbon emissions and coal exports, while there is still time”.
The 154 signatories include leading climate and environmental scientists such as the Climate Council’s Tim Flannery, Will Steffen and Lesley Hughes, as well as reef scientists Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Charlie Veron.
They point out that July 2016 was the hottest month on record, and followed a nine-month streak of record-breaking months. Average carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere reached 400 parts per million in 2015, and are rising at a rate of nearly 3 ppm each year.
The world is already witnessing the effects of climate change, the letter argues, including an increase in extreme weather events, melting of the polar ice sheets and ocean acidification.
Australia, along with 179 other countries, has signed the climate treaty brokered in Paris last year, aiming to limit average global warming to “well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C”.
But Glikson warned that “the Paris agreement, being non-binding, is in danger of not being fulfilled by many of the signatories”. The deal will not enter into force until it is ratified by 55 countries accounting for at least 55% of the world’s greenhouse emissions.
Glikson called for action to “transition from carbon-emitting technologies to alternative clean energy as fast as possible, and focus technology on draw-down (sequestration) of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere”.
Australia’s current greenhouse gas target, which it took to December’s Paris climate summit, calls for emissions to be reduced by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030. It has been widely criticised by experts as not ambitious enough.
Andrew Blakers, professor of engineering at ANU, said Australia could reduce emissions by two-thirds by 2030 “at negligible cost”.
He said the falling cost of renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, the replacement of gas with electricity for heating, and the advent of electric vehicles would eliminate most emissions. Solar and wind installation, now at 1 gigawatt each year, would need to be increased to 2.5 gigawatts each year to reach 100% renewable energy by 2030.
Remaining emissions, from shipping, aviation, and industry, could be eliminated after 2030 at slightly higher costs.
Lesley Hughes, a member of the Climate Council and professor at Macquarie University, said there were a number of factors causing the gap between science and policy, including vested interests, perception of economic downsides of climate action, ideological biases and inertia in the system from investment in fossil fuels. But she said the “most important issue” was the difficulty in convincing people to act to reduce risk decades in the future.
The Climate Change Authority, which advises the government on climate policy, in 2014 recommended Australia adopt a target of 40% to 60% below 2000 levels by 2030.
In a report released on Wednesday, the Climate Institute highlighted that aiming for 1.5C instead of 2C would avoid longer heatwaves and droughts, and give the Great Barrier Reef a better chance of survival.
The institute recommended that Australia adopt an emissions reduction target of 65% below 2005 levels by 2030 and phase out coal power by 2035.
*This article is reproduced from The Conversation.
Links
- Climate scientists write another letter warning of unfolding crisis for Turnbull to ignore
- Queensland solar projects that could create 2,600 jobs at risk in federal cuts
- Human-induced climate change began earlier than previously thought
- Climate change: big four banks' lending to Australian renewables projects falls
- What will fill the hole left by coal?
- Business and academic leaders urge new conversation about coal-free future
- Labor proposes two emissions trading schemes costing $355.9m
- Carbon price needed to avoid economic disruption from Paris climate goals – analysis
- Climate crisis should be top of world leaders' agenda
- Shorten: Coalition rightwingers forcing Australians to 'pledge loyalty' to coal
Surface Water Shifting Around The Earth
BBC News - Rebecca Morelle
Scientists have used satellite images to study how the water on the Earth's surface has changed over 30 years.
They
found that 115,000 sq km (44,000 sq miles) of land is now covered in
water and 173,000 sq km (67,000 sq miles) of water has now become land.
The largest increase in water has been on the Tibetan Plateau, while the Aral Sea has been the biggest conversion of water to land.
The team said many coastal areas have also changed significantly.
The research, carried out by the Deltares Research Institute in the Netherlands, is published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
The researchers analysed satellite images recorded by NASA's Landsat satellites, which have observed the Earth for decades.
They were able to monitor changes in the Earth's surface down to a resolution of 30m, which can be seen on the Deltares Aqua Monitor.
The team found that vast areas that were once land are now submerged beneath water, with the largest change occurring in the Tibetan Plateau, where melting glaciers are creating huge new lakes.
An increase in the number of dams was also boosting water cover, and
using the satellite data, the team was able to detect previously
unreported constructions.
Dr Fedor Baart from Deltares said: "We started to look at areas that had not been mapped before.
"We knew in Myanmar that several dams were being built, but we were able to see how many. And we also looked at North Korea, and we found dams being built there just north of the border from South Korea."
Conversely, the researchers also found that even larger areas of water have now become land.
The biggest transformation was seen in the Aral Sea in Central Asia. What was once one of the largest lakes in the world has now almost completely dried up after engineers diverted rivers to irrigate agriculture.
The researchers said Lake Mead near Las Vegas, which is the largest freshwater supply in the United States, was also losing water, and 222 sq km (85 sq miles) of it was now land.
Coastal areas were also analysed, and to the scientists surprise, coastlines had gained more land - 33,700 sq km (13,000 sq miles) - than they had been lost to water (20,100 sq km or 7,800 sq miles).
"We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world," said Dr Baart.
"We're were able to create more land than sea level rise was taking."
The researchers said Dubai's coast had been significantly extended, with the creation of new islands to house luxury resorts.
"China has also reconstructed their whole coast from the Yellow Sea all the way down to Hong Kong," sid Dr Baart.
Some areas, such as the Amazon, saw almost equal amounts of conversion of land to water and vice versa because of the natural movements of the river system.
The team says more work now needs to be done to see what impact these global changes may have.
The lead author Gennadii Donchyts from Deltares said: "This analysis was done to understand the extent of these changes. The next step is to understand their impact on nature."
Links
 |
| Areas in green show where water has turned into land and those in blue show where land has become water. Deltares |
The largest increase in water has been on the Tibetan Plateau, while the Aral Sea has been the biggest conversion of water to land.
The team said many coastal areas have also changed significantly.
The research, carried out by the Deltares Research Institute in the Netherlands, is published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
 |
| Add New lakes - seen as blue pixels - are appearing on the Tibetan Plateau. Deltares |
They were able to monitor changes in the Earth's surface down to a resolution of 30m, which can be seen on the Deltares Aqua Monitor.
The team found that vast areas that were once land are now submerged beneath water, with the largest change occurring in the Tibetan Plateau, where melting glaciers are creating huge new lakes.
 |
| The team found dams that had been built in North Korea - seen here in blue. Deltares |
Dr Fedor Baart from Deltares said: "We started to look at areas that had not been mapped before.
"We knew in Myanmar that several dams were being built, but we were able to see how many. And we also looked at North Korea, and we found dams being built there just north of the border from South Korea."
 |
| The Aral Sea has almost completely dried out - seen here in green. Deltares |
The biggest transformation was seen in the Aral Sea in Central Asia. What was once one of the largest lakes in the world has now almost completely dried up after engineers diverted rivers to irrigate agriculture.
The researchers said Lake Mead near Las Vegas, which is the largest freshwater supply in the United States, was also losing water, and 222 sq km (85 sq miles) of it was now land.
Coastal areas were also analysed, and to the scientists surprise, coastlines had gained more land - 33,700 sq km (13,000 sq miles) - than they had been lost to water (20,100 sq km or 7,800 sq miles).
"We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world," said Dr Baart.
"We're were able to create more land than sea level rise was taking."
 |
| In Dubai, the creation of new islands has significantly altered the coastline. Deltares |
"China has also reconstructed their whole coast from the Yellow Sea all the way down to Hong Kong," sid Dr Baart.
Some areas, such as the Amazon, saw almost equal amounts of conversion of land to water and vice versa because of the natural movements of the river system.
The team says more work now needs to be done to see what impact these global changes may have.
The lead author Gennadii Donchyts from Deltares said: "This analysis was done to understand the extent of these changes. The next step is to understand their impact on nature."
Links
Book Week: 8 Classic Kids' Books About The Environment
Climate Council
It’s Children’s Book Week – the perfect excuse to revisit your favourite picture book, or for those of us reliving our school days, dress up as your favourite literary character!
It’s also the perfect time to celebrate how stories can help us understand the impacts of climate change and the importance of protecting our planet. These are critical lessons for everyone, no matter how young or old.
Here are a few of our favourite children's books doing just that. Happy reading!
1. Where the Forest Meets the Sea
Written and illustrated by Jeannie Baker
It’s Children’s Book Week – the perfect excuse to revisit your favourite picture book, or for those of us reliving our school days, dress up as your favourite literary character!
It’s also the perfect time to celebrate how stories can help us understand the impacts of climate change and the importance of protecting our planet. These are critical lessons for everyone, no matter how young or old.
Here are a few of our favourite children's books doing just that. Happy reading!
1. Where the Forest Meets the Sea
Written and illustrated by Jeannie Baker
“My father says there has been a forest here for over a hundred million years.”
In this beautifully illustrated picture book, a father and son take us on a journey to a lush tropical rain forest in North Queensland. Every time you look at the page, you discover something new hiding in each corner. The final question of the book – (will the forest be here when we come back?) – could be asked about many natural wonders in today’s world. This story offers a perfect opportunity to pause and reflect on the natural beauty of the wilderness – and why we must protect it!
2. The Lorax
Written and illustrated by Dr. Seuss
In this beautifully illustrated picture book, a father and son take us on a journey to a lush tropical rain forest in North Queensland. Every time you look at the page, you discover something new hiding in each corner. The final question of the book – (will the forest be here when we come back?) – could be asked about many natural wonders in today’s world. This story offers a perfect opportunity to pause and reflect on the natural beauty of the wilderness – and why we must protect it!
2. The Lorax
Written and illustrated by Dr. Seuss
"I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees.”
This timeless rhyming tale of man vs. nature is made fun and goofy in the classic Dr. Seuss style we all know and love. The greedy Once-ler starts by cutting down one Truffula Tree, but before long he has used up all of the beautiful trees, leaving nothing but smogulous smoke for the Swomee-Swans, Brown Barb-a-loots, Humming-Fish and more that depend on them for survival. The final message is one that still deeply resonates; we all have the power to learn from the past and change for the future.
3. Not your Typical Book About the Environment
Written by Elin Kelsey, illustrated by Clayton Hammer
This timeless rhyming tale of man vs. nature is made fun and goofy in the classic Dr. Seuss style we all know and love. The greedy Once-ler starts by cutting down one Truffula Tree, but before long he has used up all of the beautiful trees, leaving nothing but smogulous smoke for the Swomee-Swans, Brown Barb-a-loots, Humming-Fish and more that depend on them for survival. The final message is one that still deeply resonates; we all have the power to learn from the past and change for the future.
3. Not your Typical Book About the Environment
Written by Elin Kelsey, illustrated by Clayton Hammer
"It is not filled with doom and gloom messages about the state of
the planet. It does not blame you, your baby sister, or your uncle
Irving for climate change.”
These are just a few of the ways that Elin Kelsey’s book is different. This delightful picture book serves as a positive reminder of the amazing progress we are making towards tackling climate change. It gets kids (and adults!) to start thinking differently about the environmental impacts of what they do every day – and introduces some of the incredible technologies and possibilities that are already out there. While strongly supporting the need for change – this fun book is about solutions and possibilities. Described as 100% gloom-free by reviewers... who wouldn’t want to read this??
4 The Sign of the Seahorse
Written and illustrated by Graeme Base
These are just a few of the ways that Elin Kelsey’s book is different. This delightful picture book serves as a positive reminder of the amazing progress we are making towards tackling climate change. It gets kids (and adults!) to start thinking differently about the environmental impacts of what they do every day – and introduces some of the incredible technologies and possibilities that are already out there. While strongly supporting the need for change – this fun book is about solutions and possibilities. Described as 100% gloom-free by reviewers... who wouldn’t want to read this??
4 The Sign of the Seahorse
Written and illustrated by Graeme Base
“Beyond the ken of mortal men, beneath the wind and waves, there lies a land of shells and sand, of chasms crags and caves”
This story about the threatened inhabitants of a fragile coral reef may be all too close to home for Australians this year – but Graeme Base’s thrilling adventure tale still merits a mention! In this story, residents of Reeftown are threatened when a sneaky real estate deal made by the Greedy Groper floods their area with toxic waste. Fortunately the sea creatures eventually come to the rescue, and in the meantime we are treated to a wonderfully illustrated rhyming adventure tale that helps us connect to the vibrancy of underwater life.
5. The Wump World
Written and illustrated by Bill Peet
This story about the threatened inhabitants of a fragile coral reef may be all too close to home for Australians this year – but Graeme Base’s thrilling adventure tale still merits a mention! In this story, residents of Reeftown are threatened when a sneaky real estate deal made by the Greedy Groper floods their area with toxic waste. Fortunately the sea creatures eventually come to the rescue, and in the meantime we are treated to a wonderfully illustrated rhyming adventure tale that helps us connect to the vibrancy of underwater life.
5. The Wump World
Written and illustrated by Bill Peet
“We can’t breathe the air! We can’t drink the water! And we can’t stand the noise! We’ve had enough!”
The adorable wumps are enough to get this book on our list of favourites, but Bill Peet’s story has an important environmental message too. The Pollutians invade the Wump World after using up all the resources on their previous planet, only to do the same thing yet again as soon as they arrive. When even the Pollutians become fed up with the mess they’ve made, they re-locate to a new planet once more. While the Pollutians obviously haven’t learnt their lesson – the question remains, have we?
6. Atmospheric
Written by Carole Wilkinson
The adorable wumps are enough to get this book on our list of favourites, but Bill Peet’s story has an important environmental message too. The Pollutians invade the Wump World after using up all the resources on their previous planet, only to do the same thing yet again as soon as they arrive. When even the Pollutians become fed up with the mess they’ve made, they re-locate to a new planet once more. While the Pollutians obviously haven’t learnt their lesson – the question remains, have we?
6. Atmospheric
Written by Carole Wilkinson
“Young people will be the ones grappling with climate change. Atmospheric reminds them they are key to the solution.” – Amanda McKenzie, Climate Council CEO
Atmospheric may not be quite as cheeky as some of the other names on our list – but this non-fiction book for older kids is definitely worth a read. Atmospheric narrates our longtime mistreatment of the atmosphere, how that affects our climate, and what we should be doing about it. Brimming with handy dates, vocab, websites, and other resources, we need more books like this on our shelves! Atmospheric cuts through the cr--, communicating complex ideas in a simple, readable way.
7. Dot and the Kangaroo
Written by Ethel Pedley, illustrated by Frank P. Mahony
Atmospheric may not be quite as cheeky as some of the other names on our list – but this non-fiction book for older kids is definitely worth a read. Atmospheric narrates our longtime mistreatment of the atmosphere, how that affects our climate, and what we should be doing about it. Brimming with handy dates, vocab, websites, and other resources, we need more books like this on our shelves! Atmospheric cuts through the cr--, communicating complex ideas in a simple, readable way.
7. Dot and the Kangaroo
Written by Ethel Pedley, illustrated by Frank P. Mahony
“To the children of Australia, in the hope of enlisting their
sympathies for the many beautiful, amiable and frolicsome creatures of
their fair land; whose extinction through ruthless destruction is being
surely accomplished.”
Published way back in 1899, this Australian classic with a deep environmental message has been a household favourite ever since. Lost and afraid in the bush, Dot is saved by the friendly Kangaroo, and taught by the other animals about the human destruction of the bush and the animals within it. The dedication at the front of the book is an important wake up call from an author writing over a century ago!
8. My Place
Written by Nadia Wheatley, illustrated by Donna Rawlins
Like its illustrations, My Place is a book with many different layers.
Set in what is now inner city Sydney, My Place moves back in time from
1988-1788, showcasing the changes that have been made to the land,
environment, and society. The constants in the landscapes are the big
tree and the creek, and if you look closely – you can spot the ways that
human influence has changed them. Adults and kids alike have lots to
learn from this ab fab picture book.
Published way back in 1899, this Australian classic with a deep environmental message has been a household favourite ever since. Lost and afraid in the bush, Dot is saved by the friendly Kangaroo, and taught by the other animals about the human destruction of the bush and the animals within it. The dedication at the front of the book is an important wake up call from an author writing over a century ago!
8. My Place
Written by Nadia Wheatley, illustrated by Donna Rawlins
25/08/2016
Human-Induced Climate Change Began Earlier Than Previously Thought
The Guardian - Ian Sample
Signs of warming appear as early as 1830 say researchers, whose analysis will help build accurate baseline of temperature before influence of human activity
Continents and oceans in the northern hemisphere began to warm with
industrial-era fossil fuel emissions nearly 200 years ago, pushing back
the origins of human-induced climate change to the mid-19th century.
The first signs of warming from the rise in greenhouse gases which came hand-in-hand with the Industrial Revolution appear as early as 1830 in the tropical oceans and the Arctic, meaning that climate change witnessed today began about 180 years ago.
Researchers in Australia found evidence for the early onset of warming after trawling through 500 years of data on tree rings, corals and ice cores that together form a natural archive of Earth's historical temperatures.
Temperature trends for the continents and tropical oceans over the last 500 years. Credit: Abram et al.
Much of what is known about Earth's climate history is based on instruments that have monitored temperatures from the 1880s onwards. But while these capture the changing conditions seen in the 20th century, they miss the start of the warming trend.
"A lot is known about the climate record for the time when we have instrumental records," said Nerilie Abram, a climate scientist at the Australian National University. "We wanted to look at whether these records give us the full picture."
Pooling the data, the scientists found that temperatures in the tropical oceans and in the air above northern hemisphere land-masses began to rise above natural variations in the 1830s, just as greenhouse gas emissions edged upwards.
The scientists first thought that they were seeing the climate rebound after a period of natural cooling brought on by particles thrown high into the atmosphere from volcanic eruptions. But climate simulations showed that the warming they observed could be explained purely by the small rise in greenhouse gas emissions.
"The changes in greenhouse gases in the 19th century were small compared with the fairly rapid changes we see now, so seeing the climate respond this way was a surprise," said Abrams.
'I brought the graph': Brian Cox refutes claims of climage change denier on Q&A
The southern hemisphere, including Australasia and South America, appeared to start heating up 50 years later, near the turn of the century, while no sign of warming on the continental scale was noticed in Antarctica. The lack of appreciable warming in Antarctica may be down to ocean currents carrying warm waters to the north and away from the frigid continent.
The results are important to build up an accurate baseline of the Earth's temperature before human activity began to wield an influence on the climate. Details of the study, which involved 25 scientists across Australia, the US, Europe and Asia, are published in the journal Nature.
Industrialisation led to only minor rises in greenhouse gases in the 1800s, but what struck the scientists was how swiftly the climate changed as a result. "There is a potential that this could have a flip side," Abram said. "If we can do anything to slow down greenhouse gas emissions, or even start to draw them back, there may be at least some areas of the climate system where we get a rapid payback."
Ed Hawkins, a meteorologist at Reading University, said the results show how tree rings, corals and other natural material can be used to understand the regional and global changes that unfolded during and since the pre-industrial period. "This is further evidence that the climate has already changed significantly since the pre-industrial period," he said.
Links
Signs of warming appear as early as 1830 say researchers, whose analysis will help build accurate baseline of temperature before influence of human activity
 |
| The first signs of warming from the rise in greenhouse gases which came hand-in-hand with the Industrial Revolution appear as early as 1830. Photograph: Print Collector/Getty Images |
The first signs of warming from the rise in greenhouse gases which came hand-in-hand with the Industrial Revolution appear as early as 1830 in the tropical oceans and the Arctic, meaning that climate change witnessed today began about 180 years ago.
Researchers in Australia found evidence for the early onset of warming after trawling through 500 years of data on tree rings, corals and ice cores that together form a natural archive of Earth's historical temperatures.
Temperature trends for the continents and tropical oceans over the last 500 years. Credit: Abram et al.
Much of what is known about Earth's climate history is based on instruments that have monitored temperatures from the 1880s onwards. But while these capture the changing conditions seen in the 20th century, they miss the start of the warming trend.
"A lot is known about the climate record for the time when we have instrumental records," said Nerilie Abram, a climate scientist at the Australian National University. "We wanted to look at whether these records give us the full picture."
Pooling the data, the scientists found that temperatures in the tropical oceans and in the air above northern hemisphere land-masses began to rise above natural variations in the 1830s, just as greenhouse gas emissions edged upwards.
The scientists first thought that they were seeing the climate rebound after a period of natural cooling brought on by particles thrown high into the atmosphere from volcanic eruptions. But climate simulations showed that the warming they observed could be explained purely by the small rise in greenhouse gas emissions.
"The changes in greenhouse gases in the 19th century were small compared with the fairly rapid changes we see now, so seeing the climate respond this way was a surprise," said Abrams.
'I brought the graph': Brian Cox refutes claims of climage change denier on Q&A
The southern hemisphere, including Australasia and South America, appeared to start heating up 50 years later, near the turn of the century, while no sign of warming on the continental scale was noticed in Antarctica. The lack of appreciable warming in Antarctica may be down to ocean currents carrying warm waters to the north and away from the frigid continent.
The results are important to build up an accurate baseline of the Earth's temperature before human activity began to wield an influence on the climate. Details of the study, which involved 25 scientists across Australia, the US, Europe and Asia, are published in the journal Nature.
Industrialisation led to only minor rises in greenhouse gases in the 1800s, but what struck the scientists was how swiftly the climate changed as a result. "There is a potential that this could have a flip side," Abram said. "If we can do anything to slow down greenhouse gas emissions, or even start to draw them back, there may be at least some areas of the climate system where we get a rapid payback."
Ed Hawkins, a meteorologist at Reading University, said the results show how tree rings, corals and other natural material can be used to understand the regional and global changes that unfolded during and since the pre-industrial period. "This is further evidence that the climate has already changed significantly since the pre-industrial period," he said.
Links
- Revealed: first mammal species wiped out by human-induced climate change
- Climate change is corroding our values, says Naomi Klein
- Climate change, chaos and inexact computing
- Can game theory help solve the problem of climate change?
- India unveils climate change plan
- Climate change? Try catastrophic climate breakdown
- Cameron cools on climate change
- Climate change is a human rights issue – and that's how we can solve it
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)