SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/1/2002 10:53:18 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
A Mittenless Autumn, for Better and Worse

" Dr. Edward S. Sarachik, a professor of atmospheric sciences
at the University of Washington in Seattle, said it was
especially significant that 2001 had proved so warm. Usually,
the conditions in a single year are discounted by climate
scientists because weather conditions vary naturally over
short time spans, pushed this way or that by unpredictable
shifts in sea temperatures and wind patterns.

But in 2001 there was no such push - in particular, no sign
of El Niño, the ocean condition in which unusually warm
waters spread across the Pacific. El Niño has exerted a
powerful influence in many other recent unusually warm
years, including 1998, the warmest year on record. But this
year, the Pacific has just emerged from the opposite, cooler
condition, La Niña."

The New York Times
December 23, 2001

SCIENCE



By PAM BELLUCK and ANDREW C. REVKIN

Across the Northeast, people
opened their doors yesterday
to discover something unfamiliar: a
chill in the air.

Weeks later than usual,
temperatures have finally
descended into something like
their normal late- December
range. The cold snap followed an
autumn in which sidewalk cafes
stayed open into December, golf
courses were packed with plaid
and the first World Series game
ever played in November felt more
like May. The unseasonal curveball
that the weather threw at the
calendar affected almost everyone,
for better and for worse.

Varel Bailey, a cattle and pig
farmer in Anita, Iowa, has been
spending 5 percent to 10 percent
less on grain because cattle eat
less when it is not cold.

In New Mexico, Ski Santa Fe, a
snow-starved resort, had to
postpone its planned Thanksgiving
Day opening to Dec. 8, and even
now has less than half its skiing
areas open.

In the natural world, daffodils
bloomed, and the grass at the New
York Botanical Garden was a lush
green the week before Christmas.
In Pennsylvania, a baby killdeer
hatched in December instead of
April. And in Massachusetts, Bill
Davis, a state wildlife biologist,
came home from a deer station one
recent day with a sunburn.

"It's global warming, dude," said Pito Robles, 28, an auto
mechanic who on Thursday was dangling his fishing line into
the Hudson River near West 66th Street in Manhattan. "I
don't care if the whole planet burns up in a hundred years. If
I can get me a fish today, it's cool by me."

In fact, the warm spell that settled over much of the nation
this fall may not be caused by global warming, the gradual
but potentially calamitous rise in worldwide temperatures
that most scientists attribute, at least in part, to
fuel-burning human activities like making electricity and
driving. When burned, fuels release carbon dioxide and other
"greenhouse gases" that trap heat in the atmosphere.

The fall weather could have been a fluke, climatologists
agree, because in the short run weather often does
unanticipated things.

But the unusually balmy fall seems to fit at least two
longer-term patterns. One is that the weather has become
significantly more erratic and variable, and that is likely to
continue, scientists say.
Another is that the warming trend is destined to continue.
This year is expected to be the second warmest on earth
since 1860, when temperatures were first measured
systematically. Nine of the 10 warmest years have occurred
since 1990. And one of the world's leading forecasting
agencies, the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and
Research in Britain, says there is a 75 percent chance that
next year will be even warmer than this year.

So far, the results of global warming in North America seem
to be a mix of good and bad. Since 1960, New England has
seen the last hard freeze come a day earlier every three
years, extending the growing season. But in the Middle
Atlantic and the South, shores are receding as seas, slowly
raised by melting glaciers, eat away at coasts.

And Alaska, where warming has been most pronounced, is
undergoing a host of changes. Glaciers are receding,
permafrost melting, shrubs spreading across previously
barren tundra. The start of the Iditarod dog race this year
had to be moved north because the trail near the usual
starting point was too mushy.

But the growing variability of the weather may be as
troublesome as the warming. This weekend, after a
mittenless fall, temperatures are plummeting quickly across
the country. And the prospect of a sudden, sustained cold
snap is making many people uneasy.

Will birds that delayed their ritual migration be trapped up
north by frigid weather? Will buds that bloomed in
December's warm chicanery burst their pipes and suffer
winter damage?

"The party is almost over for people who like warm weather,"
said Jon B. Davis, a meteorologist for Salomon Smith Barney
in Chicago. "Wednesday's 49 degrees in Chicago was probably
the warmest we will see until late March. We are headed
into a major-league cold pattern."

Labor and Industry


Even if this winter is about to earn its reputation, the fall's
warm weather has made its mark - economically,
environmentally and in other ways.

It has been a boon to workers at the site of the World Trade
Center disaster. Joe Bradley, the foreman of a crew of
machine operators struggling to clear rubble at ground zero,
said the mild weather allowed them to clean up the site
quickly and to recover bodies they might not have otherwise
found.

"It gave us an opportunity to get the bulk of the work done,"
Mr. Bradley said. "It was a gift from God, a real miracle."

Economically, the warm spell has cut both ways, benefiting
some industries while hurting others. Warm weather, it
turns out, may get people out of their houses, but not
necessarily into stores. Foot traffic may have increased,
retailers say, but people tend to window-shop. And they are
not buying the winter supplies that stores have stocked. As a
result, retailers have slashed prices on things like coats,
scarves and gloves.

"Warm weather is not good for retailers," said Scott
Bernhardt, senior vice president in charge of retail research
at Planalytics, a consulting firm in Wayne, Pa., that provides
long-range weather predictions and marketing advice to
retailers. "A winter like this hurts because retailers don't
plan on it."

Snow shovel sales are down about two-thirds for the 7,200
hardware stores in the TruServ cooperative in Chicago, said
Ray Winkel, its director of inventory management. But snow
blowers are selling well. "Unlike snow shovels, they are not
an impulse purchase, and people remembered what a tough
winter last year was," Mr. Winkel said.

And other industries are clearly benefiting from the warmth.
Scott Arves, president of Schneider National in Green Bay,
Wis., the huge trucking company known for its orange fleet,
said the mild weather had resulted in hundreds fewer
accidents, lower maintenance costs and on-time delivery
rates rare in late fall and winter, when a single storm can
delay 1,000 Schneider trucks.

Warm weather has depressed demand for natural gas, and,
partly as a result, prices have fallen sharply - to $2.60 per
million B.T.U.'s of gas to be delivered next month, from $10
last winter. That has helped consumers in the upper
Midwest, where gas provides 90 percent of the home heating
energy.

In agriculture, the warmth has generally been welcome.
Livestock farmers can buy less grain, not only because cows
eat less in warm weather but also because breeding stock
can stay out in the fields longer to forage. Grain farmers can
expect to pay less for fertilizer, because natural gas is a
major component.

In states like Florida, rising temperatures may change
growing patterns. A 1989 freeze pushed the citrus belt south,
said Jim Lushine, a National Weather Service meteorologist,
but warmer weather may have the opposite effect. "We could
see a return, a northward shift in some of the growing
climates in Florida," he added, "and that might actually
prove to be a boon for some people."

Flora and Fauna

Some plants and animals have reacted to the warm cycle as
if it were a false spring.

Spring peepers are calling, woodpeckers and ruffed grouse
have been drumming, said Mr. Davis, the wildlife biologist.
More ticks seem to be active late into the year, he said. And
in Montana, the Bitterroot Valley has been alive with
butterflies that would normally be hibernating.

Most birds that migrate over long distances are not affected
by the warmth because they would already have been in the
tropics by September. But other species, like ducks and
geese, which migrate shorter distances, have stayed north.

Two calliope hummingbirds were first spotted at Fort Tryon
Park in Manhattan about a month ago, when they would
ordinarily be in Mexico, and were still at the park last week.

The birds that have stayed north could suffer if a sudden
cold snap causes ponds and lakes to freeze, making food
unavailable for several days, said Dr. Jeff Price, director of
Climate Change Impact Studies for the American Bird
Conservancy.

Deer may actually benefit from the warmth. The deer
population got winter coats on time, but then was less active
and consumed fewer calories because of the higher
temperatures, Mr. Davis said, adding, "This sends them into
winter in better condition to survive."

Many plants may not do as well. At the New York Botanical
Garden, Dr. Kim Tripp, vice president for horticulture and
living collections, said the prolonged warmth, coupled with a
long drought, had left trees and other plants
discombobulated and stressed. To survive the winter, Dr.
Tripp said, plants have to go through a long process of
shutting down: annuals die, perennials kill off their tops,
deciduous plants shed their leaves, evergreens pump
antifreeze into their needles.

"It's still October for the plants," she said. If it suddenly goes
from October to January, water could freeze in the plants'
cells and burst them. If the freeze hits anything that has
actually flowered, it will not develop buds for next spring, she
said.

Several years of these conditions could take a toll on trees,
too. Mature canopy could be lost because such stress leaves
trees more vulnerable to disease and insects.

"You fight off a cold better when you are healthy and
vigorous," Dr. Tripp said. "When you are stressed your
metabolism is slower and healing is slower."

The Outlook

Even if this past fall's warm weather was only a blip in the
global thermostat, most scientists are beginning to believe
that human alteration of the atmosphere is at least partly
responsible for a warming trend that has been going on for
decades.

"I think it's increasingly clear that humans are influencing
the climate," said Dr. Peter H. Gleick, director of the Pacific
Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and
Security in Oakland, Calif. "I think the debate over whether
the climate is going to change is over, and now the debate is
what will the impacts be, how bad will they be and what
should we do about it."

Dr. Edward S. Sarachik, a professor of atmospheric sciences
at the University of Washington in Seattle, said it was
especially significant that 2001 had proved so warm. Usually,
the conditions in a single year are discounted by climate
scientists because weather conditions vary naturally over
short time spans, pushed this way or that by unpredictable
shifts in sea temperatures and wind patterns.

But in 2001 there was no such push - in particular, no sign
of El Niño, the ocean condition in which unusually warm
waters spread across the Pacific. El Niño has exerted a
powerful influence in many other recent unusually warm
years, including 1998, the warmest year on record. But this
year, the Pacific has just emerged from the opposite, cooler
condition, La Niña.

A milder climate has short-term and long-term
consequences for everything from water supplies to beaches.

Higher temperatures, for example, mean reduced snow melt
from the Sierras, on which California's reservoirs depend.

"As the earth is warming, less of our precipitation will be
snow and more will fall as rain, and that has a whole series
of problems for us," Dr. Gleick said. "It means we're going to
get more runoff in the winters when we're most worried
about floods. And at the other end it means our spring and
our summer runoff is going to be reduced - and that's when
we need it most."

In Alaska - and much of Siberia - the annual mean
temperature has risen 3 to 5 degrees over the last 30 years,
said Prof. Gunter Weller, director of the Cooperative Institute
for Arctic Research at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.

"There's no doubt over all that the Arctic has warmed pretty
substantially, and that it's causing serious problems,"
Professor Weller said. Among the effects are increased
coastal erosion from melting glaciers, which have raised the
sea level in the region, and thawing in the permafrost that
has wreaked havoc with roads and could eventually damage
structures like the 800-mile- long trans-Alaska pipeline.

Elsewhere, continued warming could produce rising sea
levels and more frequent and more severe storms. Seas will
rise with temperatures because water expands as it warms,
and because melting terrestrial ice will send water flowing
into oceans. Hurricanes draw their energy from the heat in
ocean waters, so warming could make them more frequent
and more powerful.

The consequences would be most serious for the East and
Gulf Coasts, which are lined with low-lying barrier islands. A
rise of one to three feet in the sea level, which many
scientists predict by the end of this century, could send sea
water 100 feet or more inland on these stretches of coast, in
communities where the federal government is spending tens
of millions of dollars a year to pump sand onto shrinking
beaches.

The new evidence of human- caused warming comes as the
Bush administration is turning its attention back to climate
change, which it had approached with skepticism and a
determination to choose no remedies that might hinder the
use of coal, oil and other fossil fuels.

Most notably, last March Mr. Bush rejected the Kyoto
Protocol, the first international agreement that would
require industrialized countries to cut emissions of
greenhouse gases or face penalties. The last details were
approved by almost every other major country at a meeting in
November, although the treaty still awaits ratification.

In the next month or two, the Commerce Department,
answering a request by Mr. Bush last summer, is planning to
issue a new research plan aimed at improving United States
climate monitoring and modeling efforts.

Senator Ted Stevens, Republican of Alaska, is one of many
from both parties in Congress seeking significant new
efforts, especially climate research.

"I have asked that consideration be given in the coming
budget to increase activities," Mr. Stevens said, "to zero in on
places where they know they can get some firm data and get
some firm predictions."

Others in Congress are proposing bills to limit releases of
carbon dioxide from power plants, but Mr. Bush rejected
such a move last spring.

While officials debate how to deal with the phenomenon,
temperatures continue to climb.

Along with whatever warming might be happening because of
human activities, federal scientists say, the Pacific is
emerging from its most recent cool spell and the warm
waters of another El Niño are getting ready to spread
.
nytimes.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/1/2002 10:57:38 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Did Planetary "Belch" Cause Prehistoric Warming?

Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
December 27, 2001

Around 55 million years ago the Earth belched a massive bubble of
methane gas from beneath the sea floor, causing a 100,000-year period
of global warming, report NASA scientists.

Volvo Ocean Race
National Geographic
Out There

The study suggests that the expulsion of methane trapped in the seafloor bed
all those years ago caused the planet's temperature to rise by up to 13
degrees Fahrenheit (7 degrees Celsius). The resulting thousand-century
period of global warming is called the Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum.

Could it happen again today? Computer models at least raise the possibility
that if the oceans warm substantially a similar scenario could arise in the
future.

"The study makes you take a broader view of climate change, looking at
greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, like methane, ozone, black soot
particles, chlorofluorocarbons, and so on as an explanation for global
warming," said Gavin Schmidt, the lead author of the study. Schmidt is a
researcher at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and
Columbia University's Center for Climate Systems Research.

The study used computer models to better understand the role of methane in
climate change. Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more potent as
a heat-trapping gas than carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas getting most of
the attention as the major culprit of global warming. The amount of
atmospheric methane has more than doubled in the last 200 years.

"Rice paddies and other massive irrigation projects are a huge source of
methane right now," said Schmidt. Other sources include livestock flatulence,
emissions from gas pipelines, coal mining, and to a lesser extent, the natural
decomposition of organic materials in wetlands and swamps.

Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum

Methane is also formed in a crystalline form as organic matter sinks to the
ocean floor and is frozen in deposits under the seabed. Generally, cold
temperatures and high pressure keep methane stable beneath the ocean
floor. The scientists believe that 55 million years ago the movement of
continental plates could have disturbed the status quo.

"We know that when the Indian subcontinent moved into the Eurasian
continent, the Himalayas began forming. The shifting of tectonic plates would
have decreased pressure in the sea floor, and may have caused the large
methane release," said Schmidt. Once the atmosphere and oceans began to
warm, Schmidt added, it is possible that more methane thawed and bubbled
out.

Other hypotheses proffered by scientists to explain the Late Paleocene
Thermal Maximum include an extraterrestrial effect from comet impacts and
extreme volcanism.

"It's difficult to pin down exactly what happened because we don't really
know much about global ocean circulation at the time; the role atmospheric
chemistry played, and other factors. The neat thing about this particular
study is that you can take a hypothesis, and work it all the way through,
discarding hypotheses that are completely out to lunch," said Schmidt. "The
methane explosion hypothesis answers a lot of questions."

Warming Oceans

Most of the methane frozen under the seafloor occurs along the continental
margins; "the water can't be too deep or too shallow-a lot of methane
hydrate deposits are under water 1,000 to 2,000 meters deep, where the
water exerts an incredible amount of pressure," said Schmidt.

Could global climate change warm the oceans enough to change the methane
from the crystalline form back to a gas that erupts from the belly of the
ocean? Is there a threshold effect, where in waters below 4 degrees Celsius
the deposits remain stable and above 4 degrees Celsius they become
unstable? What would be the effect of a slow leak of frozen methane?
Understanding the role methane plays in current greenhouse warming could
have broad policy implications.

"We can't get too fixated on just one gas like carbon dioxide when we think
about global warming. It's complicated and surprises happen-they happened
in the past and they can happen now. We need to look at climate change from
a much broader perspective," said Schmidt.

news.nationalgeographic.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/1/2002 10:59:55 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Earth's cold regions give evidence of global Warming
E-mail this story to a friend

Wednesday, December 12, 2001
By Environmental News Network

In the world of climate change, it is in the
Earth's cold regions where trends can most
easily be seen. The cryosphere, where water
is found in solid form, is among the most
sensitive regions to temperature change.

The sensitivity of ice and snow to
temperature changes is an early indicator of
even relatively small differences, says
University of Colorado at Boulder senior
researcher Richard Armstrong. He has found
that today's receding and thinning sea ice,
mountain glacier mass losses, decreasing
snow extent, melting permafrost, and rising
sea level are all consistent with warming.

Global mean temperatures have risen one
degree Fahrenheit over the past 100 years,
with more than half of the increase occurring
in the last 25 years, observes Armstrong
who is affiliated with the National Snow and
Ice Data Center headquartered at CU-Boulder.

"As slight as that may seem, it's enough to
make a difference," said Armstrong. "Now,
long-term monitoring of a series of cold
region, or cryospheric, parameters shows that for several decades the amounts of
snow and ice around the world have been decreasing."

To mark its 25th anniversary, the National Snow and Ice Data Center has organized
a special session at the 2001 Fall Meeting of American Geophysical Union, taking
place this week in San Francisco, that illuminates overall changes in the cryosphere.

The session begins Tuesday and extends through Thursday afternoon, with 75
contributions from all areas of cryospheric study. Papers and posters include
examinations of lake and river ice, glacier dynamics, and mass ice balance studies in
polar and continental glaciers, regional and polar snow cover trends, and variations
in Canadian ice cap elevations.

The extent of Arctic sea ice is shrinking by about 3 percent per decade, but the
trends are not uniform. While recent studies have indicated that the ice thickness
also had decreased over several decades, new information shows that the ice may
have thinned rapidly, Armstrong said.

Examination of springtime ice thickness in the Arctic Ocean indicates that the mean
ice thickness decreased 1.5 meters (4.8 feet) between the mid-1980s and early
1990s.

Walter Tucker of the Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory in
Hanover, N.H., said, "We attribute at least some of the thinning to changes in Arctic
atmosphere and ice circulation patterns. While no similar trend was evident in ice
thickness near the North Pole, the data unquestionably indicate a decrease in total
ice volume in the western Arctic Ocean."

Eric Rignot, a researcher at the Radar Science and Engineering Section of NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, said, "At low latitudes, glacial changes are pronounced,
uncontested, and solid evidence of climate warming. But what is happening in the
polar ice sheets is less clear."

Rignot's study shows that a number of areas previously believed to be gaining mass
in the Antarctic are in fact close to being balanced or even losing mass. He said,
"The only area which stands out as clearly out of balance is the Amundsen Sea
sector of Antarctica drained by the Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers."

There are other lines of evidence that the region is undergoing rapid changes.
These include where the ice leaves the continent and begins to float as well as ice
thinning and flow acceleration. In the remainder of Antarctica, it is too soon to say,
said Rignot.

"We now know that the retreat of the Pine Island, Thwaites, and Smith glaciers was
due to a widespread thinning of ice that extended from their termini to more than
200 kilometers inland," said Andrew Shepherd of the Centre for Polar Observation
and Modeling at University College London.

These glaciers are the principal ice drainage channels for the Amundsen Sea sector
of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. At the rate they are shrinking, Shepherd projects
that these glaciers could begin to float within 150 years.

Ted Scambos and Jennifer Bohlander of the National Snow and Ice Data Center
reported in January that other Antarctic ice shelves are closer to the breaking point
than anyone previously thought. Using satellite images of melt water on the ice
surface and a computer simulation of the movements and forces within an ice shelf,
they showed that added pressure from surface water filling crevasses can crack the
ice entirely through.

The process is likely to become more widespread if Antarctic summer temperatures
increase. Scambos said, "The shelf retreats that have occurred so far have had few
consequences for sea level rise, but breakups in some other areas, such as the
Ross Ice Shelf, could lead to increases in ice flow off the Antarctic and cause sea
level to rise."

Changes within other cryospheric areas reported at the meeting include papers on
mountain glacier monitoring, Canadian snow cover, results of river ice monitoring,
changes in onset of Arctic snow melt dates, and variations in snow accumulation
over northern Eurasia and their connections to the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Copyright 2001, Environmental News Network
enn.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/1/2002 11:01:55 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Britain urges Australia to sign up to global climate pact
Tuesday December 4, 3:49 PM

British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott warned Australia it was time
to join international efforts to reduce global warming.

Australia should abandon its position of using Washington's refusal to ratify the Kyoto
Protocol as an excuse for its own recalcitrance to sign up to the global climate treaty, Prescott
said on Tuesday.

"I know that here in Australia you are very worried about the competitive disadvantage that
you may suffer if you take action on climate change," Prescott told the Sydney Institute.

"We must act together to bring the United States back on board and not use the US position
as an excuse to do nothing."

The United States has refused to endorse the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to bind developed
countries to legally enforceable reductions of so-called greenhouse gas emissions blamed for
global warming.

Australia has refused to adopt the protocol until Washington does.

While Britain has already agreed to cut greenhouse emissions by 12.5 percent on 1990
levels, Australia managed to secure concessions enabling it to increase its greenhouse gas
output by eight percent on 1990 levels, Prescott said.

He described the deal as "pretty good ... for Australia, particularly since in per capita terms
you are the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter".

Australia also successfully negotiated special allowances for land clearing and carbon sinks,
or forests which absorb greenhouse gases.

Email this story

sg.news.yahoo.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/1/2002 11:04:13 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Warming theory hotter than ever

By JAY BOOKMAN
Atlanta Journal-Constitution Columnist

Ever since the early '80s, when the issue of global warming
began to penetrate the public consciousness, a battle has raged
over the true nature of the issue. It has not been a dispute about
science, but a conflict between values.

Almost immediately, environmentalists and others embraced the
global warming theory as proof that Western man was living in
basic conflict with nature. The conversion of coal and petroleum
to energy -- the basis up to now of our industrial economy -- was altering the
composition of the Earth's atmosphere, with potentially dire consequences.
The concept gave environmentalists leverage to force the social and economic
changes that they had long sought.

Conversely, others saw the global-warming theory as an anti-business,
anti-American conspiracy hatched between the scientists and
environmentalists. They saw it as Marxism, camouflaged in greenery and
pseudo-scientific data, and in self-defense they launched a well-funded effort to
stress the scientific uncertainty underlying the theory.

And there, to the consternation of science, is where we've been stuck.

However, while the battle over global warming raged unchanged through the
'80s and '90s and on into the 21st century, the climate itself was getting
warmer. Glaciers receded, spring came earlier, the number of white
Christmases declined sharply. The average global temperature for 2001 has
been the second warmest since accurate records began in 1860, according to
statistics from the World Meteorology Organization. More ominously, nine of
the 10 warmest years on record have occurred in the past decade.

In the face of that data, business spokesmen have responded by repeating
their earlier point: While warmer temperatures are consistent with the theory of
global warming, they do not prove that the theory is valid. There could be other
causes, and no reputable scientist can say for sure that global warming will
occur or is under way.

Every statement in that response is correct. The fact that nine of the 10
warmest years on record occurred in the last decade could be a natural if
highly unusual blip in the data. It does not prove that man-made global
warming is a reality, because in truth, absolute proof is not possible.

The global climate is simply too complex, with too many interacting factors, to
allow scientists to attribute any single change to any single cause. In fact, 50
years from now, if our children and grandchildren are trying to deal with the
exact changes in climate predicted by today's computer models, they still
won't be able to pin the blame on us for causing it.

Not scientifically, anyway.

So for a moment, try to forget the political, social and economic implications of
global warming. Imagine that the stakes were much less dramatic.

What if, 30 years ago, scientists had begun to predict that the sky was going
to get bluer. They couldn't prove it would happen, but that was their best
guess. Imagine that over the years, increasingly sophisticated computer
models had begun to reach that same conclusion. And imagine that sure
enough, in the last 10 years we had experienced nine years of the bluest sky
on record, data entirely consistent with what had been predicted.

Knowing that a guess is all that's possible and all that ever will be possible,
would you conclude that the blue-sky theory had probably been correct?

Most people, using the common sense they were born with, would say yes.
Those who still say no would be guilty of denial.

In the case of global warming, we're guilty of much worse. As a society, we
know that if we accept that global warming is real, we will be confronted by an
overwhelming obligation for change and sacrifice. We don't want to change and
sacrifice.

So we deny. We deny the data. We deny the scientific consensus. We deny
our own eyeballs. We try to avoid our obligation by hiding behind an
increasingly small bit of doubt, and the sight is beginning to look ridiculous.


Jay Bookman is deputy editorial page editor. His column appears Thursdays.

accessatlanta.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/7/2002 3:17:37 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
Global Warming, Part1
The New York Times Magazine
January, 6, 2002

George Divoky's Planet

By DARCY FREY

1. IN WHICH GEORGE TRIES
TO BUILD A FENCE

This is a story about global
warming and a scientist
named George Divoky, who
studies a colony of Arctic seabirds
on a remote barrier island off the
northern coast of Alaska. I
mention all this at the start
because a reader might like to
come to the point, and what
could be more urgent than the
very health and durability of this
planet we call Earth? However,
before George can pursue his
inquiry into worldwide climate
change; before he can puzzle out
the connections between a bunch
of penguinesque birds on a flat,
snow-covered, icebound island
and the escalating threat of
droughts, floods and rising global
temperatures, he must first
mount a defense -- his only
defense in this frozen,
godforsaken place -- against the
possibility of being consumed,
down to the last toenail, by a
polar bear while he sleeps. He
must first build a fence.

Cooper Island, June 4, 2 o'clock
in the morning. The sky is a cold
slab of gray, the air temperature
hovers in the upper 20's and the
wind -- always the wind -- howls
across hundreds of miles of sea
ice with such unremitting force
that George has disappeared
beneath a hat, two hoods and a
thick fleece face mask covering all
but his bespectacled eyes.
Standing near the three small
dome tents that make up his field
camp on Cooper, George raises a
pair of binoculars and begins to
scan for bears. Past the island's
north beach, a wind-scarred plain
of sea ice stretches uninterrupted
to the pole. To the south, the
nearest tree stands 200 miles
away on the far side of the Brooks
Range. Here, some 330 miles
north of the Arctic Circle, with
the sun making a constant
parabolic journey around the sky,
George surveys a view that
replicates in all directions: the
snow-covered island merges with
the sea ice at its shores, the
dazzling sheets of sea ice stretch
to meet a pale gray dome of sky.
Surrounded by a vast, undulating
whiteness, he appears to be
standing in the middle of the
Arctic Ocean. He appears to be
standing on the tops of cirrus
clouds.

''So, . . . '' he says, and the rest of
his words are carried off by the
wind.

''What?''

''I said, so maybe we should put up the polar-bear fence
before we get too fatigued!''

Heading fast toward fatigue, I tell him that's a fine idea
indeed, and exactly how many polar bears does he figure
might be out there on the ice? George, who spends each
summer on Cooper Island, is cheerfully indifferent to its
dangers and discomforts and reassuring to those who
aren't. Discussing a recent incident in which some Inupiat
Eskimos had to shoot a bear that wandered into their
nearby whaling camp, I consider it bad news -- there are
bears in the vicinity! -- while George thinks of it as good:
yes, but now there's one less bear.

Still scanning the faint horizon line, George insists there's
nothing to get worked up about. For the most part, bears
stay several miles offshore, where they can gorge on
ringed and bearded seals. If a bear were to come to this
island, he points out, its massive 800-pound frame would
stand out against the sky like an approaching blimp. Even
if a bear were to wander into camp, he goes on, we are
sufficiently armed with a shotgun, cans of compressed
pepper spray (mace) and a flarelike device known as a
screamer-banger. Nonetheless, George confirms that at
least one big bear shows up on Cooper each summer,
usually to scavenge the beach for dead, washed-up seals;
and furthermore, that an encounter can be so unpleasant
that you do have to figure the odds a little differently. ''I
was out here once and injured the tendon in my knee,''
he says. ''I couldn't walk, I couldn't stay warm. I kept
thinking, If it's true predators key in on the weak and the
infirm. . . . '' He shrugs and gestures to the chilling
evidence of predation right by our feet -- a caribou skull,
several seal vertebrae, a scattering of gull's feathers and
the sun-bleached skeleton of a clean-picked walrus. ''I
guess it's safe to assume that most of our fellow
Americans are south of us, sound asleep, a lot warmer
than we are, and not preparing to put up a polar-bear
fence.''

Cooper is one of six barrier islands stretching off the coast
of Point Barrow, Alaska, where the United States -- along
with continental North America -- comes to a chilly,
desolate end. Three miles tip to tip, the island is nothing
more than a snow-covered strip of sand and gravel frozen
into the Arctic pack ice, its only vertical relief an odd
cityscape of rusted 55-gallon drums and destroyed
ammunition boxes left here by the United States Navy
sometime after the Korean War. In 1972, George came out
to Cooper as a young ornithologist and discovered a rare
colony of black guillemots -- pigeon-size, stiff-legged
seabirds -- nesting in the abandoned drums and boxes.
And for many years he pursued a rather esoteric study of
them -- mate selection, age of first breeding, ''the kind of
thing that's of interest to about 20 ornithologists,'' he says
now. Then, almost by accident, he discovered that his
birds were picking up on another kind of frequency, and
that if he watched and listened with great care, they could
tell him about something no less consequential than the
climatic fate of the earth.

In coming to the Alaskan Arctic year after year, George is
following the logic of many other scientists -- that to
understand Earth's mysterious and changing climate, you
should go directly to its extremes. In the last two decades,
scores of researchers have come to the nearby town of
Barrow, hoping to learn why the Arctic is warming so
significantly and how the changing polar climate may
affect the planet as a whole -- if the Arctic sea ice were to
one day disappear, it would cause drastic changes in the
climate of the Northern Hemisphere. But while many
scientists gather their data from remote sensing devices --
satellites, buoys, robotic airplanes -- or come to this
frozen, inhospitable region on brief, well-equipped trips
before returning to the comforts of the ''Lower
Forty-Eight,'' George spends three months of each year
sleeping in a small yellow dome tent, warming himself
over a two-burner propane stove and crawling around on
his hands and knees, up to his binoculars in guillemot
scat. Thousands of miles away from the debates on
greenhouse-gas emissions, relatively unknown even
within the scientific community, George, now 55, has
come out to Cooper Island every year for more than 25
years, often with no financial or institutional support. It is
not too much to say that he has staked his entire adult
life on this barren gravel bar and its avian inhabitants.
And now, as he continues to scan the island with his
binoculars under bright, 2 a.m. skies, it is not too much to
say that his life is staked on whether he can successfully
erect that polar-bear fence.

The fence became an essential part of George's repertory
for survival after he awoke in his tent one night to the
crunch, crunch, crunch of approaching footsteps. When he
crawled out to investigate, however, he thought he must
have been dreaming: he was alone on the island. The next
morning, the 16-inch tracks in the snow told him
otherwise. If it's possible to see your life flash before your
eyes in retrospect, that's what happened to George: a big
female bear and her cub had walked within 20 yards.
While the cub stayed put, the mother came up to the
doorway of his tent, evidently sniffing George's placid,
sleeping head before he woke, unzipped his sleeping bag
and inadvertently scared both bears away.

''All right, let's see what we've got here,'' George says,
shaking the many parts of the fence out of its canvas bag
onto the snow. George's fence is made up of 30
three-foot-high garden stakes that he and I, fueled by the
adrenaline of our recent arrival, now try to place in a circle
around our tents. Each stake has a small pulley, through
which we thread a fine piece of cord. The cord makes a
perimeter around the tents and meets up at the home
stake, which is connected to a spring-loaded mousetrap,
an eight-volt battery and a car alarm with a large plastic
horn. The fence operates on the principle that a bear
wandering into camp will push the cord, the cord will
trigger the mousetrap, and the closing of the mousetrap
will complete an electrical circuit that turns on the alarm,
thereby waking George and me to the dangers at hand.

That, at any rate, is the principle. For more than an hour,
we struggle to drive the garden stakes firmly into the
snow, and each time we test the fence by pushing at the
cord, a stake pulls loose and the cord slackens, preventing
the triggering of the mousetrap. Then, when George turns
his attention to the car-alarm horn, a sharp crack echoes
in the air, followed by the gentle sound of his voice:
''Uh-oh. I think I broke it.''

Although George has spent more summers on Cooper
Island than he often cares to count, he seems, upon first
meeting, an unlikely candidate for the solitary hardships
of fieldwork in the high Arctic. Handsome, boyish, with
disheveled hair and a face deeply creased by abundant
laughter in subfreezing temperatures, George lives nine
months of the year in Seattle, and there is about him the
unmistakable air of the overcaffeinated urban neurotic.
He wakes up talking and, rushing to get the words out,
keeps up a rapid, digressive chatter -- about George Bush
and the Kyoto Protocols, the challenges of romantic
commitment and the latest from Philip Roth -- almost
until the moment, 18 hours later, that he falls directly
asleep. It seems a waste of his conversational gifts for him
to be on Cooper Island alone. It's also somewhat alarming.
When I first met George in Barrow last February, I
watched in wonder at his interactions with the mechanical
world -- forgetting to keep his car engine running when
the outside temperature dropped to 30 below; or, when he
parked and did remember to plug his engine block into an
electric heater, forgetting to unplug before driving off --
snap!

But for almost three decades, he has hurled himself to the
very ends of the earth and met its risks and challenges
with tireless enthusiasm. When his new stove broke on
the first day of one field season, he kept a series of
bonfires going all summer; when he ran out of freshwater,
he placed tin cups around his tent to catch the rain; when
his radio broke, he tried calling for help with an old signal
mirror from World War II. (He also tried spelling HELP on
the beach with large pieces of driftwood, but came up one
log short, inadvertently announcing to the skies a
pressing need for KELP.)

Now, holding the two halves of the car alarm in his hands,
he shrugs and says, ''To be honest, the fence doesn't keep
bears out; it just lets you know that one is about to eat
you. Really, it's just a placebo.'' He looks around at our
camp -- one tent for cooking and two for sleeping that
we've pitched far enough apart for privacy while also
keeping, in George's words, ''within screaming distance.''
For our campsite, he chose what seemed the safest, most
sheltered location near the island's south shore -- out of
harm's way, and back from the thick, upended slabs of
sea ice that have rammed up against the island to the
north. But as far as I can see, we are nothing if not in
harm's way: like a Bedouin camp in the desert, our three
yellow tents are the only signs of life in this
white-on-white landscape -- the only signs of food, come
to think of it, to an animal so wily that it stalks prey by
sliding on its belly behind a moving block of ice and is
said to raise its white paw to cover its black nose for
camouflage in the snow. ''Any bear that shows up on this
island is probably very hungry or very deranged,'' George
says fatalistically, ''and there's not much you can do to
keep Charles Manson out of the suburbs.''

nytimes.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (1719)1/14/2002 3:01:15 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
New El Nino to bring weather chaos

John Vidal and Paul Brown
Monday January 14, 2002
The Guardian

A new El Nino, the periodic warming of
the surface of the Pacific ocean that can
trigger severe worldwide weather and
environmental disasters, has been
observed building up by a US government
agency.

The phenomenon brought droughts and
floods, causing thousands of deaths and
serious malnutrition, across Latin
America, southern Africa and the Pacific
region during its last appearance in
1997-98.

Some 230m people lost their homes in
China, while Hurricane Mitch devastated
Honduras. The phenomenon also caused
serious delays to the monsoon in India
and severe flooding in Bangladesh.

Scientists believe that the small rise in
temperature in the Indian and Pacific
oceans was enough to also provoke a
severe cold wave in Europe in October
1998 and a crippling ice storm in the
southern US.

Other phenomena observed included
forest fires in Indonesia, Brazil, Central
America and Florida, and floods in
California and Mexico. More than 15% of
the world's coral reefs were killed and the
global tourism industry was hit.

National Oceanic Atmospheric
Administration (Noaa) experts say it is too
early to forecast the severity of this El
Nino, but they expect the US to
experience problems from this summer
until next year.

Scientists have predicted that El Ninos
will become more frequent and more
severe as the world warms.

The Noaa warning is backed up by the
enhanced cloudiness and precipitation
recorded recently over the equatorial
central Pacific for the first time since the
1997-98 episode.

"The magnitude of an El Nino determines
the severity of its impacts," said Vernon
Kousky, Noaa climate specialist. "At this
point, it is too early to predict if this El
Nino might develop along the same lines
as the 1997-98 episode, or be weaker.

"The first region on the globe to
experience El Nino's impacts would be in
the tropical Pacific," he added. "Indonesia
is likely to realise some relief from
torrential rains. If El Nino develops as is
presently indicated, the Pacific northwest
will experience wetter than normal
conditions in the autumn. In the winter,
Louisiana eastward to Florida, and
possibly southern California, could also
experience wetter than normal conditions,
and the northern Great Plains will be
warmer."

El Nino episodes have occurred every two
to 10 years and can last up to 12 months.
In Spanish their name refers to Jesus
Christ because they used to take place
around Christmas.

The timing of this episode could be
politically significant because of the
Rio+10 conference in August. The main
topic will be President George Bush's
refusal to sign the Kyoto climate
agreement, along with the US failure to curb greenhouse gas emissions.


guardian.co.uk