Tag Archives: ipcc

IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri resigns

High profile head of the UN’s climate science panel steps down and denies charges of sexually harassing a 29-year-old female researcher. Rajendra K. Pachauri Juan Karita/AP The chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, resigned on Tuesday, following allegations of sexual harassment from a female employee at his research institute in Delhi. The organisation will now be led by acting chair Ismail El Gizouli until the election for a new chair which had already been scheduled for October. “The actions taken today will ensure that the IPCC’s mission to assess climate change continues without interruption,” said Achim Steiner, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, which is a sponsor of the IPCC. Pachauri, 74, is accused of sexually harassing a 29-year-old female researchershortly after she joined The Energy and Resources Institute. Lawyers for the woman, who cannot be named, said the harassment by Pachauri included unwanted emails, text messages and WhatsApp messages. Pachauri, one of the UN’s top climate change officials, has denied the charges and his spokesman said: “[He] is committed to provide all assistance and cooperation to the authorities in their ongoing investigations.” His lawyers claimed in the court documents that his emails, mobile phone and WhatsApp messages were hacked and that criminals accessed his computer and phone to send the messages in an attempt to malign him. Read the rest at the Guardian. View post – IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri resigns

Visit source:

IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri resigns

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, For Dummies, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, Naka, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri resigns

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

26 Aug 2014 7:46 PM

Share

Share

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

×

Yep, we know that greenhouse gas emissions are through the roof, and that climate change is already happening in a big, bad way, and that it’s only getting worse. But did you see the news stories about the latest draft report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)? They are positively horrifying! We are royally f#!@%$#cked, everybody. The key word that the report uses to describe our plight: irreversible.

From The New York Times:

The world may already be nearing a temperature at which the loss of the vast ice sheet covering Greenland would become inevitable, the report said. The actual melting would then take centuries, but it would be unstoppable and could result in a sea level rise of 23 feet, with additional increases from other sources like melting Antarctic ice, potentially flooding the world’s major cities.

The IPCC — a team of scientists and other experts appointed by the United Nations to periodically review the latest research on climate science — has been rolling out its fifth assessment report in four installments, and this draft is the latest.

While it restates many things included in earlier reports, this time it uses stronger words in hopes that you and I and everyone else will actually freak out the way we should given the circumstances. Grueling heat waves, droughts, floods, and all kinds of extreme weather are likely to continue and intensify. And the IPCC is trying to get the world to do something about it.

Using blunter, more forceful language than the reports that underpin it, the new draft highlights the urgency of the risks likely to be intensified by continued emissions of heat-trapping gases, primarily carbon dioxide released by the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

And that’s because — despite what we know — we’re not doing better at curbing emissions.

From 1970 to 2000, global emissions of greenhouse gases grew at 1.3 percent a year. But from 2000 to 2010, that rate jumped to 2.2 percent a year, the report found, and the pace seems to be accelerating further in this decade.

There is a bit of good news, though: Efforts to curb emissions have been relatively successful at the local and regional levels in many countries, and continuing to lower emissions would at least slow the pace of all this change, if not stop it.

Anyway, at least this report is a “draft,” right? “It’s not final,” The New York Times notes, and could, theoretically, “change substantially before release,” which is slated for early November in Copenhagen. But even if it does, chances are it’ll still be pretty darn grim.

Source:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Are Growing, and Growing More Dangerous, Draft of U.N. Report Says

, The New York Times.

UN climate change report warns of ‘irreversible’ impacts

, The Christian Science Monitor.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Read more:  

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, Hagen, KTP, LG, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

U.N. climate report was censored

U.N. climate report was censored

Shutterstock

Keep walking past the earthly conflagration, folks. There’s nothing to see here.

When the latest installment of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report landed over the weekend, only a 33-page summary was published. The full report, which details the radical steps we need to take to reduce greenhouse gas pollution if we are to succeed in capping warming at 2 degrees Celsius, wasn’t published until this morning. So that summary was the basis for hundreds of media reports beamed and printed all around the world.

And it turns out the summary was watered down — diluted from an acid reflux–inducing stew of unpalatable science into a more appetizing consommé of half-truth. The Sydney Morning Herald has the details:

A major climate report presented to the world was censored by the very governments who requested it, frustrating and angering some of its lead authors. …

[E]ntire paragraphs, plus graphs showing where carbon emissions have been increasing the fastest, were deleted from the summary during a week’s debate prior to its release. Other sections had their meaning and purpose significantly diluted. They were victims of a bruising skirmish between governments in the developed and developing world over who should shoulder the blame for, and the responsibility for fixing, climate change.

One report author joked that he felt like a “pawn” who had been sacrificed in a game. Several others told Fairfax [Media Limited] the rancour was much greater than in previous IPCC meetings.

The encounter was a prelude to what promises to be a bitter battle in Paris next year, where countries are intended to sign a new binding treaty on radical action against global warming. Countries including — but not limited to — the United States, Brazil, China and Saudi Arabia fought to ensure the summary could not be used as a weapon against them in pre-Paris negotiations.

This sad story has precedence. The previous installment of the report, which dealt with climate adaptation, stated that poor countries need $100 billion a year to help them cope with climatic changes – but that dollar figure was yanked from the report’s summary by rich governments at the last moment.


Source
IPCC report summary censored by governments around the world, The Sydney Morning Herald

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Source article:

U.N. climate report was censored

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Landmark, ONA, organic, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on U.N. climate report was censored

U.N. report spells out super-hard things we must do to curb warming

Mission not-quite-impossible

U.N. report spells out super-hard things we must do to curb warming

Shutterstock

Hooboy, it’s gonna get hot. A U.N. climate panel on Sunday painted a sizzling picture of the staggering volume of greenhouse gases we’ve been pumping into the atmosphere — and what will happen to the planet if we keep this shit up.

By 2100, surface temperatures will be 3.7 to 4.8 degrees C (6.7 to 8.7 F) warmer than prior to the Industrial Revolution. That’s far worse than the goal the international community is aiming for — to keep warming under 2 C (3.7 F). The U.N.’s terrifying projection assumes that we keep on burning fossil fuels as if nothing mattered, like we do now, leading to carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere of between 750 and 1,300 parts per million by 2100. A few centuries ago, CO2 levels were a lovely 280 ppm, and many scientists say we should aim to keep them at 350 ppm, but we’re already above 400.

These warnings come from the third installment of the latest big report from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, compiled by hundreds of climate scientists and experts. (WTF is this IPCC? See our explainer. Feel like you’ve heard this story before? Perhaps you’re thinking of the first installment of the report, which came out last fall, or the second installment, which came out last month. Maybe the IPCC believes that breaking its report into three parts makes it more fun, like the Hobbit movies.)

Here’s a paragraph and a chart from the 33-page summary of the latest installment that help explain how we reached this precarious point in human history.

Globally, economic and population growth continue to be the most important drivers of increases in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. The contribution of population growth between 2000 and 2010 remained roughly identical to the previous three decades, while the contribution of economic growth has risen sharply … Between 2000 and 2010, both drivers outpaced emission reductions from improvements in energy intensity. Increased use of coal relative to other energy sources has reversed the long-standing trend of gradual decarbonization of the world’s energy supply.

IPCCClick to embiggen.

Of course, we could change our fossil-fuel-burning, globe-warming ways. It’s too late to avoid climate change — it’s already here — but the scientists who collaborated on the latest IPCC report think they know what it would take to keep warming within 2 degrees. It would require “substantial cuts” in greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century “through large-scale changes in energy systems,” and maybe also changes in how we use land and protect CO2-slurping forests. By 2050, we would need to be pumping far less pollution into the atmosphere than we were in 2010 — perhaps 40 to 70 percent less. And by 2100, we would need to stop polluting the atmosphere entirely.

Achieving these seemingly impossible but utterly crucial reductions in greenhouse gas pollution will require international agreement, the report notes. The trans-boundary nature of the climate crisis means no one government or group can fix this problem on its own. So come on, everybody — let’s get to it!


Source
• Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change IPCC Working Group III Contribution to AR5, IPCC

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Read the article: 

U.N. report spells out super-hard things we must do to curb warming

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on U.N. report spells out super-hard things we must do to curb warming

Let’s Stop Talking About Climate Change Like It’s Breaking News

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website.

Here’s the scoop: When it comes to climate change, there is no “story,” not in the normal news sense anyway.

The fact that 97% of scientists who have weighed in on the issue believe that climate change is a human-caused phenomenon is not a story. That only one of 9,137 peer-reviewed papers on climate change published between November 2012 and December 2013 rejected human causation is not a story either, nor is the fact that only 24 out of 13,950 such articles did so over 21 years. That the anything-but-extreme Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) offers an at least 95% guarantee of human causation for global warming is not a story, nor is the recent revelation that IPCC experts believe we only have 15 years left to rein in carbon emissions or we’ll need new technologies not yet in existence which may never be effective. Nor is the recent poll showing that only 47% of Americans believe climate change is human-caused (a drop of 7% since 2012) or that the percentage who believe climate change is occurring for any reason has also declined since 2012 from 70% to 63%. Nor is the fact that, as the effects of climate change came ever closer to home, media coverage of the subject dropped between 2010 and 2012 and, though rising in 2013, was still well below coverage levels for 2007 to 2009. Nor is it a story that European nations, already light years ahead of the United States on phasing out fossil fuels, recently began considering cutbacks on some of their climate change goals, nor that US carbon emissions actually rose in 2013, nor that the southern part of the much disputed Keystone XL pipeline, which is to bring particularly carbon-dirty tar sands from Alberta, Canada, to the US Gulf Coast, is now in operation, nor that 2013 will have been either the fourth or seventh hottest year on record, depending on how you do the numbers.

Don’t misunderstand me. Each of the above was reported somewhere and climate change itself is an enormous story, if what you mean is Story with a capital S. It could even be considered the story of all stories. It’s just that climate change and its component parts are unlike every other story from the Syrian slaughter and the problems of Obamacare to Bridgegate and Justin Bieber’s arrest. The future of all other stories, of the news and storytelling itself, rests on just how climate change manifests itself over the coming decades or even century. What happens in the 2014 midterms or the 2016 presidential elections, in our wars, politics, and culture, who is celebrated and who ignored—none of it will matter if climate change devastates the planet.

Climate change isn’t the news and it isn’t a set of news stories. It’s the prospective end of all news. Think of it as the anti-news.

Continue Reading »

Link to original:

Let’s Stop Talking About Climate Change Like It’s Breaking News

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Let’s Stop Talking About Climate Change Like It’s Breaking News

Major newspaper coverage of climate change plummeted last year

Major newspaper coverage of climate change plummeted last year

Shutterstock

We were feeling optimistic a couple of weeks ago when we reported that mainstream media coverage of climate and energy issues was up last year. But it turns out that if you remove the “and energy,” the numbers are actually pretty depressing.

The University of Colorado’s Center for Science & Technology Research monitors mentions of “global warming” and “climate change” in five major U.S. newspapers: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. Check out the following sad graph showing its latest findings:

University of ColoradoClick to embiggen.

ClimateProgress breaks down bad news:

The final numbers for the year are in and NY Times climate coverage — stories in which the words “global warming” or “climate change” appeared — has plummeted more than 40 percent. That is a bigger drop than any of the other newspapers monitored by the University of Colorado, though the Washington Post’s coverage dropped by a third, no doubt driven in part by its mind-boggling decision to take its lead climate reporter, Juliet Eilperin, off the environment beat.

And remember, this drop happened from levels of climate coverage that were already near a historical low and in a year that was HUGE on climate news. We’ve had devastating extreme weather around the planet. In May, CO2 levels in the air passed the 400 parts per million threshold for the first time in millions of years. In June, President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan. And in September, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its latest alarming review of the scientific literature.

As the chart above shows, when the IPCC released its previous reports (2001, 2007), media coverage spiked at the major newspapers. These days, the media herd is not to be heard from.

Meanwhile, TV news coverage of climate change flatlined. According to Robert Brulle of Drexel University, the nightly news programs at ABC, NBC, and CBS aired 30 climate stories in 2013, compared to 29 in 2012.

A new Climate Action Task Force in the U.S. Senate is going to try to reverse the trend. It announced yesterday that it will push to get more climate coverage in the mainstream media, particularly on Sunday morning political talk shows. “Sunday news shows are obviously important because they talk to millions of people,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a task force member, “but they go beyond that by helping to define what the establishment considers to be important and what is often discussed during the rest of the week.” We wish them good luck.


Source
Media coverage of climate change / global warming, University of Colorado
Silence Of The Lambs: Climate Coverage Drops At Major U.S. Newspapers, Flatlines On TV, ClimateProgress
Democrats Plan to Pressure TV Networks Into Covering Climate Change, National Journal

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Living

View article: 

Major newspaper coverage of climate change plummeted last year

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Major newspaper coverage of climate change plummeted last year

We Know Humans Are Causing Global Warming; Here Are Some Things We’re Less Sure About

Melting Greenland glaciers will have an effect on the global climate by affecting the strength of ocean circulation patterns. Exactly how much of an effect they’ll have is stll up in the air. Photo: Christine Zenino

This morning in Sweden representatives from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change presented a summary of the current state of scientific knowledge about climate change, a brief version of part of the IPCC’s upcoming full report. Most of the attention is being paid—and rightly so—to the things we know we know for sure: the temperature is rising, the sea level is, too. And we and our carbon emissions are largely to blame.

The IPCC report speaks a language of certainties and uncertainties—what do we think we know? how certain are we about it? The headline news from this new IPCC report is that we’re overwhelmingly certain that people are causing climate change. But what are we less confident about? The short answer is: we’re less sure about what’s happening in places where there’s less data— whether because historically there’s been less funding for science there, as in places outside the northern hemisphere, or less human presence, as in Antarctica.

This doesn’t undermine the IPCC’s claims: these sources of uncertainty were all taken into consideration when the IPCC said that we’re the dominant driver of climate change. Rather, they’re a reminder that though the science of climate change is settled, it isn’t complete. There’s a lot more work for scientists to do, and many open questions—some of them quite large. Answering these questions will do a great deal to help us answer the really important question: what’s next?

So here, gleaned from the IPCC’s briefing, are some of the things we’re still trying to work out:

What’s up with clouds?

We’ve touched on this one before, but it’s just as true as ever: we don’t really know what’s going on with clouds. We know that they’re important in determining the “climate sensitivity,” the measure of how much warming you’d expect for a given increase in greenhouse gases. And they’re also obviously relevant to figuring out how the weather will be affected. But, as the IPCC says, trying to make clouds in a computer model is tricky.

The southern hemisphere

The bulk of long-term scientific research has been focused on the northern hemisphere, and those gaps in the observation grid mean that we know less about how things work down under.

We’re not quite as sure how all the extra energy in the Earth’s atmosphere, trapped by greenhouse gases, is warming the air in the Southern Hemisphere. This isn’t to say it isn’t warming. The question is about how much warming we’re seeing at different altitudes.

We’re also not quite sure how the rain has, or will, change. We know that over the northern hemisphere rainfall has been going up, but we’re not so sure what’s going on over the ocean or in the southern hemisphere.

Changes in Antarctic ice

The vast Antarctic glaciers are a focus of a lot of research, but we’re not really sure how they work. Scientists are trying to figure that out, because all of that ice could mean a lot of sea level rise. National Geographic says that if Antarctica and all the other ice melted we’d get something like 216 feet of sea level rise. (This is never going to happen, but it’s not fun to think about.)

We also don’t know as much as we’d like about the gigantic floating sheets of ice that ring Antarctica. Scientists are having trouble understanding why they sometimes seem to be growing, and there’s a lot of uncertainty in our predictions of what will happen to them as the world continues to warm.

Arctic permafrost bomb

The Arctic reaches of Canada and Siberia and Scandinavia and other polar regions are full of permafrost—land that’s frozen year round. As the world gets warmer, it makes sense that this permafrost will start to thaw (and it has been). What people are really worried about is that, trapped within this frozen soil, there is whole lot of carbon in the form of decaying plant material known as peat.

Peat likes to catch on fire. Peat also releases carbon dioxide and methane as it breaks down. So, there’s a big worry that if we keep thawing out the frozen peat, that there will be a big surge in greenhouse gases. But that’s exactly what it is—a worry. We’re not really sure how much extra greenhouse gases will be released from all this frozen land. A lot of it depends on how much we can limit global warming.

The power of the sun

Some people like to claim that changes in the amount of energy coming from the Sun are what’s actually causing climate change, and that greenhouse gas emissions aren’t to blame. If it’s all the Sun’s fault, then we’re off the hook. Those people are wrong.

That being said, of course changes in the amount of energy coming from the Sun affect the climate. How this happens, though, is the question. Scientists think that there may be a connection between the 11-year solar cycle and medium-term changes in the climate, changes that happen from decade to decade. This matters because these decade-to-decade changes can stack on top of the long-term changes caused by anthropogenic climate change.

The fate of the AMOC

There’s a gigantic circulation system running all throughout the world’s oceans, linking them together, transporting nutrients and salt and heat between the Pacific and the Atlantic and the Indian and the others. The Atlantic Ocean branch of this system is called the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation—meridional because it flows “along the meridian,” and overturning because, from north to south, it flows along the bottom of the ocean, and from south to north, it flows along the top. This circulation system is very important for keeping everything moving, and its behavior affects everything from the temperature in Europe to the strength of the monsoon in China.

Scientists are worried that if climate change melts enough of the ice in Greenland and the rest of the Arctic that this circulation pattern could slow down, or even stop entirely. The IPCC says it’s “very unlikely” that the AMOC will stop in the next 100 years, but, after that, they’re not so sure.

What’s the takeaway here? We’re already locked in to a certain amount of climate change, thanks to the greenhouse gases we’ve already let into the air. We know that the world is going to change, but in some cases we’re not quite so sure what exactly is going to happen. We know a lot about climate change—we know that it’s happening and that it’s our fault—but that doesn’t mean scientists can take a break. There’s still a lot of work to be done to understand how the planet’s going to react to these changes we’ve wrought.

More from Smithsonian.com:

It’s 95 Percent Certain That We’re the Main Cause of Climate Change
Melting Greenland Ice Has Consequences

Link – 

We Know Humans Are Causing Global Warming; Here Are Some Things We’re Less Sure About

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Smith's, solar, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on We Know Humans Are Causing Global Warming; Here Are Some Things We’re Less Sure About

The next big U.N. climate report will not include the massive effects of permafrost melt

The next big U.N. climate report will not include the massive effects of permafrost melt

Climate Progress blogger Joe Romm is one of the best there is at breaking down climate science, which is to say that he is one of the best there is at dropping reams of data in your lap that he can demonstrate add up to the apocalypse. Yesterday, when you weren’t looking, he dropped a ton of data in your lap in a post whose title ends in an exclamation point. So, you know. It’s serious.

For a long time, climate scientists have been concerned about the effects of melting permafrost. By way of quick refresher, permafrost is the layer of frozen ground that is a hallmark of the Arctic. Since the region is usually below freezing, the soil stays frozen to varying depth, which has been a boon for development. Rock-solid soil makes it simple to build towns and roads. Until the permafrost starts to melt — which it is — causing some serious problems for those towns and roads.

U.N./Christopher Arp

Near Alaska, a chunk of permafrost broke off into the Arctic Ocean.

That’s actually the least troubling problem. Of far more concern is methane release. As layers of soil and vegetation that have been frozen solid for centuries thaw, they start to release methane that’s been trapped. And, worse, that vegetation starts to decompose, releasing newly created methane. Methane, as we’ve noted, is far more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, creating a massive negative loop of warming and permafrost thaw and more warming and so on.

What’s the U.N. going to do about the problem? Nothing. As Romm notes, a key U.N. report won’t even acknowledge it exists.

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is due to release its “Fifth Assessment Report” in stages beginning next fall. It’s meant to be an overview of the science on climate change to guide the global body. But it “will not include the potential effects of the permafrost carbon feedback on global climate,” per a new report that details the permafrost problem. Therefore: Romm went ballistic. With graphs and reports, as is his fashion.

Back in 2005, before the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment, a major study (subs. req’d) led by NCAR climate researcher David Lawrence, found that virtually the entire top 11 feet of permafrost around the globe could disappear by the end of this century. Using the first “fully interactive climate system model” applied to study permafrost, the researchers found that if we tried to stabilize CO2 concentrations in the air at 550 ppm, permafrost would plummet from over 4 million square miles today to 1.5 million.

That matters because the … permamelt contains a staggering 1.5 trillion tons of frozen carbon, about twice as much carbon as contained in the atmosphere, much of which would be released as methane. Methane is 25 times as potent a heat-trapping gas as CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but 72 to 100 times as potent over 20 years!

ThinkProgress/Schaefer et al

Carbon expected to be released into the atmosphere from thawing permafrost.

Translation: The U.N. IPCC’s report won’t take into consideration perhaps the single most important contributor to warming besides consumption of fossil fuels. Meaning that its models over the course of decades and centuries will be wrong. And meaning, therefore, that the undoubtedly grim predictions it outlines will actually be hopelessly optimistic.

Which is worth a few exclamation points.

Source

IPCC’s Planned Obsolescence: Fifth Assessment Report Will Ignore Crucial Permafrost Carbon Feedback!, ThinkProgress

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View original: 

The next big U.N. climate report will not include the massive effects of permafrost melt

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The next big U.N. climate report will not include the massive effects of permafrost melt