Tag Archives: ocean

Rising seas could wipe out $1 trillion worth of U.S. homes and businesses

Some 2.4 million American homes and businesses worth more than $1 trillion are at risk of “chronic inundation” by the end of the century, according to a report out Monday. That’s about 15 percent of all U.S. coastal real estate, or roughly as much built infrastructure as Houston and Los Angeles combined.

The sweeping new study from the Union of Concerned Scientists is the most comprehensive analysis of the risks posed by sea level rise to the United States coastal economy. Taken in context with the lack of action to match the scale of the problem, it describes a country plowing headlong into a flood-driven financial crisis of enormous scale.

“In contrast with previous housing market crashes, values of properties chronically inundated due to sea level rise are unlikely to recover and will only continue to go further underwater, literally and figuratively,” said Rachel Cleetus, an economist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, and a report co-author, in a statement. “Many coastal communities will face declining property values as risk perceptions catch up with reality.”

The report defines chronic inundation as 26 flood events per year, or roughly one every other week — enough to “make normal routines impossible” and render the properties essentially worthless. It builds on the group’s previous work to identify the risk of chronic flooding under a sea-level-rise scenario of two meters (6.6 feet) by 2100. Using data from Zillow for every property in every coastal zip code in the lower 48, the results of this week’s report are at once familiar and surprising. (Here’s the interactive map where you can plug in your zip code).

It’s probably no surprise that Miami Beach is the community most at risk nationwide. More than $6 billion could be wiped out by 2045 (within the lifespan of current mortgages). That’s more than 10 percent of the city’s property value. (All amounts are in 2017 dollars).

A more surprising result: New Jersey is the state with the most to lose over the same time frame, eclipsing Florida. In Wildwood, Ocean City, and Long Beach, more than $10 billion is at risk.

In about two percent of all coastal zip codes, rising waters could soon eliminate more than half of property tax revenue. For these communities, like Crisfield, Maryland and parts of Newport Beach, California, sea level rise is an immediate existential threat — city services would have to shutter with such a catastrophic budget shortfall.

Looking further ahead — under the high sea level rise scenario to 2100 — a quarter of Boston would be underwater. Vulnerable barrier islands, like Miami Beach and Galveston, Texas, would be largely uninhabitable. Nationwide, more than $12 billion in property tax revenue would be lost.

The study estimates that Long Island, New York would experience floods at the scale of Hurricane Sandy more than two dozen times a year. The longer the world waits to significantly cut emissions, and the more bad news we discover about the inherent instability of the vast Antarctic ice sheets, the more likely this scenario becomes.

Though the costs and scale of this looming disaster are staggering, it’s important to remember that the catastrophe will hit some people much harder than others. Academics and climate activists have been talking about this for a long time, but local governments have struggled to prepare for a more watery future.

“While wealthier homeowners may risk losing more of their net wealth cumulatively, less-wealthy ones are in jeopardy of losing a greater percentage of what they own,” Cleetus said. “Homes often represent a larger share of total assets for elderly or low-income residents.” For some, taking a $100,000 loss could be a life-shattering blow; for others it’s a temporary setback.

The futurist Alex Steffen calls this situation a “brittleness bubble,” and it’s characteristic of slow-onset but predictable problems like climate change. When the brittleness bubble breaks, those without means — the economically poor, those from marginalized groups — will be forced to abandon their homes and ways of life.

“The risks we face grow with inaction,” Steffen recently wrote. “So, too, do the losses we can expect.”

Read this article – 

Rising seas could wipe out $1 trillion worth of U.S. homes and businesses

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rising seas could wipe out $1 trillion worth of U.S. homes and businesses

It’s World Oceans Day! Let’s Say Sayonara to Single-Use Plastic

In July 2017, a study tallied up all the plastic ever made, arriving at the jaw-dropping figure of 8.3 billion metric tons. That was 11 months ago. How much more do you think has been added since then?

Most people get that plastic is a major problem, but the extent of?that problem eludes us. This is understandable, given that we generally don’t see the results of our own actions when it comes to plastic waste.

We’ll use a plastic straw in our smoothie, for example and excuse it as one small thing.

However, all those small things add up, until eventually what you?re left with is a garbage patch in the ocean that?s two time the size of Texas. That?s a heck of a lot of plastic.

According to Reuse This Bag, we use over 320 million metric tons of plastic annually. Do the math on that, and it?s easy to understand why the action focus for World Oceans Day 2018 is centered around?stopping?plastic pollution.

Single-Use Plastic is Destroying Our Oceans

It would be bad enough if our garbage ended up only in landfills, but around 2.41 million metric tons of plastic end up in the sea each year. The resulting impact of plastic on marine and bird life is disastrous.

Just recently, a whale was found in Thailand with eighty shopping bags and other plastic debris clogging its stomach. It literally starved to death. That?s just one story out of millions.

The number of countries and cities that have banned single-use plastics is growing. It?s time for all of us to step up and do our bit. Together, we can make single-use plastic obsolete.

By properly informing ourselves, we?ll be able to view our actions as part of the collective whole, rather than standalone indiscretions that don?t make all that much of a difference.

This infographic offers an in-depth look at plastic in the ocean. Along with dispelling myths around the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, it shows the impact of plastic pollution on?sea birds and marine life, including the harmful effects when these creatures eat plastic waste.

This video by National Geographic does a great job of explaining the history of plastic as well as the impact it’s had on the world and what we can do to make a difference. They, too, emphasize?the importance of eliminating single-use plastic.

What can you do to help?

If all we did was eliminate our use of single-use plastic, we?d make massive inroads into the problem. Avoiding plastic is a struggle, but it can be done. Here are some hacks to reduce your single-use plastic consumption:

  1. Carry your own travel mug.
  2. Carry your own eating utensils.
  3. Bring your own cloth shopping bags.
  4. Bring your own fresh produce bags, too.
  5. Don?t use plastic straws.
  6. Carry a reusable water bottle.
  7. Buy in bulk to reduce packaging waste.
  8. Buy laundry detergent that comes in a box.
  9. Opt for zero waste lunches.
  10. Refuse plastic at the dry cleaner. Or skip the dry cleaner all together!
  11. Use eco-friendly shaving supplies.
  12. Stop buying single-use coffee pods.
  13. Avoid processed food.
  14. Use bar shampoo and soap.
  15. Light your fire with matches.
  16. Use cloth diapers instead of disposable.
  17. Ladies, make your period waste-free.
  18. Shop at package-free stores.
  19. Rethink your food storage options.
  20. Make reusable bowl covers?(or bribe someone to make them for you)

We all know what we need to do, it’s time to do it. Let’s all commit to saying sayonara to single-use plastic for good.

Photo Credit: Thinkstock

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View article: 

It’s World Oceans Day! Let’s Say Sayonara to Single-Use Plastic

Posted in alo, bigo, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on It’s World Oceans Day! Let’s Say Sayonara to Single-Use Plastic

5 Reasons Why You Need to Give Up Plastic this Earth Day

With Earth Day on all of our minds, it?s a good time to start taking some tangible, quantifiable steps to reducing our environmental impact. Driving more eco-friendly cars, investing in solar power and shopping local are all fashionable (and of course, great steps!), but our favorite Earth Day resolution?this year is reducing your plastic consumption.

When you think about it, plastic is pretty much everywhere these days, from shipping materials to health food products. Here are five reasons you should give up (or at least greatly reduce) your plastic consumption:

It?s Accumulating in the Ocean

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch has been common knowledge among environmentalists for years, but recently, we collectively learned that this patch of plastic is even worse than we?d feared. The ?patch? is now estimated to be 4 to 16 times larger than originally thought, according to NPR.

In addition to recognizable items like water bottles, fishing supplies, plastic bags and buoys, the garbage patch is cluttered with tiny, nearly invisible plastic particles called microplastics, which are essentially the remnants of trash that?s already been broken down. Plastic is not a material that quickly and easily breaks down, so its memory remains in the ecosystem long after its usually short-lived human use has expired.

Related: What Happens to a Plastic Bag After You Throw It Away

It?s Killing Wildlife

Speaking of the garbage patch, plastic that collects in forests and waterways is slowly killing countless animals. Turtles and birds have long been known to get trapped in plastic bags, soda rings and other plastic items, but that?s only the beginning. According to National Geographic, seabirds around the world are regularly consuming plastic ? and it?s slowly killing them.

It?s Responsible for a Huge Number of Carbon Emissions

About 6 percent of global oil consumption can be attributed to plastic use, according to Time for Change. And as we all know by now, oil production comes at a major price to the environment. Time for Change also points out that the production of plastic bags and bottles generates 6 kg CO2 per kg of plastic.

It Could Be Impacting Your Health

Most scientists agree that too much exposure to plastics can cause major health issues. The question is usually ?how much is too much??, but when you consider the risks, you may decide that you want to avoid plastic at all costs.

Plastics contain chemicals that mimic estrogen in the body, an activity called ?estrogenic activity.? The presence of synthetic estrogens has been linked to a number of different health concerns, including developmental and hormonal issues as well as many cancers.

It Could Impact the Health of Your Children and Grandchildren

Finally, those synthetic chemicals can wind up in the bodies of future generations. A huge study commissioned by the Environmental Working Group and Commonweal found an average of 200 industrial chemicals, a number of which are transferred from plastics, in the umbilical cord blood of newborns. If that isn?t enough to scare you away from plastics, I don?t know what is!

Related Articles:

3 Ways a Zero Waste Lifestyle Can Improve Your Health
Finally Some Good News on Plastic Bags in Our Oceans
9 Ways to Cut Out Plastic That Will Help the Environment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

This article is from:  

5 Reasons Why You Need to Give Up Plastic this Earth Day

Posted in alo, bigo, eco-friendly, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Reasons Why You Need to Give Up Plastic this Earth Day

Here’s What Happens to a Plastic Bag After You Throw It Away

Globally, we use more than?1 trillion plastic bags each year. Yeah, that’s A LOT of plastic. Even more shocking, only 1 percent of plastic bags actually get recycled in the US.

Plastic shopping bags are a huge environmental issue, mainly because they are so ubiquitous and there is a lot of?confusion around recycling them. The fact is, unless you are making a special effort to recycle your plastic bags at your local grocery store or drop-off location, your used bags are eventually ending up in one of 3 locations: the landfill, a tree by the highway or the ocean. And they’re not going away any time soon.

Here’s the timeline of what happens when you toss your plastic bags…

That day…

After a trip to the grocery store, you pull out a single bunch of bananas from a?plastic grocery bag. You stare at the bag?guiltily, wishing you had a better use for it, but your drawer is already overflowing with too many saved plastic bags as is. So you crumple the bag up, toss it in your trash, and forget about it.

A few days later…

You take out your trash and it gets collected. The garbage bag breaks open in the truck and all the contents spill out. Your plastic grocery?bag may?catch a breeze and blow off the truck, getting tangled in a high tree on the side of a busy road where it will cling for years to come. Otherwise, the bag makes its way to the landfill.

1 year later?

You?ve probably gained a wrinkle or two, maybe another gray hair, but that plastic bag you?ve tossed hasn?t changed all that much. At this point it has probably reached its home, one of 3 locations:

  1. If the bag was in a tree, perhaps it fell, tattered, to the ground, where it was?eaten by an innocent?seagull. The plastic makes the bird?feel unnaturally full and causes it to starve to death. The body decomposes in a matter of weeks, but the plastic bag in its stomach remains behind, fully intact.
  2. Your plastic bag may have?been?swept up in the breeze at the landfill and?end up near a waterway. A few hard rainfalls later, it is in a trickling stream en route to the ocean.
  3. Perhaps the bag remains in the landfill, lifeless, perfectly preserved. In any scenario, it hasn’t?broken down at all.

20 years later…

  1. If the bag was originally stuck in a tree, it finally decomposes after 20 years, thanks to photodegradation from solar UV light. Since bacteria do not eat plastic, it cannot biodegrade like a banana or a paper bag, which is why plastic?is extremely difficult to break down.
  2. If it became an?ocean-dwelling bag, it likely remains?fairly intact, very slowly breaking down into smaller pieces of harmful microplastics, which are already?destroying our oceans. And just because it is in the ocean doesn’t mean it is not your problem. Small fish feed on these plastic pieces, larger fish feed on small fish and we feed on larger fish. So, effectively, that fish dinner you or your loved ones eat in 20 years might contain toxic microplastics from?your grocery bag. Ew.
  3. In the landfill, rainfall causes water-soluble chemicals from the plastic to get carried away and leached into the ground. From there, these chemicals pollute the?water supply, poison local?farmland and harm local animal and plant life.

500 years later?

You?ve come and gone, and so have your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandchildren (and their great-grandchildren, too). And finally, in some massive landfill, your grocery bag that held that single bunch of bananas has hopefully decomposed?although we can?t be sure, since plastic bags have only been around for about 50 years.

The process?may actually take over 1000 years, since plastic does not technically biodegrade and some types need?UV light to break down. So?it is possible that your grocery bag will be harming human health and the planet for the next 30?generations?to come. At least no one can say you didn’t leave your mark.

If your plastic bag ended up in the waterways, it is still floating around the ocean in the form of microplastics, killing sea life (if there still is any in 500 years) and further acidifying the ocean. The sad truth is that, in the ocean, plastics?may never fully break down, even in 1000 years.

Make a change!

Wow, that was bleak. But it doesn’t have to be that?way. Your humble actions today can make a huge difference for the next millennium!

While you cannot recycle plastic bags with your home recycling, they are fairly easy and convenient to recycle through a drop-off location. Just collect all of your plastic bags in a corner of your kitchen and bring them back to the grocery store, which should have a recycling drop-off?for them.?Find locations near you here. (Please do not try to recycle plastic bags in your home recycling. It causes major problems.) From there, the bags will be broken down into raw plastic pellets and get reused to create any number of useful products, from clothing to sunglasses to useful appliances. And hopefully those will get recycled or repurposed, and the cycle of good will continue.

Or, ideally, you can stop using plastic shopping bags altogether.

If you make one change this year to become greener, work on your plastic waste. Carry reusable bags with you to the grocery store so you don’t need plastic bags. Petition your local town to ban plastic bags from stores. Encourage more grocery stores?to offer recyclable boxes (leftover from their shipments) for people who forget their bags. These changes are small, easy and highly effective once they are widely implemented.

It’s all up to you. Go ahead, lead the plastic-free revolution in your town, in your country, in your planet.

?Related on Care2:

And 2018′s Dirtiest Produce Award Goes To…
8 Easiest Hacks to Reduce Your Plastic Consumption
A Guide to the Greenest Meal Delivery Kits Out There

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Taken from: 

Here’s What Happens to a Plastic Bag After You Throw It Away

Posted in alo, bigo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s What Happens to a Plastic Bag After You Throw It Away

The Big Ones – Lucy Jones

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

The Big Ones

How Natural Disasters Have Shaped Us (and What We Can Do About Them)

Lucy Jones

Genre: Nature

Price: $13.99

Expected Publish Date: April 17, 2018

Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group

Seller: Penguin Random House LLC


By the world-renowned seismologist, a riveting history of natural disasters, their impact on our culture, and new ways of thinking about the ones to come Earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, hurricanes, volcanoes–they stem from the same forces that give our planet life. Earthquakes give us natural springs; volcanoes produce fertile soil. It is only when these forces exceed our ability to withstand them that they become disasters. Together they have shaped our cities and their architecture; elevated leaders and toppled governments; influenced the way we think, feel, fight, unite, and pray. The history of natural disasters is a history of ourselves. In The Big Ones , leading seismologist Dr. Lucy Jones offers a bracing look at some of the world's greatest natural disasters, whose reverberations we continue to feel today. At Pompeii, Jones explores how a volcanic eruption in the first century AD challenged prevailing views of religion. She examines the California floods of 1862 and the limits of human memory. And she probes more recent events–such as the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 and the American hurricanes of 2017–to illustrate the potential for globalization to humanize and heal. With population in hazardous regions growing and temperatures around the world rising, the impacts of natural disasters are greater than ever before. The Big Ones is more than just a work of history or science; it is a call to action. Natural hazards are inevitable; human catastrophes are not. With this energizing and exhaustively researched book, Dr. Jones offers a look at our past, readying us to face down the Big Ones in our future.

Source article:  

The Big Ones – Lucy Jones

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Knopf, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Big Ones – Lucy Jones

Relax, The Day After Tomorrow isn’t going to happen, like, tomorrow

Back in 2004, the blockbuster disaster film The Day After Tomorrow introduced the world to the important role that the Atlantic Ocean’s circulation might play in kicking climate change into overdrive. The ocean’s heat-transport system collapses in the movie, unleashing a tidal wave on New York City, spawning continent-sized superstorms, and freezing much of the Northern Hemisphere.

More than a decade later, mainstream science is still fighting the popular perception that abrupt climate change might just happen one afternoon — a ridiculous notion that skews our perception of the massive real-world consequences climate change is already bringing.

Problem is, there’s a thread of truth to that movie’s skewed premise: We know the Atlantic’s circulation is slowing down. And we know it’s expected to slow down in the future because of climate change. But the evidence of a catastrophic collapse anytime soon remains extremely tenuous.

This week, two teams of researchers published new evidence in the journal Nature that the Atlantic Ocean’s circulation is now at its weakest in at least the past 1,600 years.

Taken at face value, this news is troubling. If the Atlantic’s circulation continues to slow dramatically, it would mean changes in European weather, drought in central and west Africa, fluctuations in hurricane frequency, and sharp rises in sea level on the east coast of the United States as ocean water from the wind-driven Gulf Stream current piled up without an escape route.

Dig further, however, and you’ll find that there are reasons not to lose too much sleep over a looming ocean-triggered apocalypse.

The initial wave of news coverage this time around has been predictably dire, even for jaded journalists routinely confronted with the possibility of climate-induced civilizational collapse.

Take this line from the Washington Post’s coverage: “The Atlantic Ocean circulation that carries warmth into the Northern Hemisphere’s high latitudes is slowing down because of climate change, a team of scientists asserted Wednesday, suggesting one of the most feared consequences is already coming to pass.” Others went further: “Gulf Stream current at ‘record low’ with potentially devastating consequences for weather, warn scientists,” read a headline in The Independent.

Deep breaths, people. The truth isn’t quite so scary.

For starters, these results aren’t especially new. Similar work in 2015 showed largely the same thing — a slowdown coinciding with the rise of industrial civilization. Sure enough, a persistent cool spot has started to appear over the North Atlantic in recent years, just south of Greenland, exactly where we’d expect one if a slowdown was underway.

In phone and email conversations with Grist, the lead authors of both papers as well as outside experts strongly cautioned against making too much of the new research.

“I would not call it a global catastrophe,” says Levke Caesar, a physicist at Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and lead author of the first paper.

David Thornalley, a geographer at University College London and lead author of the second paper, mostly agrees. He says the best data available suggests that most likely the Atlantic Ocean’s circulation will gradually weaken over the next century. While that doesn’t rule out a collapse scenario, he says, “We don’t know how close we are to a tipping point.”

Other experts who study the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), the scientific name for this phenomenon, say that recent news coverage has twisted their colleagues’ work out of context.

Isabela Astiz Le Bras, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, says that direct measurements of the AMOC taken over the past 20 years “do not reflect the reported trends” that media coverage has latched on to. That’s partly because the new papers rely on indirect approximations, or proxies, of the AMOC.

“It seems like the uncertainty has been underplayed in the media, and the implications blown out of proportion, which is unfortunate,” Le Bras says.

Martha Buckley, an oceanographer at George Mason University, goes even further. She disputes the claim that the circulation has slowed down primarily as a result of climate change, mostly because there just isn’t enough evidence yet.

“I do not believe the framing of this research as a global catastrophe is supported by the science,” she says. “Furthermore, I believe it detracts from the imminent and certain impacts of climate change, such as sea level rise, more heat waves, melting of ice, and ocean acidification.”

Setting aside possible human influence, the strength of the AMOC varies a lot naturally. David Smeed, an oceanographer at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, United Kingdom, is the principal investigator for the leading effort to directly measure the AMOC, which he and his colleagues began in 2004.

“From our measurements that we make, so far what we’ve observed is consistent with natural variability,” Smeed says. “To detect an anthropogenic change, when we compare with the climate models, we realize that we need to measure a lot longer before we’d be able to detect that signal.”

At an international scientific meeting this summer, researchers will present their latest results and hash out their differences.

There is evidence that a sudden slowdown has happened before, about 30,000 years ago, an era defined by stronger storms and sudden sea-level rise. Another collapse would take years — not hours as in The Day After Tomorrow — and Buckley says not a single model predicts this scenario for this century without invoking simultaneous collapses in other climate systems, like the Greenland ice sheet.

But precisely because the AMOC has collapsed relatively quickly before, Thornally says, it’s worth worrying about now, especially because man-made climate change is creating “the right conditions for it to happen” — even if those conditions haven’t been met yet.

The media, says Thornalley, are “right to flag it as something that is potentially catastrophic, though catastrophic obviously in a different way than in a movie.”

This article is from: 

Relax, The Day After Tomorrow isn’t going to happen, like, tomorrow

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Relax, The Day After Tomorrow isn’t going to happen, like, tomorrow

The Death and Life of the Great Lakes – Dan Egan

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

The Death and Life of the Great Lakes

Dan Egan

Genre: Science & Nature

Price: $14.99

Publish Date: March 7, 2017

Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company

Seller: W. W. Norton


A Los Angeles Times Book Prize Finalist Winner of the J. Anthony Lukas Award A landmark work of science, history and reporting on the past, present and imperiled future of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes—Erie, Huron, Michigan, Ontario and Superior—hold 20 percent of the world’s supply of surface fresh water and provide sustenance, work and recreation for tens of millions of Americans. But they are under threat as never before, and their problems are spreading across the continent. The Death and Life of the Great Lakes is prize-winning reporter Dan Egan’s compulsively readable portrait of an ecological catastrophe happening right before our eyes, blending the epic story of the lakes with an examination of the perils they face and the ways we can restore and preserve them for generations to come. For thousands of years the pristine Great Lakes were separated from the Atlantic Ocean by the roaring Niagara Falls and from the Mississippi River basin by a “sub-continental divide.” Beginning in the late 1800s, these barriers were circumvented to attract oceangoing freighters from the Atlantic and to allow Chicago’s sewage to float out to the Mississippi. These were engineering marvels in their time—and the changes in Chicago arrested a deadly cycle of waterborne illnesses—but they have had horrendous unforeseen consequences. Egan provides a chilling account of how sea lamprey, zebra and quagga mussels and other invaders have made their way into the lakes, decimating native species and largely destroying the age-old ecosystem. And because the lakes are no longer isolated, the invaders now threaten water intake pipes, hydroelectric dams and other infrastructure across the country. Egan also explores why outbreaks of toxic algae stemming from the overapplication of farm fertilizer have left massive biological “dead zones” that threaten the supply of fresh water. He examines fluctuations in the levels of the lakes caused by manmade climate change and overzealous dredging of shipping channels. And he reports on the chronic threats to siphon off Great Lakes water to slake drier regions of America or to be sold abroad. In an age when dire problems like the Flint water crisis or the California drought bring ever more attention to the indispensability of safe, clean, easily available water, The Death and the Life of the Great Lakes is a powerful paean to what is arguably our most precious resource, an urgent examination of what threatens it and a convincing call to arms about the relatively simple things we need to do to protect it.

Excerpt from – 

The Death and Life of the Great Lakes – Dan Egan

Posted in alo, Anchor, ATTRA, FF, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, The Atlantic, Uncategorized, W. W. Norton & Company | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Death and Life of the Great Lakes – Dan Egan

Polar ice is lost at sea

Our planet reached another miserable milestone earlier this week: Sea ice fell to its lowest level since human civilization began more than 12,000 years ago.

That worrying development is just the latest sign that rising temperatures are inflicting lasting changes on the coldest corners of the globe. The new record low comes as the planet’s climate system shifts further from the relatively stable period that helped give rise to cities, commerce, and the way we live now.

So far, the new year has been remarkably warm on both poles. The past 30 days have averaged more than 21 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal in Svalbard, Norway — the northernmost permanently inhabited place in the world. Last month, a tanker ship completed the first wintertime crossing of the Arctic Ocean without the assistance of an icebreaker. Down south in the Antarctic, sea ice is all but gone for the third straight year as summer winds to a close.

The loss of Earth’s polar sea ice has long been considered one of the most important tipping points as the planet warms. That’s because as the bright white ice melts, it exposes less-reflective ocean water, which more easily absorbs heat. And that, sorry to say, kicks off a new cycle of further warming.

According to research published last fall, that cycle appears to be the primary driver of ice melt in the Arctic, effectively marking the beginning of the end of permanent ice cover there. The wide-ranging consequences of this transition, such as more extreme weather and ecosystem shifts, are already being felt far beyond the Arctic.

Data from NSIDC and NASA

There is just 6.2 million square miles of sea ice on the planet right now, about a million square miles less than typical this time of year during the 1990s, and a few tens of thousands of square miles less than just last year, which had marked the previous record low. This level of detail about the remotest parts of the planet is available thanks to our relatively newfound vantage point from space. Satellites monitoring the poles gather sea-ice data, and records only go back to 1978. But it’s a near certainty that ice levels have not been this low in a long, long time.

Proxy evidence from microscopic fossils found on the floor of the Arctic Ocean provides proof that sea ice levels there are the lowest in centuries and perhaps much longer. There’s evidence from ancient plant material in far northern Canada that the Arctic has not been as warm as it currently is for at least 44,000 years. For the Antarctic, sea ice is more variable and no reliable ancient reconstructions currently exist — though there’s convincing evidence that there was less sea ice there about 128,000 years ago. For context, humans first mastered agriculture about 12,000 years ago in the Middle East, once temperatures stabilized near the end of the last ice age.

The middle of February is the usual time of the annual low for the planet’s sea ice (the Antarctic almost always has more ice than the Arctic, because there’s less land mass in the way); lately, however, the February lows have been much lower than normal on both poles. The Arctic and the Antarctic mostly operate as separate entities in the Earth’s climate system, but at the moment they’re in sync — a bit of a puzzle for researchers.

According to Zack Labe, a sea ice researcher at the University of California-Irvine, thinks there might be more than one cause. Arctic sea ice has been declining rapidly for decades, which Labe and other scientists are sure is the result of human-caused warming.

Antarctic ice, by contrast, began falling in 2016, which suggests the drop could be connected to natural swings in the climate. “It is too early to say whether losses in the Antarctic are representing a new declining trend,” says Labe.

Although the loss of sea ice is troubling, the overall pace of change is even worse. Global temperatures are rising at a rate far in excess of anything seen in recent Earth history. That means, in all likelihood, these latest records were made to be broken.

Link to original:  

Polar ice is lost at sea

Posted in alo, Anchor, Anker, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Polar ice is lost at sea

Is Bernie Sanders the only one still talking about climate change?

This story was originally published by HuffPost and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Democratic Party omitted any mention of climate change in its rebuttal Tuesday to President Donald Trump’s first State of the Union address.

In his speech, Democratic Representative Joe Kennedy of Massachusetts didn’t bring up global warming, sea-level rise, or the surge in global greenhouse gas emissions, which threaten to become worse as the Republican White House ramps up fossil fuel production to unprecedented levels.

The 37-year-old former prosecutor and grandson of Massachusetts Democrat Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1968, lamented the Trump administration’s “all-out war on environmental protection,” made a passing reference to a “coal miner” and lionized Americans with the courage to “wade through floodwaters, battle hurricanes, and brave wildfires and mudslides to save a stranger.”

Yet, like Trump, the Democrat neglected critical milestones in the climate crisis in his speech. Last year marked the world’s second-hottest year on record. The U.S. racked up a record $306 billion in climate-related damages. And fossil fuel emissions hit an all-time high as the rate of carbon dioxide pollution began increasing for the first time in three years.

Drew Hammill, a Democratic spokesperson, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This comes against the backdrop of Trump dismantling U.S. policies to reduce greenhouse gases and slashing funding for research. The president, who has long mocked scientists’ warnings on climate change, announced plans to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord, which has been signed by every other nation on Earth. In October, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed the repeal of the Clean Power Plan, the federal government’s only major policy to reduce emissions. In his inaugural State of the Union address, Trump declared an end to a “war on American energy.” He took credit for the boost in fossil fuel exports that began under President Barack Obama, and he celebrated the end of a “war on beautiful, clean coal,” a bizarre statement at odds with the continued closures of coal-fired plants and the high-profile failure of a carbon-capture coal plant last year. The president noted “floods and fires and storms,” but did not mention the overwhelming scientific consensus that a warming planet has made the weather events worse.

The GOP remains the only major political party in the developed world to oppose the widely accepted science behind human-made global warming as a platform issue. Yet Democrats’ criticism has focused more on their opponents’ climate denialism than on policies to drastically curb emissions, leaving the party without any grand vision to address what they routinely call the greatest environmental challenge of a lifetime. A tax on carbon ― the policy proposed by Reagan-era economists and nominally supported by Big Oil ― remains the foremost idea on the table.

Kennedy’s dynastic roots and impassioned speeches defending health care laws have made him a rising star in the party. While he isn’t known for his environmental stances, he earned a 96 percent lifetime score on the League of Conservation Voters’ ranking.

Even the State of the Union statement issued by Rhode Island Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, considered one of the most hawkish Democrats on climate issues, snubbed climate change. He did, however, rail against the Trump administration’s plans to open nearly all federal waters to oil and gas exploration, noting that the proposal put “the local commercial fishing industry and the Ocean State’s coastal economy in harm’s way.”

By contrast, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent, pointedly skewered Trump for ignoring climate change.

“How can a president of the United States give a State of the Union speech and not mention climate change?” he said in his own rebuttal. “No, Mr. Trump, climate change is not a ‘hoax.’

“It is a reality which is causing devastating harm all over our country and all over the world, and you are dead wrong when you appoint administrators at the EPA and other agencies who are trying to decimate environmental protection rules and slow down the transition to sustainable energy.”

Sanders is scheduled to participate in a “Climate State of the Union” on Wednesday evening hosted by the environmental group 350.org.

Originally from:

Is Bernie Sanders the only one still talking about climate change?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, sustainable energy, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is Bernie Sanders the only one still talking about climate change?

La Niña is here, so 2017 won’t be the warmest year on record.

Kathleen Hartnett White, President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the White House Council on Environmental Quality, stammered through her confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

When Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, a Democrat, asked if she believes climate change is real, she wavered but settled on the right answer: “I am uncertain. No, I’m not. I jumped ahead. Climate change is of course real.”

That’s a surprise. Hartnett White, a former chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, has a long history of challenging climate science and promoting fossil fuels. Notably, she has said that carbon dioxide isn’t a pollutant.

But that’s not to say she’s made peace with established science. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island, quizzed Hartnett White over how much excess heat in the atmosphere is absorbed by oceans. “I believe there are differences of opinions on that,” she said, “that there’s not one right answer.” For the record, the number is about 90 percent.

Then things got bizarre. Appearing frustrated with equivocating answers, Whitehouse pressed her on basic laws of nature, like whether heat makes water expand. “I do not have any kind of expertise or even much layman study of the ocean dynamics and the climate-change issues,” she said.

Watch below, if you dare:

After the hearing, Whitehouse tweeted, “I don’t even know where to begin … she outright rejects basic science.”

View original article:  

La Niña is here, so 2017 won’t be the warmest year on record.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on La Niña is here, so 2017 won’t be the warmest year on record.