I just signed the We Campaign’s letter to President-elect Obama and have included my comments below. I would encourage all Climaticide Chronicles readers to sign as well.

Dear President-elect Obama,

Congratulations! I am overjoyed with your victory. Our house was the first in our town to have an Obama 2008 sign up in the yard.

I do hope that you take up the challenge of getting us off of our dependence on coal and oil and of generating all of our electricity from clean, sustainable sources within 10 years.

And, please, now that the election is over, do not hesitate to talk about global warming or Climaticide, as I prefer to call it. Your are not only our Commander-in-Chief, you are also our Educator-in-Chief, and people urgently need to hear from you on this subject. The bully pulpit of the presidency is a powerful tool for clearing up misconceptions and fighting back against the lies and propaganda that have been propagated at a cost of tens of millions of dollars by the denialists/delayers of the oil/coal/gas/utility/auto manufacturing lobbies.

This is the biggest challenge of our times, but we can stop Climaticide by working together under strong leadership. Yes, we can!

Click here to sign the We Campaign’s letter to President-elect Obama.

Posted by: JohnnyRook | November 5, 2008

Greenland and Antarctic Glacier Retreat Linked

In an earlier post, When Ice Shelves Collapse: A Brief Tutorial, I provided a brief overview of the reasons that ice shelves collapse by taking a close look at the collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf. In the tutorial we examined how ice sheets break up and what effect the breakup of ice sheets has on the movement of ice sheets behind them.

More recently over at Real Climate Mauri Pelto has written a fine piece, What links the retreat of Jakobshavn Isbrae, Wilkins Ice Shelf and the Petermann Glacier? dealing with a similar topic in an attempt to establish a link between the retreat of glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica. I will excerpt a bit of it here, but recommend a full reading of Pelto’s piece which is clearly written and intelligible to the layman.

Pelto explains that observations of glaciers in Greenland and the Antarctic have changed our perception of how fast glaciers can move.

Changes occurring in marine terminating outlet glaciers of the Greenland Ice Sheet and ice shelves fringing the Antarctic Peninsula have altered our sense of the possible rate of response of large ice sheet-ice shelf systems. There is a shared mechanism at work that has emerged from the detailed observations of a number of researchers, that is the key to the onset and progression of the ice retreat. This mechanism is shared despite the vastly different nature of the environments of Jakobshavns Isbrae, Wilkins Ice Shelf and the Petermann Glacier.

He goes on to discuss two mechanisms that might account for the breakup of ice sheets or outlet glaciers leading to a speedup of the upstream ice sheet. To better understand what we are discussing lets consider the images below:

Petermann Glacier breakup

In the three images we can observe the breakup of a large piece of the ice shelf flowing out of the Petermann glacier. One can clearly see the ice shelf arm which is floating in the ocean and which is connected to the glacier proper behind, which is anchored to the land. Over a relatively short time a large part of the ice sheet breaks up as can be seen in the photos. The result of this breakup, as it turns out is, in most instances, to cause the ice sheet behind the ice shelf to move more rapidly. This has a consequence for sea-level rise, because the ice sheet is on land whereas the ice shelf, as you will remember was floating although anchored in places to the sea bed.

moulin

It had generally been assumed for a number of years now that the reason that the movement of ice sheets increased was due to warming at the glaciers surface leading to the creation of meltwater which worked its way into the glacier itself, creating what are know as moulins, holes in the glacier that eventually allow the meltwater to reach the glacier’s base thus ” greasing it” and speeding up its movement. This is known as the Zwally effect What Pelto explains is that although the Zwally effect is real, it is not capable of explaining large increases in ice sheet movement that may continue for many years.

Photo above right: Meltwater stream flowing into a large moulin in the ablation zone (area below the equilibrium line) of the Greenland ice sheet. (Image courtesy Roger J. Braithwaite, The University of Manchester, UK via GISS)

So, if the Zwally effect cannot account for the sudden, rapid movement of ice sheets (up to 20 kilometers per year), what can.

Pelto explains:

The second mechanism is a dynamic thinning of the terminus zone of the marine terminating outlet glacier reducing the effective bed pressure, allowing acceleration – the Jakobshavn effect. The reduced resistive force at the calving front due to the thinner ice, now experiencing greater flotation, is then propagated “up glacier” (Hughes, 1986; Thomas, 2003 and 2004). If the Jakobshavn effect is the key the velocity increase will propagate up-glacier, there will be no seasonal cycle, and thinning and acceleration would be greatest near the terminus.

In other words, the glacier thins where the ice shelf ends, at the place where it calves icebergs into the sea. As the ice shelf thins it becomes a less effective cork for the ice sheet behind it. If it breaks up dramatically as happened with the Wilkins ice sheet in Antarctica this austral winter (!) it may produce rapid movement in the glacier or ice sheet behind it because the remaining ice shelf is simply not strong enough to hold the upstream glacier or ice sheet back.

Peterman glacier triptych 2

Peterman glacier triptych 3

Peterman glacier triptych

A series of Landsat images [of the Petermann glacier] from 2002, 2006 and 2007 illustrate the shift in the terminus and in the position of key rifts A, B and C. The distance back from the terminus has diminished for A and B from 2002 to 2007. In 2006 to 2007 the shift in the position of C is also evident.

But why does the ice shelf thin at its terminus? Pelto goes on:

The reasons for Ice Shelf collapse continue to be identified, but one key thread emerges. The decade prior to collapse the Larsen-B Ice Shelf had thinned primarily by melting of the ice shelf bottom (by the ocean) by 18 m (Shepard and others, 2003). Thinning preconditions the ice shelf for failure by weakening its connection to pinning points at the grounding line as the shelf becomes more buoyant. Glasser and Scambos (2008) observed that prior to collapse that rifts and crevasses parallel to the ice front crosscut the meltwater channels and ponds, hence, post dated them. The number and length of the rifts increased markedly in the year before collapse. There was no evidence of relict rifts, illustrating that these rifts are a feature of the last 20 years. After ice shelf collapse the ice front receded to the pre-existing rifts, and the pre-existing rifts defined the area of collapse. In this case the thinning and resultant structural weaknesses preconditioned the ice to rapid breakup, which proceeded to lose only the preconditioned portion of the ice shelf.

and concludes:

It appears then that glacier or ice shelf thinning is the key preconditioning factor for collapse, retreat and acceleration, whether you are in Antarctica of Greenland. The mechanisms for ice shelf thinning include basal melting (from warming ocean waters), surface melting, reduction in glacier inflow and rift development. These are interrelated mechanisms that precondition the ice shelves to collapse. On marine terminating outlet glaciers the mechanisms to trigger thinning is surface ablation causing thinning, and potentially basal melting, though not yet observed (though see this recent paper by Holland et al, 2008). Once the process begins thinner less buttressed ice enables acceleration and more calving and more retreat. There is a potential difference between the two, in glacier such as most marine terminating outlet glaciers, where the glacier flow is rapid, acceleration results from retreat and thinning. In the case of ice shelves a glacier buttressed by them will accelerate after the loss, but the slow moving ice shelf may suffer from reduced inflow. Attention will continue to be focused on these rapid responders to climate change;marine terminating glaciers in Greenland and ice shelves in Antarctica. We can look forward to more details from the extensive 2008 summer field season in Greenland and the upcoming view of the Wilkins this fall.

There is much more detail in Pelto’s fascinating Real Climate post. If you’re interested in such things I highly recommend it.

Obama post card

Yes, let’s all get to work. We’ve not a moment to lose.

No on Prop 10

Congratulations to the No on 10 folks and all Californians for their defeat of this wasteful, greedy, counterproductive proposition.

[This is an update of a story that I posted late last night]

I’ll update this in the morning when I’m less bleary-eyed, but the essence of the story is that T. Boone Pickens’s Proposition 10 went down to a crushing defeat yesterday. Despite being outspent by nearly 23 million dollars, with Pickens own firm, Clean Energy Fuels Corp., contributing 19 million of that) to $170,000 dollars, opponents of the boondoggle bill to fleece California taxpayers of 10 billion dollars to subsidize natural gas vehicles succeeded in getting the word out about what a bad idea this was. With 50% of the vote counted, Proposition 10 is going down to a crushing defeat losing in every California county but one and by a two-to-one margin statewide. (A quick check of the results this morning with over 96% of ballots counted showed a vote of nearly 60%-40% against.)

In California, at least, folks seem to have caught on to Pickens’s flim-flam.

According to MarketWatch.com:

“California voters didn’t fall for a Texas oil tycoon’s $10 billion money grab, no matter how much he spent camouflaging it as green,” stated Richard Holober, spokesman for the No on Prop 10 campaign, and Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California. “Proposition 10 is the ultimate example of a wealthy special interest abusing the ballot initiative process to enrich itself. We built a coalition of major environmental, consumer, business, labor, taxpayer and civic organizations that triumphed over Prop 10’s $23 million war chest. The defeat of Prop 10 sends a signal that California’s ballot initiative process is not for sale to the highest bidder.”

The defeat of Proposition 10 is the first test of voter support for the self-styled “Pickens Plan.” News reports state that Mr. Pickens has spent $58 million on national television ads since July promoting his plan. One key component of his plan is the conversion of vehicles to run on natural gas. Pickens Plan ads do not spell out who pays for this conversion, and who benefits from it.

“Proposition 10 pulled back the veil from the Pickens Plan, and revealed that taxpayers would be hit hard with the cost of funding giveaways designed to put money in Mr. Pickens’ pockets. The Pickens’ Plan flunked the smell test with California voters,” Holober stated.

For more information on the Pickens Plan and why it is a scam check out the following posts:

Joe Romm Pickens’ natural gas plan makes no sense and will never happen

Joe Romm Memo to T. Boone Pickens: Your energy plan is half-brilliant, half-dumb

A. Siegel Pickens buying CA vote?

A Siegel T Boone Pickens continues hard sell with blogger call

A Siegel The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: T. Boone Pickens

JohnnyRook T. Boone Pickens Loves You and Wants to Use Your Debit Card

Posted by: JohnnyRook | November 5, 2008

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama

Election Day, November 4, 2008

Posted by: JohnnyRook | November 4, 2008

“The Coalition of Everyone Against Proposition 10”

I just received an email from Anthony Rubenstein, one of the leading opponents of California’s Proposition 10, the T. Boone Pickens natural gas scam that if passed will make Pickens a bundle and cost California taxpayers 10 billions dollars. For your information, Tony is:

Chairman and founder of Californians for Clean Energy, the force behind the 2006 Proposition 87, the largest Clean Energy referendum in U.S. history. The intent of Prop 87 was to reduce the use of petroleum fuels in California by creating market incentives to foster the use of clean alternative replacement fuels, renewables, and energy efficiency technologies. Despite a record-breaking $110 million opposition campaign by the petroleum industry, Prop 87 was narrowly defeated, with support from 45% of California voters.)

In his email, Tony included his latest newsletter highlighting Pickens’s lies, manipulation and machinations in favor of Proposition 10. The Proposition 10 boondoggle is a topic that I have blogged on before. I am, with Tony’s permission, reprinting his full newsletter below. Read it, and, if you live in California, go out and vote no against Proposition 10.

Anthony Rubenstein’s Newsletter
Last Day Until Prop 10 Goes Down

November 3, 2008
Only 1 Day Left
Volume 3 Edition 8
Dear Subscriber Please help me to stop Proposition 10. T. Boone Pickens is outspending those of us opposed to Proposition 10 by 200 to 1. We need your help to spread the word to vote NO on 10 – Please forward this email to everyone in your database.

For your convenience I’ve attached the lists of supporters from both Yes on 10 and No on 10 websites (as of October 25) so you can see for yourself – it really is “Everyone Against Prop 10”. The resolution on the images is low for email, so please click here to see higher resolution versions of the lists for yourself.

Over the weekend, T. Boone Pickens’ Yes on 10 Campaign sent mass email spam to California voters claiming Senator Obama supports Prop 10. Don’t be fooled, Senator Obama DOES NOT support Prop 10. This is just one more deception by T. Boone Pickens’ $10 million Yes on 10 Campaign.

It was reported last week that T. Boone’s operatives have been running a dedicated “Swift Boat” style smear campaign against me. Because they have never been able to counter even a single fact that I’ve raised in objection to Prop 10, they have resorted to lies and smears against me personally instead. Please don’t let them get away with this, tell everyone you know to VOTE NO ON 10.

It was also revealed last week that a young girl who was unknowingly used in Prop 10’s deceptive TV ad campaign publicly came out against T. Boone’s Prop 10.

Even Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger came out against Proposition 10 last week.

And finally, the Sacramento Bee joined every other newspaper in the state in opposing Prop 10, by labeling it “the worst of the worst”.
Wow… quite a week’s work to cap-off the Pickens Plan for California. So let me just say this: If you were ever going to vote NO on anything, vote NO on 10. Teach T. Boone Pickens a lesson in California politics that he’ll never forget: Forward this email to everyone you know and ask them to forward it on as well. Tell everybody you know that you’re part of the “Coalition of Everyone Against Prop 10”. Tomorrow vote NO on 10.

See for yourself: Click here to see who is for and against Prop 10.

No on 10
Yes on 10

Forward this email to everyone you know and ask them to forward it on as well. Tell everybody you know that you’re part of the “Coalition of Everyone Against Prop 10.”

T. Boone Pickens’ Yes on Prop 10 campaign is really only supported by those who will gain financially if the measure passes. Even the John Dunlap and Alan Henderson, listed as “supporters” by Yes on 10 are being paid for their endorsement.

Remember, Prop 10 is a $10 billion “reprehensible scam.
Then there’s this to to look forward to…

Politico reported yesterday: “Marty Wilson, the campaign manager of the Pickens-backed initiative in California, said he’s already planning a second attempt, should this one fail.

“We’ve already seen areas where we could improve &hellip and build a bigger coalition,” he said. “We’re certainly open to getting out there with a similar measure in 2010.”

www.anthonyrubenstein.com

Posted by: JohnnyRook | November 3, 2008

Offered Without Comment

Photobucket

Posted by: JohnnyRook | November 3, 2008

NOAA’s 2008 Arctic Report Card: Less Ice, More Shrubs

By now, anyone who has been paying attention knows that Arctic sea ice is melting at an increasingly rapid rate opening up the possibility that the Arctic will be free of sea ice in summer by sometime in the next decade. But sea ice forms only one part of the Arctic equation. For a comprehensive view of the status of the Arctic one needs to look at a number of factors, which is just the Arctic Report Card does.

On October 6, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Climate Program Office issued it’s annual Arctic Report Card, which it describes as establishing “a baseline of conditions in that region in the 21st century and provides a way of monitoring the often quickly changing conditions. It is updated annually in October and tracks the Arctic atmosphere, sea ice, biology, ocean, land and Greenland.”

On this year’s report card changes in three of the areas (atmosphere, sea ice, and Greenland) are attributed principally to global warming while changes in three others are considered to be the result of “mixed signals.” Last year only atmosphere and sea ice were attributed definitively to global warming.

You can read the full report card here. From this page is it also possible to download a PDF of the report in which the charts and graphs, because they are larger, are easier to read.

Below I have provided excerpts from each section just to give you a taste of the sort of information that the Arctic Report Card contains. If you are interested in learning more I would recommend reading the entire report.

As you read through the excerpts that follow you may find this fine Arctic map useful.

ATMOSPHERE–warming

Autumn temperatures are at a record 5º C above normal, due to the major loss of sea ice in recent years which allows more solar heating of the ocean. Winter and springtime temperatures remain relatively warm over the entire Arctic, in contrast to the 20th century and consistent with an emerging global warming influence.

The year 2007 was the warmest on record for the Arctic, continuing a general, Arctic-wide warming trend that began in the mid-1960s (Fig. A1).

Annual mean SAT anomaly

Figure A1. Arctic-wide annual averaged surface air temperature anomalies (60°–90°N) based on land stations north of 60°N relative to the 1961–90 mean. From the CRUTEM 3v dataset, (available online at http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/. Note this curve does not include ship observations.

SEA ICE–warming

Seasonal versus perennial ice

The Arctic sea ice cover is composed of perennial ice (the ice that survives year-round) and seasonal ice (the ice that melts during the summer). Consistent with the diminishing trends in the extent and thickness of the cover is a significant loss of the older, thicker perennial ice in the Arctic (Fig. S4). Data from the NASA QuikSCAT launched in 1999 (Nghiem et al., 2007) and a buoy-based Drift-Age Model (Rigor and Wallace, 2004) indicate that the amount of perennial ice in the March ice cover has decreased from approximately 5.5 to 3.0 million km2 over the period 1958–2007. While there is considerable interannual variability, an overall downward trend in the amount of perennial ice began in the early 1970s. This trend appears to coincide with a general increase in the Arctic-wide, annually averaged surface air temperature, which also begins around 1970 (see Fig. A1). In recent years, the rate of reduction in the amount of older, thicker perennial ice has been increasing, and now very little ice older than 5 yr remains (Maslanik et al. 2007).

Many authors have recently acknowledged that a relatively younger, thinner ice cover is more susceptible to the effects of atmospheric and oceanic forcing (e.g. Gascard et al., 2008; Stroeve et al., 2008; Kwok, 2007; Ogi and Wallace, 2007; Maslanik et al., 2007; Serreze et al., 2007; Shimada et al., 2006). In the face of the predictions for continued warming temperatures (Christensen et al., 2007), the persistence of recent atmospheric (Comiso et al., 2008; Kwok, 2008) and oceanic circulation patterns (Steele et al. 2008; Polyakov et al. 2007), and the amplification of these effects through the ice albedo feedback mechanism (Perovich et al., 2008), it is becoming increasingly likely that the Arctic will change from a perennially ice-covered to an ice-free ocean in the summer.

Perennial Sea Ice Extent

Figure S4. Time series of area of perennial sea ice extent in March of each year estimated by the Drift-Age Model and observed by QuikSCAT satellite scatterometer within the model domain. In each year, the model result was an average over March, and the satellite observation was on the spring equinox (21 Mar). (Adapted from Nghiem et al. 2007)

BIOLOGY–mixed signals

Rangifer (wild reindeer and caribou) herds across the circumpolar north have long been characterized by periods of abundance and periods of scarcity. Recent population estimates indicate we may be entering a period of declining numbers. Populations that have been increasing at a steady rate since the early to mid 1970’s are either showing signs of peaking or beginning to decline. Figure R1 shows the current status of selected Rangifer (the major migratory herds and herds being monitoring as part of the CircumArctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment (CARMA) Network.

Rangifer migratory herds

Figure R1. Current status of the main migratory herds across the circumpolar north.

OCEAN–mixed signals

In general, the Arctic Ocean continued to warm and freshen in 2007 under the influence of unusual atmospheric forcing and continued dramatic sea ice melt. These changes were accompanied by an unprecedented rate of sea level rise.

Marginal Seas

Sea Surface Temperature (SST ) trends over the past 100 yr in the Arctic marginal seas (White, Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, Chukchi, and Beaufort) were analyzed by Steele et al. (2008). They found that many areas cooled up to ~0.5°C decade–1 during 1930–65 as the AO index generally fell (see Fig.A.5), while these areas warmed during 1965–95 as the AO index generally rose. Warming is particularly pronounced since 1995, and especially since 2000 when the AO index exhibited relatively low and fluctuating values. Summer 2007 satellite-derived data indicate that SST anomalies were up to 5°C in ice-free regions (Fig.O2).

Marginal Seas

Figure O2. (top left) Mean satellite-derived summer (Jul–Aug) SST (Reynolds et al. 2002) and anomalies from this mean over 2000–07. Latitudes 70° and 80°N and longitudes 0°/180° and 90°E/270°E are shown. For 2007, extra contours for 3° and 4°C are provided. Also shown is the Sep mean ice edge (blue contour) for each year (from Steele et al. 2008).

GREENLAND–warming

Glacier changes

The terminus of Greenland’s largest glacier, the Jakobshavn’s Isbrae near the town of Ilulissat, retreated 0 to 500 m in 2007 (Fig. G3), continuing a retreat that began summer 2001 with a dramatic 11-km floating ice collapse (Weidick and Bennike 2007). The large ice lagoon called Tissarissoq at the south side of the fjord was flushed of ice by the end of the summer, ice-free probably for the first time since at least the onset of the Little Ice Age (ca. 0.4–0.1 ky BP). It is possible that Tissarissoq was ice-free before that time during the medieval warm period (ca. 1.1–0.5 ky BP).

Jakobshavn Isbrae glacier 2007

Figure G3. Front position of the Ilulissat (Jakobshavn Isbrae) glacier in 2007 and earlier years, based on Weidick and Bennike (2007). The image mosaic is from Jun 2003 Landsat and ASTER images. (click for larger image).

LAND–mixed signals

Vegetation

Evidence of widespread changes in vegetation in northern latitudes comes from trends in terrestrial greenness as detected by the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) derived from the NOAA AVHRR satellites (Myneni et al. 1997; Zhou et al. 2001; Lucht et al. 2002; Jia et al. 2003; Goetz et al. 2005; Bunn et al. 2007). During the 1981–2005 period of observation, about 6% of the circumpolar tundra area experienced an increase in NDVI and about 1% experienced a decrease (Fig.L1; Bunn et al. 2007). The positive trends in NDVI in tundra areas have been strongest in North America. For example, in the tundra region south of 70°N (the region of the Arctic with a consistent AVHRR record from 1982 to 2005) the rate of change in NDVI is +0.58% yr–1 over the North American Arctic compared to +0.34% yr–1 over the Eurasian Arctic (Jia et al. 2007). Forested areas experienced a slight decline over the same period: NDVI declined in 6% of the forested area versus an increase in 4% of the area.

Arctic vegetation extent

Figure L1. Spatial distribution of trends in May to Aug photosynthetic activity across the northern high latitudes from 1981 through 2005. Significant positive trends in photosynthetic activity are shown in green, and negative trends are shown in rust. (From Bunn et al. 2007.)

Vegetation responds relatively quickly to warming temperatures by growing more vigorously and densely. Over a longer time span, changing climate alters vegetation type. Land cover on much of the Alaska North Slope, for example, is transitioning from tundra to shrubs (Wang and Overland 2004). Recent vegetation dynamics observations across the Arctic also indicate that, in general, shrubs have become more abundant and taller. A study in northern Alaska (Tape et al. 2006) showed that both larger and smaller shrub species have increased in size, abundance and extent over the last 50 years. As well as increasing in size and filling in empty patches, the shrubs were colonizing new areas (Figure L2).

Arctic Shrubs

Figure L2. Large shrubs have colonized a river terrace that was virtually free of large shrubs in 1949. The new shrubs are more than 2 m high. In the foreground are poplar trees. Photo from the Chandler River located at 68° 25.14′ N, 161° 15.24′ W: 7/4/1948 and 7/29/2001. (Tape et al. 2006).

I realize that an article like this, posted only one day before the most important presidential election in the last 75 years (actually the subject of this article: Climaticide is the biggest reason that this is the most important presidential election in 75 years) may draw only minimal attention. That is perfectly understandable. But it is also strikes me as perfectly clear that on the day after that election, information such as this need to be in the foreground of everyone’s thoughts. And those thoughts must spur us to action if we are to avoid the Climaticide that threatens us, our children, our grandchildren and untold generations to come with unimaginable, and for the most part, unnecessary, misery and suffering.

Photobucket

Nearly a month ago the National Snow and Ice Data Center announced that although 2008 Arctic sea ice extent did not quite reach the minimums of 2007, sea ice volume had probably set a record.

NSIDC Research Scientist Walt Meier said, “Warm ocean waters helped contribute to ice losses this year, pushing the already thin ice pack over the edge. In fact, preliminary data indicates that 2008 probably represents the lowest volume of Arctic sea ice on record, partly because less multiyear ice is surviving now, and the remaining ice is so thin.”[emphasis–JR]

Envisat ASAR image of the McClure Strait in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, acquired on 31 August 2007. The McClure Strait is the most direct route of the Northwest Passage and has been fully open since early August 2007.

Credits: ESA

Arctic Sea Ice Age

Figure 4. A comparison of ice age in September 2007 (left) and September 2008 (right) shows the increase in thin first-year ice (red) and the decline in thick multi-year ice (orange and yellow). White indicates areas of ice below ~50 percent, for which ice age cannot be determined. AVHRR, SMMR SSM/I, and IABP buoy data.

—From National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy C. Fowler, J. Maslanik, and S. Drobot, University of Colorado at Boulder

Meier’s judgement was confirmed today when the European Space Agency (ESA) issued a press release declaring that in 2008, Arctic sea ice had declined by 19% compared with the previous five winters.

The research, reported in Geophysical Research Letters, showed that last winter the average thickness of sea ice over the whole Arctic fell by 26 cm (10%) compared with the average thickness of the previous five winters, but sea ice in the western Arctic lost around 49 cm of thickness.

Ice volume change

Circumpolar average winter season (October to March) ice thickness anomalies (from Katharine A. Giles, Seymour W. Laxon and Andy L. Ridout, Circumpolar thinning of Arctic sea ice following the 2007 record ice extent minimum, Geophysical Research Letters).

Credits: Giles – Laxon – Ridout

Dr Katharine Giles of UCL, who led the study, said: “This summer’s low ice extent doesn’t seem to have been driven by warm weather, so the question is, was last winter’s thinning behind it?”

“As the Arctic ice pack is constantly moving, conventional methods can only provide sparse and intermittent measurements of ice thickness from which it is difficult to tell whether the changes are local or across the whole Arctic,” Giles said.

“Satellites provide the only means to determine trends and a consistent and wide area basis. Envisat altimeter data have provided the critical third dimension to the satellite images which have already revealed a dramatic decrease in the area of ice covered in the Arctic.”

it will be very interesting to see how low the ice goes in 2009. With volumes dropping so radically and the ice thin because so much of it is new, if temperatures next year (a recent report from NOAA states that fall temperatures in the Arctic are at a record high, 5 degrees Celsius above average ) are closer to those of 2007 than those of 2008, expect to see another big step toward an ice free Arctic summer.

Posted by: JohnnyRook | October 27, 2008

Is T. Boone Pickens Bailing on Wind Power?

I recommend checking out SolveClimate’s excellent piece over at Daily Kos on T. Boone Picken’s recent talk at Chadbourne & Parke’s Green Business Summit II in New York. Here is an excerpt:

To prove his green bona fides and sell his plan to the public, Pickens announced he was building the biggest wind farm in the world in Texas. (I fell for it.) The Pampa Wind Project, as it’s called, plans to erect 2700 wind turbines across tens of thousands of barren acres in the Panhandle to feed 1 million homes 170 miles away. Mesa Power, the company Pickens created to run the project, announced back in May that it had placed a $2 billion order for 667 wind turbines with GE. Terms were not disclosed. Still he earned the very public support of Carl Pope, head of the Sierra Club, and lunch with Al Gore (burger and fries).

So it was pretty surprising when the neighbor to my right, a guy who specializes in the sale of distressed assets — let’s call him Tim McGillicuddy — started talking about Pickens selling off his wind turbines. We had spent a good part of the morning listening to a panel deliver bad news about how the credit crunch and plummeting oil prices are slamming renewable energy projects. Maybe Pickens had his own bad news to share about Pampa?

Read the entire piece here.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories