Area Of Arctic Sea Ice Lost During 2012 Melt Season Larger Than Area Of The United States

[hatrack]

DOHA, Qatar (AP) — An area of Arctic sea ice bigger than the United States melted this year, according the U.N. weather agency, which said the dramatic decline illustrates that climate change is happening "before our eyes."

In a report released at U.N. climate talks in the Qatari capital of Doha, the World Meteorological Organization said the Arctic ice melt was one of a myriad of extreme and record-breaking weather events to hit the planet in 2012. Droughts devastated nearly two-thirds of the United States as well western Russia and southern Europe. Floods swamped west Africa and heat waves left much of the Northern Hemisphere sweltering.

But it was the ice melt that seemed to dominate the annual climate report, with the U.N. concluding ice cover had reached "a new record low" in the area around the North Pole and that the loss from March to September was a staggering 11.83 million square kilometers (4.57 million square miles) — an area bigger than the United States.

"The alarming rate of its melt this year highlighted the far-reaching changes taking place on Earth's oceans and biosphere," WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said. "Climate change is taking place before our eyes and will continue to do so as a result of the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which have risen constantly and again reached new records."

EDIT

http://news.yahoo.com/arctic-sea-ice-larger-us-melted-202753238.html;_ylt=Ag0X.6oAjG.3ddStsgE_ITMPLBIF;_ylu=X3oDMTNyZ3J1czRlBG1pdANNZWdhdHJvbiBTY2llbmNlU0YEcGtnAzI1MDIyNDZiLTNmNTMtMzU2My04NGFhLTg1N2Mx

[AgingAmerican]

1. Zero reaction from Obama

His silence on climate change since 2009 has me worried and stunned. Apparently bickering about tax cuts is more important than the fate of humanity.

[joshcryer]

2. Obama is about to reside over the biggest oil boom the US has ever seen.

He will not, and the Democrats will not, address climate change in any meaningful way.

[AgingAmerican]

3. He seems to have adopted "drill, baby, drill"

without using the slogan. Sigh.

[joshcryer]

4. Yep. There's no political solution here.

Politically, the Democrats would be completely fucked if they said, "Oh, we're not going to drill."

Obama could come out with a massive Manhattan project ($100 billion) in sustainable (non-fossil fuel) energy investment programs. But it won't happen. And if he did that, which he won't, no one would vote for it.

[pscot]

5. It's amazing what you find on the intertoobs

[AgingAmerican]

6. Talking about it would be a nice start

A major speech outlining what we face would be nicer. He has been silent on the issue since 2009. If he regularly addressed the issue with speeches, people would start to take it seriously. If people began taking it more seriously, he would be on a lot firmer ground for implementing a realistic energy policy.

The republicans would jump up and down and say bad stuff, but who cares? They do that anyway.

[joshcryer]

8. He simply won't do that.

He is beholden to the Democratic Party. As the Party does not want to lose power, it will not advocate, or imply, the reduction of fossil fuel production. We're on our way to being an oil producer that rivals Saudi Arabia. There's no way the Democrats are in any way going to come out against them in any meaningful manner.

[NoOneMan]

7. Shatters the whole illusion, eh?

Sure, Im not going to say there's no difference. But in terms of what is relevant to our actual survival, the proof is in the pudding. If you are looking for answers and a path forward, you will not find them in politics at this time.