Glaciers meltBecause of melting ice due to warming of the earth’s surface:
Open water now stretches all the way round the Arctic, making it possible for the first time in human history to circumnavigate the North Pole… melting ice last week opened up both the fabled North-west and North-east passages, in the most important geographical landmark to date to signal the unexpectedly rapid progress of global warming.
It is the simultaneous opening – for the first time in at least 125,000 years – of the North-west passage around Canada and the North-east passage around Russia… Until recently both had been blocked by ice since the beginning of the last Ice Age.
What does this portend for the future, in the absence of aggressive action to halt the global warming trend? Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor of The Independent,
reported the following last week, August 31st:
Professor Mark Serreze, a sea ice specialist at the official US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), hailed the publication of the images as "a historic event", and said that it provided further evidence that the Arctic icecap may now have entered a "death spiral". Some scientists predict that it could vanish altogether in summer within five years…
Early last week the NSDIC warned that, over the next few weeks, the total extent of sea ice in the Arctic may shrink to below the record low reached last year – itself a massive 200,000 square miles less than the previous worst year, 2005…
Scientists say that… if the ice continues to melt at present rates, (it will be) possible to sail right across the North Pole. They have long regarded the disappearance of the icecap as inevitable as global warming takes hold, though until recently it was not expected until around 2070. Many scientists now predict that the Arctic Ocean will be ice-free in summer by 2030 – and a landmark study… concluded that there will be no ice as early as 2013. The tipping point, experts believe, was the record loss of ice last year, reaching a level not expected to occur until 2050.
Oceans rise Prior to the mid-19th Century, sea level had been
almost constant over three thousand years. We then saw a marked acceleration in rising sea levels, concomitant with the onset of the industrial age and warming of the earth’s atmosphere, as
sea levels rose about 17 cm. during the 20th Century. The 21st Century is
expected to be much worse:
Higher temperatures are expected to further raise sea level by expanding ocean water, melting mountain glaciers and small ice caps, and causing portions of Greenland and the Antarctic
ice sheets to melt. The IPCC estimates that the global average sea level will rise between 0.6 and 2 feet (0.18 to 0.59 meters) in the next century (IPCC, 2007).
The faster than expected melting of arctic ice portends even faster sea level rises than previously predicted.
Islands flood and inhabitants leaveRising sea levels pose grave threats to most coastal areas of the world,
including those in the United States. But effects on small islands are already being seen.
In 1998 the first
uninhabited islands, in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati,
disappeared because of rising sea levels. Then, in December 2006, the first
inhabited island, Lohachara Island,
disappeared beneath the sea. Several nearby islands have been affected as well, with tragic human consequences:
Refugees from the vanished Lohachara Island and the disappearing Ghoramara Island have fled to Sagar, but this island has already lost 7,500 acres of land to the sea. In all, a dozen islands, home to 70,000 people, are in danger of being submerged by the rising seas.
In addition, several other islands face catastrophic consequences in the immediate or foreseeable future if global warming isn’t soon halted or at least slowed considerably. For that reason, many small island nations are currently making evacuation plans and at the same time collectively making a
resolution plea to the United Nations Security Council to address the problem.
Here is
a petition to the U.N. to address these concerns. Included with the petition is an e-mail you can send your friends about this situation, which reads in part:
Imagine the sea rising around you as your country literally disappears beneath your feet, where the food you grow and the water you drink is being destroyed by salt, and your last chance is to seek refuge in other lands where climate refugees have no official status. This is not a dream, it's the fearful reality for millions of people who live on islands around the world, from the Maldives to Papua New Guinea.
That is why these small islands are taking the unprecedented step of putting an urgent resolution before the United Nations ahead of next week's global climate talks, calling upon the Security Council itself to address climate change as a pressing threat to international peace and security.
This is a creative move born of desperation, a challenge to global powers to end their complacency and tackle this lethal crisis with the urgency of wars. But the island states' campaign is meeting fierce opposition from the world’s biggest polluters, so they need our help. Sign the petition now to raise a worldwide chorus of support for this call – it will be presented by the islands' ambassadors to reinforce their resolution at the UN next week:
McCain and Palin pander to oil companies on the issue of global warmingAlaskan Governor Sarah Palin has made a big deal over her claim of “standing up” to big oil companies. But when it comes to issues that really matter to big oil,
Daniel Weiss notes:
Palin rejects clean renewable energy that is an alternative to oil. Earlier this month,
she claimed that “alternative-energy solutions are far from imminent and would require more than 10 years to develop.”
Like many other oil champions, Palin is skeptical of global warming. During her gubernatorial campaign, she said she
was unconvinced about how much human emissions contribute to current global warming trends. Palin also
opposes listing our polar bears as a
threatened species because it could require action on climate change.
John McCain uses impressive rhetoric to convince independents, moderates and progressives that he takes global warming seriously.
Yet the non-partisan League of Conservation Voters (LCV) gives McCain a
24% lifetime score for his global warming policies, and a 0% score for 2007. McCain
expresses opposition to the funding of clean energy alternatives to oil. He supports the appointment of
“strict constructionist” judges to the Supreme Court, who are deeply antagonistic to the regulation of greenhouse gases. He has never expressed plans to improve energy efficiency. And his plans for reducing global warming rely almost entirely on the hope of
voluntary compliance by industry.
Differences between McCain and Obama on global warmingUnlike John McCain, Barack Obama not only
talks about the need to do something about global warming, but he actually develops plans to do something constructive about it.
Obama has a
comprehensive plan that involves improving energy efficiency and developing sources of clean, renewable energy. The League of Conservation Voters gives him a
96% environmental voting record.
With regard to plans to cap greenhouse gases, Mark Hertsgaard explains some of the problems with McCain’s plan. Noting that
Obama’s plan for an 80% cut on greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, using a “cap-and-trade” system that “sells corporations permits to emit greenhouse gases and then invests the revenue in green energy development and rebates to Americans hit with higher energy prices”, is consistent with what scientists say is necessary, Hertsgaard
notes that McCain:
supports a 60 percent emissions cut by 2050. But it is doubtful that McCain's approach would actually deliver such large cuts, since his cap-and-trade system would give most permits away free, a provision environmentalists attack as a corporate giveaway.
In other words, aside from advocating a much smaller cut in emissions than Obama, McCain seems to hold the opinion that purely
voluntary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by industry will work.
John McCain’s confusion, flip flopping, and misleading statements about his positions on global warming are part and parcel of a general pattern with the man. Just as he
doesn’t know much about the economy and
can’t remember that Iran doesn’t harbor al Qaeda or
how many houses he owns, John McCain doesn’t appear to know what a mandate is.
Joseph Romm explains:
In a recent Republican debate, he (McCain) denied that a cap and trade system is a mandate, even though it would arguably be the most far-reaching government mandate ever legislated. Moreover, like most conservatives, he doesn't understand or accept the critical role government must play to make that system succeed.