Category: Climate science

Sharpening Antarctica’s image

I like Google Earth. I like looking down on my neighbours to see what’s going on behind their shelter belts, and because I like monitoring what’s going on at the poles, I have the National Snow & Ice Data Centre’s overlay switched on most of the time. It shows current sea ice extent, snow cover and so on. But when I swoop over Antarctica, the underlying images provided by Google are rather disappointing – low resolution and distorted. I was therefore very pleased to discover that a collaboration between NASA, the US Geological Survey, the National Science Foundation and the British Antarctic Survey has created a new map of the continent based on Landsat imagery. From NASA’s press release:

The map is a realistic, nearly cloudless satellite view of the continent at a resolution 10 times greater than ever before with images captured by the NASA-built Landsat 7 satellite. With the unprecedented ability to see features half the size of a basketball court, the mosaic offers the most geographically accurate, true-color, high-resolution views of Antarctica possible.

You can play with the map at the USGS site, but the interface is rather clunky. However, there are hints that the new map will be available for Google Earth before long. Can’t wait….

It’s not just the cows

It’s been a quiet few days chez Hot Topic, as the sun’s been shining (until today), the farm’s been calling and friends have been dining, but I can’t pass over this piece of news. A new web site called CARMA – Carbon Monitoring for Action – was launched last week [Science Daily ]. It pulls together information on carbon emissions from the 50,000 power plants around the world and the 20,000 companies that run them, and ranks countries, regions and cities on their emissions. So what happens when you have a look at New Zealand?

As you might expect, Huntly dwarfs the competition, credited with producing 7.6 million tons of CO2 per year, but if you click on the emissions intensity tab (far right) – the amount of CO2 per unit of power generated – a couple of Fonterra factories top the charts. Step forward Waitoa and Edendale – NZ’s most intense/least efficient emitters of CO2. Can’t be good for their performance on Fonterra’s internal “carbon account“. CARMA is a treasure trove of information, well worth a long look.

IPCC’s Fourth Report now complete: Synthesis in Valencia

After six years and a lot of sweat, the IPPC has completed its fourth report. The Synthesis Report [PDF], released today in Valencia, pulls together the key findings of the three working groups, and provides a 23 page overview of the problem and its potential solutions. Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, welcomed the report:

“Today the world’s scientists have spoken clearly and with one voice,” he said. “In Bali I expect the world’s policymakers to do the same.”

The most succinct summary of the contents comes from Joseph Romm at Climate Progress: “Debate over, further delay fatal, action not costly.” Couldn’t have put it better myself.

I don’t like Mondays

Lady Young, head of the UK’s Environment Agency, thinks that coping with climate change demands wartime urgency, as the Telegraph [UK] reports:

“This is World War Three – this is the biggest challenge to face the globe for many, many years. We need the sorts of concerted, fast, integrated and above all huge efforts that went into many actions in times of war. We’re dealing with this as if it is peacetime, but the time for peace on climate change is gone – we need to be seeing this as a crisis and emergency,” she said.

Meanwhile, the Observer covers a new report from a peace group:

This stark warning will be outlined by the peace group International Alert in a report, A Climate of Conflict, this week. Much of Africa, Asia and South America will suffer outbreaks of war and social disruption as climate change erodes land, raises seas, melts glaciers and increases storms, it concludes. Even Europe is at risk.

Greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, and the International Energy Agency sees “inexorable”growth in energy demand over the next 30 years with a risk of more coal being burned. It does suggests a 450ppm CO2 limit might be achievable, but:

“Exceptionally quick and vigourous policy action by all countries, and unprecedented technological advances, entailing substantial costs, would be needed to make this case a reality.”

Not much hope of that. And the China Post says EU officials reckon that China will reject binding limits on emissions in any post-Kyoto deal. The words “hell” and “handbasket” spring to mind…On the upside? Bryan Appleyard in the Sunday Times [UK] looks at options for “fixing” climate through technology (well worth a read), scientists at Harvard and Penn State reckon they’ve found a way to speed up a natural weathering process to neutralise ocean acidity and remove carbon from the atmosphere, and Technology Review reports on a Dutch biofuel company working with a California-based venture capital outfit to develop catalysts that can turn organic matter such as waste wood into biocrude – chemicals that can be processed to make biofuels. If you’ve got money to invest, the Observer [UK] reckons that one of a new breed of green investment funds might be a good place to put it.

Going up

How much will sea level rise over this century? “Don’t know” is a good answer. “Not much” is looking like a bad answer that’s getting worse by the month. Last week a group of Northland Conservation Corps workers rode on a hikoi along Ninety Mile Beach to draw attention to the issue:

Tutor Mike Wikitera and his team erected five signs marking predicted sea level rises by 2030. The group, who rode horses to avoid adding to greenhouse gas emissions, erected the first sign at Shipwrecks Bay and placed the last one at Waipapakauri beach on October 30.

But what are the “likely levels” by 2030? The IPCC’s latest report projects between 18cm and 59cm by the end of the century, but only by excluding a very big unknown – how much ice will melt in Greenland and Antarctica. As more evidence of dramatic melt in Greenland arrives, it’s getting increasingly difficult to rule out multi metre rises. The latest number comes from Professor David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey, quoted in the Daily Telegraph [UK]:

Prof Vaughan says the main message is not to panic – the effects of melting will be gradual, in the order of three metres per century if the evidence of the past 20,000 years is anything to go by.

Three metres per century? That’s towards the top end of current speculation. 30cm every ten years, ten times the current rate, compares with 17cm over the last century. Prof Vaughan’s right about panic. It’s not a good option, but extreme concern is certainly justified. For some dramatic pictures of what might happen, check out this Greenpeace report on climate change impacts on Spain, timed to coincide with the IPCC meeting in Valencia to ratify the AR4 synthesis report. To see what 3m might mean for NZ, go here and zoom in on your favourite bit of beachfront property. NIWA’s current advice to local government is to allow for 50cm by 2100. That’s in need of considerable upward revision.

Meanwhile, the impact of sea level rise is not just high tides and wet feet. Salt water intrusion into fresh water coastal aquifers can be bad news for agriculture and drinking water – and the problem may be worse than previously thought, according a new study reported by Science Daily. The BBC covers one of the areas at most risk – Bangladesh – in a new series, documenting a boat journey through the country.