Green

Climate change in action in Greenland

Image...
You can't see climate change in action, much to the disappointment of photographers and magazine art directors. Warming is a function of time, and we see it only as time passes. Years go by, we add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, temperatures rise, glaciers retreat and deserts expand. One of the essential facts about climate science is that unlike, say, weather forecasting, the farther ahead we look into the future, the more confident we can be of our predictions. So we know that burning enough fossil fuel to raise the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to 550 parts per million twice preindustrial levels will virtually guarantee a temperature increase of at least 3 F, with all the consequences that will carry. By contrast, we can't look at a hurricane, or at an iceberg melting, and say, "Yes, this is global warming, and we did this." Climate change is change, and change happens over time.

In some places of the world, that change is happening more quickly than in others, so quickly that our "fast-thinking human mind," as the University of Copenhagen geologist Minik Rosing says, can almost catch it. One of those places is the coastal town of Ilulissat, the last stop on our climate tour of Greenland. It's home to the Ilulissat ice fjord, a basin-shaped wound in the rocky coast, through which the massive Sermeq Kujalleq glacier churns toward the sea. As the glacier moves at the hardly glacial speed of over 100 ft. a day the ice melts and cracks into cathedrals of blue and white that bob in the harbor beyond the isfledsbanken, or iceberg bank. Sermeq Kujalleq, which is fed by the 1.8 million cubic miles of solid ice that cover central Greenland, is the most productive glacier on the island, calving icebergs with dramatic regularity. The iceberg that sank the Titanic may well have come from Sermeq, and looking upon Ilulissat's harbor, choked with sheer cliffs of ice that dwarf even the stately cruise liners, I can believe it.

We take a boat out for a tour amid the ice. In the Arctic summer Ilulissat is cool but not cold, maybe 65 F, but as we near the ice fjord, the temperature drops, as if cold is emanating from the icebergs themselves. As we leave the port, at first we encounter a slurry of ice in the water, which is sapphire blue because of the cold. But soon we near the giants, and they are easily over 100 ft. tall and that's just above the water. (More than 80% of an iceberg's mass is beneath the surface, and the water in Ilulissat's port is more than a mile deep.) We can't get too close to the big icebergs as they melt all the time in the salty sea, without warning, they can crack and cave in, loosing waves big enough to topple or even crush small boats. But even from a distance, they are breathtaking: natural cathedrals of white, lined by unmappable crevices, leaking pure glacial meltwater that pours into the sea as if from a fountain. It's easy to see why UNESCO made Ilulissat a World Heritage site and why tourist numbers have been growing steadily.

But we're not here as tourists. After the boat docks, our group boards a helicopter piloted by a sprite of a Greenlandic woman for a tour of the fjord and glacier, which is retreating fast. Before we leave, we are shown a map of the glacier. As pressure from the central ice cap builds up behind the glacier, it pushes its way to the sea through the ice fjord. The glacier ends where melting causes icebergs to calve off, and we see that each year the glacier has retreated farther and farther away from the sea. Sermeq Kujalleq is shrinking so fast (on a geological scale) that we can almost see it.

This is global warming as close as we can get to it in action. There's no doubt here, no room for skeptics: temperatures have warmed in Greenland, and as they have warmed, the ice has melted. It is as simple as that.
  • added August 10, 2008
  • flag
 

44 responses // Climate change in action in Greenland

  •  

    Seems simple enough a concept, and it is. One made very simple for the masses to understand by Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth, which earned him the scorn of those in the oil and coal industry and their shills who up to that point had literally banked on the "scientific" explanations going over the heads of Americans who in many cases innocently and oblivious to the dangers continued to support their industries to the tune of BILLIONS in profits at the expense of our health and environmental safety. And it is still going on even in the face of the most urgent crisis we have ever faced as a civilization. And yet, people would call that last sentence "shrill" even seeing the effects of what we have caused and the more important aspect of all of this, the speed at which these changes are taking place.

    So again, for those who clearly cannot accept personal responsibility so would rather think it is OK for islands of people to be sunk because "they" didn't do it... it is happening whether you believe you are part of it or not. And you will not be morally absolved for allowing it to happen regardless of the cause.

    There is not one scientist I have read on this crisis who has ever denied that natural variations in temperature take place around the globe. It has been happening for eons, and even in An Inconvenient Truth this was not dismissed. However, the point that is getting lost in lieu of mindless propaganda being spewed on the Internet and in the media now is that NOW the changes are becoming more intense and are escalating far faster than scientists predicted... Indeed, many even now admit the models used by the IPCC, NASA, and other scientific agencies may have been too soft on the true effects we are now experiencing due in great part to the burning of fossil fuels which is also causing ice to melt faster in places such as Siberia with larger methane emissions also now occurring.

    Greenland is one example of the effects of the greenhouse effect. The Arctic is another. The Himalayas are another. The glaciers of Peru and South America are another. The glaciers of Africa are another... even the glaciers in our own Washington state are another. ALL melting NOW in sync faster than predicted... That my friend is NOT just natural variability no matter how you slice it. It is climate change being excelerated by human behavior and the overload of the climate system.

    It is then time to move on from these flatearthers with personal agendas who want to hold up action by keeping people arguing over whether they are responsible in any way or not simply to protect their own egos and profit sheets. Climate change is upon us, and regardless of what you believe the effects of it are REAL, and are affecting and will affect REAL LIVES. The fact that people can actually argue that they really don't care what happens to this planet or our and other species simply because they are not responsible for it is to me the height of willful immoral ignorance.

    So again, see it with your own eyes, arm yourselves with knowledge, and realize that at this point in history if you would rather sit and continue with your petty arguments and vendettas while the future of this planet and its inhabitants is at stake just to protect what you have, you are simply part of the problem, and I might add the minority.

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  

    We must come together and do something, we can do something, but we must do it now.

    recommended by JanforGore
    Vierotchka
  •  

    Yes, and the misinformation that to do something would cost us more than it would cost for us to do nothing is criminal. We can have renewable energy in 10 years that is competitive in pricing and is cleaner and safer for our planet as a whole. That would reduce global warming/climate change pollution to a level we could hopefully handle. The effects this planet are experiencing now are due to GHGs that have been in our atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. To continue to spew fossil fuels in the air at the rate of millions of tons a day knowing that is simply immoral and irresponsible. 350 is the magic number and we are now past that... Going anywhere near 440 or above will surely make arguing over this look as petty as it is.

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  

    The alarm has sounded. I wonder how many people are going to wake up?

    recommended by Vierotchka
    cibalin
  •  

    More are but we must make people understand that this is about more than petty political bickering that is nothing but a distraction from the big picture.

    And just an observation... only a few seconds ago the voting on this was 80% and 20% and was number 25. Only a few seconds after that it was 67% and 33% and is nowhere to be seen. Don't tell me that is the work of a couple of "sockpuppets." And again, whoever is removing my tags, please stop it. Thank you.

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  

    I was just noticing that myself. Current is not what it used to be. There are some strange goings on here!!!

    cibalin
  •  

    Jan, how can people remove tags? One can add tags, but remove them?

    Better ask Mario.

    Vierotchka
  •  

    I don't know. It has happened to me more than once here. I had the tag "see it with your own eyes" originally, and it was removed. I am guessing only staff can do that. Why they would then remove that is beyond me, but it was gone so I put it back. I am actually getting tired of it.

    JanforGore
  •  

    Those who are voting such posts down are murderous psychopaths, I reckon. They are probably paid by oil and other polluting corporations.

    Vierotchka
  •  

    Can one degree change the world? You bet it can.

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  

    I endured the 3-month heatwave of 2003 - it was hellish. No wind, no breeze, not fresh air, it was absolutely ghastly. I do not wish such a heatwave on anyone.

    Vierotchka
  •  
    Image...

    Effects of Deforestation on Climate.

    And that is not a "natural variance." It takes human hands to cut down trees and slash and burn to the point where diversity is threatened and climate changed.

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  
    Image...

    Study done a couple years ago on the chemical effects on the climate by coal combustion.

    And to remind certain skeptics and "Fox news" syncophants who thrive on their bs, this is not "Al Gore's scam." He was up on Capitol Hill THIRTY YEARS ago not making a DIME off of telling the truth regarding what was going to happen and what we needed to do THEN to stop it... and he was ignored... NOW LOOK. And the consensus on this which is GROWING is based on PEER reviewed articles. NONE dispute manmade climate change. So in all honesty, you can take your Fox News reports and shove them way up ...

    recommended by Vierotchka
    JanforGore
  •  

    What we know for sure: fossil fuel burning is increasing CO2 in the atmosphere which is in turn increasing temperature. What proves it? The spectrometer at Mauna Loa.

    JanforGore
  •  

    ottimo articolo

    dagos
  •  
    Image...

    The Photographic Documentation of Climate Change.

    JanforGore
  •  

    This article explains a great deal and makes sense. Thanks for finding this and placing it in the news.

    MeganMcKenzie
  •  

    As always time will tell..the earth was once flat you know?

    frimer
  •  

    To reiterate from the video regarding the Mauna Loa Climate Observatory: the chemical makeup of CO2 spewed from a volcano or plant is different than the chemical make up of CO2 spewed from an automobile and can be read as such. That is what is being read in Mauna Loa.

    JanforGore
  •  
    Image...

    Trends in Carbon Dioxide in Mauna Loa

    JanforGore
  •  
    Image...

    Volcanic Activity-Mauna Loa.

    From the report:

    The CO2 emission rate follows a very predictable exponentially decreasing trend which is established after each eruption. The slope of these trends have been different for each eruption.

    Current concentrations of volcanic CO2 (2006) are at their lowest levels since the record began in 1958.

    How does this program fit into the big picture?

    What is it's role in global climate change?
    Mauna Loa volcanic CO2 was used as a tracer to constrain the flow of air around the mountain (1997 paper). The MLO CO2 emissions record (1995 and 2001 papers) is an important component in the "geophysical picture" of how Mauna Loa volcano works. The lack of significant methane emissions from Mauna Loa volcano (2006 paper) helps our understanding of the "life on Mars picture" by suggesting that Martian volcanoes are unlikely to be the source of methane in the atmosphere of Mars.

    CO2 emissions from Mauna Loa volcano are an insignificantly small part of the global carbon cycle and do not play a role in climate change.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    If volcanic eruptions are an insignificantly small part of the global carbon cycle and do not play a role in climate change according to NOAA, how can detractors say they are? And what then explains that CO2 is rising in Mauna Loa which is part of why Greenland is melting? It isn't volcanic activity in Mauna Loa.

    JanforGore
  •  
    Image...

    Funny to see who´s behind them...lol

    frimer
  •  
    Image...

    Your turn to watch something then..and i hope the same way you asked me to watch the full piece you will do the same.

    frimer
  •  

    Fossil fuel emissions from cars and power plants are rising and therefore so is CO2 and other GHGs and therefore so is temperature. That in turn is causing climate change to be excelerated at a more precipitous rate than anticipated by scientists. Unless we then begin to seriously limit fossil fuel/power plant Co2 emissions along with cutting the rate of deforestation, the effects of climate change will progressively get worse. I will believe a scientist from Mauna Loa far faster than I ever will a Fox News/Washington Times shill or oil/coal shill with a political vendetta.

    JanforGore
  •  

    May i quote you? "You can sit and go on all you want about whatever distractionary bit of information you can find to escape the fact that your assertion was disproved."(you just did exactly that with my piece)
    Garbage because it totaly unmounts your US department of COMMERCE financed research center analysis?
    Interesting that one of the main issues in this documentary goes completely against the original subject of this post..GREENLAND.For those of you following this thread please watch the documentary i just posted above..let us know your opinions.

    frimer
1 - 25 of 37

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response

current videos