iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Global Warming's Impacts Have Sped Up, Worsened Since Kyoto

SETH BORENSTEIN   11/22/09 02:54 PM ET   AP

Climate Change

WASHINGTON — Since the 1997 international accord to fight global warming, climate change has worsened and accelerated – beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then.

As the world has talked for a dozen years about what to do next, new ship passages opened through the once frozen summer sea ice of the Arctic. In Greenland and Antarctica, ice sheets have lost trillions of tons of ice. Mountain glaciers in Europe, South America, Asia and Africa are shrinking faster than before.

And it's not just the frozen parts of the world that have felt the heat in the dozen years leading up to next month's climate summit in Copenhagen:

_The world's oceans have risen by about an inch and a half.

_Droughts and wildfires have turned more severe worldwide, from the U.S. West to Australia to the Sahel desert of North Africa.

_Species now in trouble because of changing climate include, not just the lumbering polar bear which has become a symbol of global warming, but also fragile butterflies, colorful frogs and entire stands of North American pine forests.

_Temperatures over the past 12 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the dozen years leading up to 1997.

Even the gloomiest climate models back in the 1990s didn't forecast results quite this bad so fast.

"The latest science is telling us we are in more trouble than we thought," said Janos Pasztor, climate adviser to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

And here's why: Since an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas pollution was signed in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997, the level of carbon dioxide in the air has increased 6.5 percent. Officials from across the world will convene in Copenhagen next month to seek a follow-up pact, one that President Barack Obama says "has immediate operational effect ... an important step forward in the effort to rally the world around a solution."

The last effort didn't quite get the anticipated results.

From 1997 to 2008, world carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels have increased 31 percent; U.S. emissions of this greenhouse gas rose 3.7 percent. Emissions from China, now the biggest producer of this pollution, have more than doubled in that time period. When the U.S. Senate balked at the accord and President George W. Bush withdrew from it, that meant that the top three carbon polluters – the U.S., China and India – were not part of the pact's emission reductions. Developing countries were not covered by the Kyoto Protocol and that is a major issue in Copenhagen.

And the effects of greenhouse gases are more powerful and happening sooner than predicted, scientists said.

"Back in 1997, the impacts (of climate change) were underestimated; the rate of change has been faster," said Virginia Burkett, chief scientist for global change research at the U.S. Geological Survey.

That last part alarms former Vice President Al Gore, who helped broker a last-minute deal in Kyoto.

"By far the most serious differences that we've had is an acceleration of the crisis itself," Gore said in an interview this month with The Associated Press.

In 1997, global warming was an issue for climate scientists, environmentalists and policy wonks. Now biologists, lawyers, economists, engineers, insurance analysts, risk managers, disaster professionals, commodity traders, nutritionists, ethicists and even psychologists are working on global warming.

"We've come from a time in 1997 where this was some abstract problem working its way around scientific circles to now when the problem is in everyone's face," said Andrew Weaver, a University of Victoria climate scientist.

The changes in the last 12 years that have the scientists most alarmed are happening in the Arctic with melting summer sea ice and around the world with the loss of key land-based ice masses. It's all happening far faster than predicted.

Back in 1997 "nobody in their wildest expectations," would have forecast the dramatic sudden loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic that started about five years ago, Weaver said. From 1993 to 1997, sea ice would shrink on average in the summer to about 2.7 million square miles. The average for the last five years is less than 2 million square miles. What's been lost is the size of Alaska.

Antarctica had a slight increase in sea ice, mostly because of the cooling effect of the ozone hole, according to the British Antarctic Survey. At the same time, large chunks of ice shelves – adding up to the size of Delaware – came off the Antarctic peninsula.

While melting Arctic ocean ice doesn't raise sea levels, the melting of giant land-based ice sheets and glaciers that drain into the seas do. Those are shrinking dramatically at both poles.

Measurements show that since 2000, Greenland has lost more than 1.5 trillion tons of ice, while Antarctica has lost about 1 trillion tons since 2002, according to two scientific studies published this fall. In multiple reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, scientists didn't anticipate ice sheet loss in Antarctica, Weaver said. And the rate of those losses is accelerating, so that Greenland's ice sheets are melting twice as fast now as they were just seven years ago, increasing sea level rise.

Worldwide glaciers are shrinking three times faster than in the 1970s and the average glacier has lost 25 feet of ice since 1997, said Michael Zemp, a researcher at World Glacier Monitoring Service at the University of Zurich.

"Glaciers are a good climate indicator," Zemp said. "What we see is an accelerated loss of ice."

Also, permafrost – the frozen northern ground that oil pipelines are built upon and which traps the potent greenhouse gas methane – is thawing at an alarming rate, Burkett said.

Another new post-1997 impact of global warming has scientists very concerned. The oceans are getting more acidic because more of the carbon dioxide in the air is being absorbed into the water. That causes acidification, an issue that didn't even merit a name until the past few years.

More acidic water harms coral, oysters and plankton and ultimately threatens the ocean food chain, biologists say.

In 1997, "there was no interest in plants and animals" and how they are hampered by climate change, said Stanford University biologist Terry Root. Now scientists are talking about which species can be saved from extinction and which are goners. The polar bear became the first species put on the federal list of threatened species and the small rabbit-like American pika may be joining it.

More than 37 million acres of Canadian and U.S. pine forests have been damaged by beetles that don't die in warmer winters. And in the U.S. West, the average number of acres burned per fire has more than doubled.

The Colorado River reservoirs, major water suppliers for the U.S. West, were nearly full in 1999, but by 2007 half the water was gone after the region endured the worst multiyear drought in 100 years of record-keeping.

Insurance losses and blackouts have soared and experts say global warming is partly to blame. The number of major U.S. weather-related blackouts from 2004-2008 were more than seven times higher than from 1993-1997, said Evan Mills, a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.

"The message on the science is that we know a lot more than we did in 1997 and it's all negative," said Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. "Things are much worse than the models predicted."

___

On the Net:

U.S. government's 2009 report on climate change impacts: http://tinyurl.com/usimpacts

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 report on changes already observed:

http://tinyurl.com/worldimpacts

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change: http://unfccc.int

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON — Since the 1997 international accord to fight global warming, climate change has worsened and accelerated – beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then. As the worl...
WASHINGTON — Since the 1997 international accord to fight global warming, climate change has worsened and accelerated – beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then. As the worl...
Filed by Lara Gross  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 578
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
09:30 PM on 01/01/2010
The polar ice caps are MELTING?....This was the headline back in 1922 proving global warming is nothing but a scam...

http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf
01:33 PM on 11/30/2009
I have a great idea to help get the Republicans on board in acknowledging that there is something seriously wrong with our planet. We need to write an email with a certain degree of verisimilitude and a little medical jargon that they'll send around virally...that convinces them that a rise in earth temperatures have contributed to a mutation in DNA that is causing an increase in the number of gays. If we could convince the whackos that "Global Warming causes Gayness", they might just help save the planet.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
02:07 PM on 11/29/2009
Some of the released CRU e-mails involve comments by climate scientists noting that the earth has stopped warming, and no one has an explanation for it. These comments are directly in conflict with the title of this article, which implies that global warming has gotten worse since 1997.

If global warming was getting worse, scientists wouldn't have to drop off the latest data from their analyses, because it drags down the average amount of warming.

The credibility of the IPCC reports is now close to zero.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Proud member of the reality-based community!
03:26 PM on 11/26/2009
NOAA's National Climatic Data Center stated in its October Global Analysis that "[f]or the year to date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 14.7 °C (58.4 °F) tied with 2007 as the fifth-warmest January-through-October period on record."

GISS: 2009 year-to-date global surface temperature ranks fifth warmest out of 130 years. The following "Comparison of 2009 Temperature to the Two Years with the Warmest Annual Means" was posted on the Surface Temperature Analysis of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, last modified on November 16:

Met Office: 2009 will be one of top five warmest years globally. The BBC reported on November 24 that "[t]his year will be one of the top five warmest years globally since records began 150 years ago, according to figures compiled by the Met Office." The BBC further reported that "[o]ther sources say it could even be the third warmest."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
12:22 AM on 11/26/2009
The premise of this article is obviously false. The Kyoto meeting was in 1997. The next year, 1998, had the highest recorded temperatures in the recent period. 1998 also had the highest sea level measurements at many tide stations around the world, including all the NOAA tide stations along the Pacific Ocean in California, Oregon, and Washington.

Since then, the global air temperature measurements have not exceeded 1998. Also, the sea level measurements have declined to a level not only lower than 1998, but also lower than several other years during the 1990s. Even more than with air temperature data, the sea level data indicates a shift in world climate away from the slight warming of the 1990s to a slight cooling in the first decade of the 21st Century.

The only point on which the title of this article may be correct, is that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased even faster than people had predicted. This appears to be the case, based on measurements from a volcanic mountain in Hawaii.

However, the fact that temperature data and sea level data has moved in the opposite direction as the level of CO2 appears to undercut a key concept in AGW, which is that CO2 is the main driver of climate change. The temperature data, and the sea level, indicate either no forcing by CO2, or a negative forcing (!), as the temperatures and the sea levels have dropped since 1998.
02:23 AM on 11/26/2009
We've all been trying for months to help you understand the data but without success. I'm only commenting to make sure other readers will not blindly accept what you say as fact, because it's not.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
11:15 PM on 11/28/2009
Tide station data is available from around the world. You could check Sydney, Australia, for example, or Los Angeles, California. The 1990s had higher sea level readings than the more recent years. The pause in the normal, slight increase in sea levels over time is an unusual event, a significant event.

It hints that the earth's climate has shifted. The shift is from a warming climate to a largely stable one. The CRU e-mails show that many of the IPCC scientists recognized that the warming had stopped, but they did not publically acknowledge this. They didn't want the public to realize that this is what was happening, as it conflicts with the predictions of the climate models. So the IPCC scientists continued to promote global warming even as the earth's climate moved sideways or perhaps even down. Now it is clear that some of them were seeing the sames things in the data that the climate skeptics were seeing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Proud member of the reality-based community!
03:24 PM on 11/26/2009
Your post, as usual, is all fabrications. R2 says the atmosphere has not warmed since 1998 and sea levels are not increasing. All the tidal data shows sea level increases. The satellite data shows a sea level increase of 3.3 mm per year since 1993, a 50% increase over the average of the last century.

The year, 2009 was the fifth warmest on record in the last 130 years. "We see evidence of a slowing of the warming trend but not of cooling. The past five years (2004–2008) were on average warmer than the previous five years (1999–2003) , which were warmer than the previous 5 years, and so on down the series. However, the difference between the 2004–2008 average and the 1999-2003 averages is not statistically significant. No cooling there."

http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2009-03/pronouncement-global-warming%E2%80%99s-demise-thin-ice
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realpolitic
Proud member of the reality-based community!
01:07 PM on 11/25/2009
"Temperatures over the past 12 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the dozen years leading up to 1997." So much for the deniers who say it has not warmed since 1998!

When deniers can read an article like this one that breaks down the traumatic shifts in climate well and still maintain their faith that there is no global warming, they are way past the point of skepticism and more likely just have their heads buried far, far into the sand ad their minds switched to the off position.
02:29 AM on 11/26/2009
Did you read what he actually said?

Quote The hacked emails are a hard knock, but the science of global warming withstands much more than that. End quote

In fact, as more information (the all important context) comes out, I don't even believe they are a hard knock.

Why are you so selective in your choice of quotes?
10:08 PM on 11/23/2009
"_Temperatures over the past 12 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the dozen years leading up to 1997."

Twelve? Twelve? It almost looks like they are trying ever so hard to keep 1998 from moving into the later timeframe... I wonder why...

Next year will it read:

"_Temperatures over the past 13 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the 13 years leading up to 1997."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:56 PM on 11/23/2009
NASA has 2005 as hotter than 1998, and 1998 was an el nino.

It's been a very hot decade, whatever you think of global warming, you cant deny it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lbsaltzman
Permaculture and Sustainability
10:41 AM on 11/24/2009
You under estimate the ability of these folks to deny any rational input. They believe in a paranoid conspiracy theory so that they can deny the reality of global warming.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
02:11 PM on 11/29/2009
Perhaps NASA will now honor the Freedom of Information requests that it has previously blocked, to release their raw temperature data, and their support for the adjustments to the raw data that NASA has made.

Perhaps NASA will now allow independent scientists to review and replicate the research done by the NASA scientists.

This step is long, long overdue.
09:49 PM on 11/23/2009
The picture of people trudging through deep snow seems somewhat at odds with the story title....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
05:35 AM on 11/24/2009
for people who do not understand that seasons have not much to do with the overall process, since sometimes its beyond view. That is why it is so hard to grasp for people with limited intellectual capabilities.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
07:03 AM on 11/24/2009
Even in Hell there are reported to be places that are very cold.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fumes
Midnight Toker
07:10 PM on 11/23/2009
i think at this point in time..

we can reasonably forgo the printing of calendars past the year 2020..

until further notice!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Zonie
Right & Left are part of a whole. Divided we die.
03:38 PM on 11/23/2009
If anyone hasn't noticed....not many folks are denying climate change....they are, in fact, denying CO2 as the culprit....
\

Did it ever occur to those ridiculing those of a different view....that if indeed these guys have been manipulating their data.....and suppressing other views....we could be missing the real culprit?

If you really believe this planet is warming up and doing it so fast as to threaten our existence in an imminent way....then doesn't it follow that you would seek to get ALL the answers? All the thoughts? All the right data? And appreciate this: The consensus in Galileo's time was..........? Consensus is not proof.

No........instead we witness alot of slinging mud.....Ha. Assumptions and rubbish.....As though Republican and Democrat imply either great scientific knowledge or vast stupidity. .

If you are so entrenched in your belief that AGW is FACT that you cannot examine what appears to be a DECEIT upon your intelligence...Then it is clear....this IS about POLITICS....and not science.

Pathetic.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
shockmagog
Infrared hair, UV shades, SPF 110 dome.
07:04 PM on 11/23/2009
Come on, don't be that way.
10:19 PM on 11/23/2009
Since CO2 absorbs infrared radiation and re-radiates it downward, the heat escaping from the Earth to space goes down - causing warming.

We should be able to verify this mechanism by looking at the trend of the infrared escaping from the Earth.

If the outgoing long wave radiation goes up (instead of down) with increasing CO2, it pretty much eliminates CO2 as the cause of warming we are seeing.

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/CDB/Tropics/figt1.gif (bottom graph)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Zonie
Right & Left are part of a whole. Divided we die.
07:24 PM on 11/24/2009
Let me rephrase then....Anthroprogenic warming. The point being is I don't necessarily believe these folks are denying warming.

And neither am I. I have doubts about the science.

Why? For example, because they are political injections into science and because it it likely the data has been manipulated. Reasons that are not irrational.

There's a difference in denial and doubt. Doubt raises the possibility that errors have been made and is a bit more open minded. Open to at least considering other causes and the possibility human beings are often wrong in forming absolute conclusions based upon skimpy or manipulated data.

Deny that?

Denial seems to have be some sort of epithet that implies closed minded stupidity and ignorance.

Hmmmmmm......when anyone suppresses further study seems to always have an agenda of forcing THEIR closed minded beliefs upon others in order to further an agenda....not furthering discovery.and truth......but agenda.

And when anyone resorts to hypocricy, ridicule and ad hominum attacks of those opposing their views.....what the hell is that?

Hypocrisy isn't exclusive to any side of the aisle........is it? And blind faith has never been a guiding light in seeking the truth....

Hmmmmmmmmm........hmmmmmmmph....well....I won't say God help us.....
03:05 PM on 11/23/2009
Relax. Soon things will no longer be boring.

Ever wondered what our harbours will look like when sea levels rise one meter? The first 4 cm are already in the bag. And one meter is less than 2 % of total sea level rise when all ice caps have melted.

Dream on….. prepare your kids…. they’ll need gills.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vonmises2012
03:04 PM on 11/23/2009
Your Global Government Redistribution charade's goose is cooked
Calls for an independent inquiry into what is being dubbed “Climategate” are growing as the foundation for man-made global warming implodes following the release of emails which prove researchers colluded to manipulate data in order to “hide the decline” in global temperatures.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lbsaltzman
Permaculture and Sustainability
08:28 PM on 11/23/2009
What climategate. There is nothing in those e-mails worthy of discussion or investigation. The meltdown of glaciers and icepack continues. The relentless warming of the planet continues. There is no time to waste on denialism. It is a paranoid deadend best ignored.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:40 AM on 11/24/2009
So wait, you admit that temperatures appeared to go up? Before you guys wouldnt admit it for some reason. So now they went up, but it was faked?

Like creationists, global warming denialists can't keep their talking points straight.
01:57 PM on 11/23/2009
Lets get to the bottom of Climategate first:

...emails suggest the authors co-operated covertly to ensure that only papers favorable to CO2-forced AGW were published, and that editors and journals publishing contrary papers were punished.
They also attempted to “discipline” scientists and journalists who published skeptical information.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6927598.ece
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html#mod=todays_us_page_one
http://www.climatedepot.com/
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/global-warminggate-what-does-it-mean/
02:21 AM on 11/26/2009
That is not true. Some scientists were outraged at the publication of scientific garbage. The information is available for you to read - go research it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
11:21 PM on 11/28/2009
There is a large dose of hypocrisy in persons who on one hand criticize climate skeptics or luke-warmers, because they haven't had their research published, and who on the other hand make great efforts to block the publication of articles by the same climate skeptics or luke-warmers.

The public can easily detect the hypocrisy in these persons.
09:17 AM on 11/23/2009
boring!!! not interested. if fact I would love to never shovel snow again.