Greenpeace outlined a scenario in which 95 percent of energy generation comes from renewable sources by 2050 while creating 12 million jobs, for a price tag of around $18 trillion in global investment, resulting in an 80 percent decrease in CO2 emissions.
According to the Greenpeace report, Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable World Energy Outlook, such a drastic revolution in energy production is necessary, since even a 50 percent decrease in CO2 emissions by 2050 might not be enough to prevent runaway climate change scenarios. Under the Greenpeace scenario, CO2 emissions will peak in 2015 before dropping by more than 80 percent by 2050.
In its first edition of the Energy [R]evolution report in 2007, Greenpeace had predicted that 156 GW of renewable energy would be produced in 2010. As of the end of 2009, 158 GW were being produced.
The report makes several policy recommendations, such as phasing out all subsidies for fossil and nuclear fuel businesses, establishing legally binding targets for renewable energy, and strict efficiency standards. According to the report, conventional fuel sources receives an estimated $250 – 300 billion in worldwide subsidies, with coal alone receiving $63 billion.
The Energy [R]evolution scenario outlines a scenario which creates about 12 million jobs, with 8.5 million in the renewables sector alone, by 2030. Without adopting the policy recommendations of the report, however, only 2.4 million renewable jobs will be created. The renewable energy sector already employees two million people worldwide. The policy recommendations also state that the market for renewable technology will increase from $100 billion today to more than $600 billion by 2030.
Actual energy consumption is expected to increase up to 60 percent by 2050, according to the report. Implementing the policy recommendations in the report, including improved insulation and design for buildings, implementing efficiency standards and replacing heating systems with renewable technology, would decrease energy consumption by 20 percent.
Greenpeace also reported that renewable energy resources alone have the potential to generate up to 32 times current global power demands.
The report estimates potential savings in fuel costs of switching to renewable systems at $282 billion per year. However, the annual investment necessary between now and 2030 is estimated to be $782 billion, though without further investment costs beyond that time horizon. Under current policies, Greenpeace estimates global energy investment of $11.2 trillion dollars from now until 2030, while under the Energy [R]evolution scenario, global investment reaches $17.9 trillion.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Celebrate Earth Day: How One Person Can Change the World
Earth Day is a time when millions of people worldwide celebrate and renew their personal commitment to environmental stewardship.
And it has never been more important, or more urgent, for you and people everywhere to take personal action, to adopt a greener lifestyle, and to share your concerns about the environment.
How Can One Person Change the World?
Today, the environmental problems facing the world are enormous. Earth’s finite resources are being stretched to the limit by rapid population growth, air, water and soil pollution, and much more. Global warming, spurred by our use of fossil fuels for energy and transportation as well as mass-scale agriculture and other human activities, threatens to push our planet beyond its ability to support human life unless we can meet the growing need for food, energy and economic opportunity within a sustainable environment.
In the face of such huge global problems, it is easy to feel overwhelmed and powerless, and to find ourselves asking, “What difference can one person make?” The answer is that one person can make all the difference in the world:
Rachel Carson was just one person who wrote Silent Spring, a book credited with launching the environmental movement in the United States.
John Muir was one person who saved the Yosemite Valley, founded the Sierra Club, and inspired generations of conservationists who continue to do life-giving work.
Wangari Maathai is one person who started planting trees and empowering women in her native Kenya, and eventually was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2004 for her contribution to sustainable development, democracy and peace.
Al Gore is just one person who traveled for years to any conference room or auditorium where people would gather to hear his call to action and see his slide show, which became the Academy Award-winning film and best-selling book, An Inconvenient Truth
The Power of Personal Commitment
Each of us has the power through our daily decisions and lifestyle choices to make our homes and communities more environmentally friendly, but our power doesn’t end there.
There is no question that solving many of the problems currently threatening our global environment will require the resources and enlightened action of government and industry. Yet, because government and industry exist to serve the needs of their citizens and customers, how you live your life, the demands you and your neighbors make for products and services that help to preserve rather than erode the environment, will influence those actions and, ultimately, help to determine the future of planet Earth and the fate of mankind.
Anthropologist Margaret Mead said, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
So make some changes in the way you live your life. Use less energy and fewer resources, create less waste, and join with others who share your beliefs to urge government representatives and business executives to follow your lead toward a more sustainable world.
And it has never been more important, or more urgent, for you and people everywhere to take personal action, to adopt a greener lifestyle, and to share your concerns about the environment.
How Can One Person Change the World?
Today, the environmental problems facing the world are enormous. Earth’s finite resources are being stretched to the limit by rapid population growth, air, water and soil pollution, and much more. Global warming, spurred by our use of fossil fuels for energy and transportation as well as mass-scale agriculture and other human activities, threatens to push our planet beyond its ability to support human life unless we can meet the growing need for food, energy and economic opportunity within a sustainable environment.
In the face of such huge global problems, it is easy to feel overwhelmed and powerless, and to find ourselves asking, “What difference can one person make?” The answer is that one person can make all the difference in the world:
Rachel Carson was just one person who wrote Silent Spring, a book credited with launching the environmental movement in the United States.
John Muir was one person who saved the Yosemite Valley, founded the Sierra Club, and inspired generations of conservationists who continue to do life-giving work.
Wangari Maathai is one person who started planting trees and empowering women in her native Kenya, and eventually was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2004 for her contribution to sustainable development, democracy and peace.
Al Gore is just one person who traveled for years to any conference room or auditorium where people would gather to hear his call to action and see his slide show, which became the Academy Award-winning film and best-selling book, An Inconvenient Truth
The Power of Personal Commitment
Each of us has the power through our daily decisions and lifestyle choices to make our homes and communities more environmentally friendly, but our power doesn’t end there.
There is no question that solving many of the problems currently threatening our global environment will require the resources and enlightened action of government and industry. Yet, because government and industry exist to serve the needs of their citizens and customers, how you live your life, the demands you and your neighbors make for products and services that help to preserve rather than erode the environment, will influence those actions and, ultimately, help to determine the future of planet Earth and the fate of mankind.
Anthropologist Margaret Mead said, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
So make some changes in the way you live your life. Use less energy and fewer resources, create less waste, and join with others who share your beliefs to urge government representatives and business executives to follow your lead toward a more sustainable world.
Global Warming May Kill Billions This Century
In the 1970s, James Lovelock became one of the world’s most celebrated environmental scientists after he proposed the Gaia theory, the idea of Earth as a self-sustaining organism with a built-in control system that keeps the environment in balance and the planet fit for life. Writing in The Independent newspaper, Lovelock warns that the world has already passed the point of no return with global warming, and that climate change will kill billions of people in this century as the Earth reaches a “coma'' state from which it may not recover for 100,000 years.
If almost anyone other than James Lovelock issued such a warning about global warming, it would be labeled at best science fiction and at worst irresponsible and alarmist. But Lovelock has a formidable reputation as an environmental scientist and a stunning record of achievement, so when he says mankind has pushed the planet to the breaking point, it pays to listen.
Beyond the Point of No Return
Writing in The Independent and in his new book, “The Revenge of Gaia,” to be published next month, Lovelock says that current efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and mitigate the greenhouse effect that leads to global warming—including the Kyoto Protocol and the alternative Sydney Summit —won't be enough to solve the problem. He says the only hope is for all nations to use their resources wisely to sustain civilization for as long as possible.
“We have given Gaia a fever and soon her condition will worsen to a state like a coma,” Lovelock writes. “She has been there before and recovered, but it took more than 100,000 years. We are responsible and will suffer the consequences.”
Lovelock predicts that by the end of the century the temperature will rise 8 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit) in temperate regions such as Europe and the U.S., and 5 degrees Celsius in the tropics.
“Much of the tropical land mass will become scrub and desert, and will no longer serve for regulation; this adds to the 40 per cent of the Earth's surface we have depleted to feed ourselves,” Lovelock explains.
If Lovelock is correct, the outlook is grim for the human race, and for the planet.
"Before this century is over, billions of us will die, and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable," Lovelock writes.
Nuclear Energy May Be Key to Survival
According to Lovelock, there is still time to prevent such a disaster—although not much time—but he says the nations with the most power to halt the approaching devastation are also the ones doing the most to bring it about.
"Civilisation is energy-intensive and we cannot turn it off without crashing, so we need the security of a powered descent,” Lovelock writes. “Sadly I cannot see the United States or the emerging economies of China and India cutting back in time, and they are the main source of emissions. The worst will happen and survivors will have to adapt to a hell of a climate.”
Lovelock is a leading thinker in envirnomental science whose holistic view of the planet sometimes puts him out of step with others in the environmental community. For example, Lovelock supports further development of nuclear energy as the only clean source of energy that can be developed in time to slow the effects of global warming and head off the disaster he believes is coming. According to Lovelock, who views the Earth as a living organism, human civilization is not only a large part of the problem but also a "precious resource" for the planet.
“We should be the heart and mind of the Earth, not its malady,” he says. “Most of all, we should remember that we are a part of it, and it is indeed our home.”
If almost anyone other than James Lovelock issued such a warning about global warming, it would be labeled at best science fiction and at worst irresponsible and alarmist. But Lovelock has a formidable reputation as an environmental scientist and a stunning record of achievement, so when he says mankind has pushed the planet to the breaking point, it pays to listen.
Beyond the Point of No Return
Writing in The Independent and in his new book, “The Revenge of Gaia,” to be published next month, Lovelock says that current efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and mitigate the greenhouse effect that leads to global warming—including the Kyoto Protocol and the alternative Sydney Summit —won't be enough to solve the problem. He says the only hope is for all nations to use their resources wisely to sustain civilization for as long as possible.
“We have given Gaia a fever and soon her condition will worsen to a state like a coma,” Lovelock writes. “She has been there before and recovered, but it took more than 100,000 years. We are responsible and will suffer the consequences.”
Lovelock predicts that by the end of the century the temperature will rise 8 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit) in temperate regions such as Europe and the U.S., and 5 degrees Celsius in the tropics.
“Much of the tropical land mass will become scrub and desert, and will no longer serve for regulation; this adds to the 40 per cent of the Earth's surface we have depleted to feed ourselves,” Lovelock explains.
If Lovelock is correct, the outlook is grim for the human race, and for the planet.
"Before this century is over, billions of us will die, and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable," Lovelock writes.
Nuclear Energy May Be Key to Survival
According to Lovelock, there is still time to prevent such a disaster—although not much time—but he says the nations with the most power to halt the approaching devastation are also the ones doing the most to bring it about.
"Civilisation is energy-intensive and we cannot turn it off without crashing, so we need the security of a powered descent,” Lovelock writes. “Sadly I cannot see the United States or the emerging economies of China and India cutting back in time, and they are the main source of emissions. The worst will happen and survivors will have to adapt to a hell of a climate.”
Lovelock is a leading thinker in envirnomental science whose holistic view of the planet sometimes puts him out of step with others in the environmental community. For example, Lovelock supports further development of nuclear energy as the only clean source of energy that can be developed in time to slow the effects of global warming and head off the disaster he believes is coming. According to Lovelock, who views the Earth as a living organism, human civilization is not only a large part of the problem but also a "precious resource" for the planet.
“We should be the heart and mind of the Earth, not its malady,” he says. “Most of all, we should remember that we are a part of it, and it is indeed our home.”
Did Global Warming Cause Iceland Volcano to Erupt?
You can blame climate change for a lot, but not for spoiling your European vacation.
Global warming probably did not cause the volcanic eruption beneath Iceland's Eyjafjallajokull glacier, which has disrupted global aviation and grounded travelers on multiple continents over the past few days--but many scientists believe global warming will trigger future volcanic eruptions in Iceland and throughout the polar regions.
Ice is heavy and exerts enormous pressure on whatever lies beneath it. Under glaciers and other thick ice formations, the pressure is often enough to limit geologic movement, or even to restrict the formation of magma by leaving too little room for superheated rock to expand and become molten. When glacial ice melts, the pressure underneath is reduced, allowing the surface of the Earth to push free of its constraints, a release of energy that sometimes causes earthquakes, tsunamis or volcanic eruptions.
The Icelandic volcano that is currently spewing ash into the atmosphere is located under a small and lightweight ice cap, as ice caps go, so scientists are pretty certain than melting ice did not trigger the eruption.
Size also matters in the question of whether ash from the volcano in Iceland will be enough to slow global warming by creating a kind of reflector shield in the stratosphere to block some of the sun's rays and prevent them from reaching the Earth's surface. Again, the relatively small size of the volcano and the eruption leads scientists to believe that the world will go on warming with no cooling effect from Iceland's geology.
The poet Robert Frost wrote, "Some say the world will end in fire/some say in ice," and then went on to offer his own views on the subject. From what scientists are starting to learn about the relationship between climate change, glacial ice and volcanoes, we may get plenty of both before we're through.
Global warming probably did not cause the volcanic eruption beneath Iceland's Eyjafjallajokull glacier, which has disrupted global aviation and grounded travelers on multiple continents over the past few days--but many scientists believe global warming will trigger future volcanic eruptions in Iceland and throughout the polar regions.
Ice is heavy and exerts enormous pressure on whatever lies beneath it. Under glaciers and other thick ice formations, the pressure is often enough to limit geologic movement, or even to restrict the formation of magma by leaving too little room for superheated rock to expand and become molten. When glacial ice melts, the pressure underneath is reduced, allowing the surface of the Earth to push free of its constraints, a release of energy that sometimes causes earthquakes, tsunamis or volcanic eruptions.
The Icelandic volcano that is currently spewing ash into the atmosphere is located under a small and lightweight ice cap, as ice caps go, so scientists are pretty certain than melting ice did not trigger the eruption.
Size also matters in the question of whether ash from the volcano in Iceland will be enough to slow global warming by creating a kind of reflector shield in the stratosphere to block some of the sun's rays and prevent them from reaching the Earth's surface. Again, the relatively small size of the volcano and the eruption leads scientists to believe that the world will go on warming with no cooling effect from Iceland's geology.
The poet Robert Frost wrote, "Some say the world will end in fire/some say in ice," and then went on to offer his own views on the subject. From what scientists are starting to learn about the relationship between climate change, glacial ice and volcanoes, we may get plenty of both before we're through.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Arctic Sea Ice News And Anylsis
Sea ice data updated daily, with one-day lag. Orange line in extent image (left) and gray line in time series (right) indicate 1979 to 2000 average extent for the day shown. Click for high-resolution image.
Learn about update delays, which occasionally occur in near-real-time data. Read about the data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center Arctic sea ice reflects sunlight, keeping the polar regions cool and moderating global climate. According to scientific measurements, Arctic sea ice has declined dramatically over at least the past thirty years, with the most extreme decline seen in the summer melt season.
Read timely scientific analysis year-round below. We provide an update during the first week of each month, or more frequently as conditions warrant.
Please credit the National Snow and Ice Data Center for image or content use unless otherwise noted beneath each image.
Have a question about sea ice? Visit our updated Frequently Asked Questions page.
April 6, 2010
Cold snap causes late-season growth spurt
Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year on March 31 at 15.25 million square kilometers (5.89 million square miles). This was the latest date for the maximum Arctic sea ice extent since the start of the satellite record in 1979.
Early in March, Arctic sea ice appeared to reach a maximum extent. However, after a short decline, the ice continued to grow. By the end of March, total extent approached 1979 to 2000 average levels for this time of year. The late-season growth was driven mainly by cold weather and winds from the north over the Bering and Barents Seas. Meanwhile, temperatures over the central Arctic Ocean remained above normal and the winter ice cover remained young and thin compared to earlier years.
Figure 1. Arctic sea ice extent for March 2010 was 15.10 million square kilometers (5.83 million square miles). The magenta line shows the 1979 to 2000 median extent for that month. The black cross indicates the geographic North Pole. Sea Ice Index data. About the data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image Overview of conditions
Arctic sea ice extent averaged for March 2010 was 15.10 million square kilometers (5.83 million square miles). This was 650,000 square kilometers (250,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average for March, but 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) above the record low for the month, which occurred in March 2006.
Ice extent was above normal in the Bering Sea and Baltic Sea, but remained below normal over much of the Atlantic sector of the Arctic, including the Baffin Bay, and the Canadian Maritime Provinces seaboard. Extent in other regions was near average.
Figure 2. The graph above shows daily sea ice extent as of April 4, 2010. The solid light blue line indicates 2010; green shows 2007; dark blue indicates 1999, the year with the previous latest maximum extent, which occurred on March 29, 1999; and solid gray indicates average extent from 1979 to 2000. The gray area around the average line shows the two standard deviation range of the data. Sea Ice Index data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image
Conditions in context
Sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year on March 31, the latest maximum date in the satellite record. The previous latest date was on March 29, 1999. The maximum extent was 15.25 million square kilometers (5.89 million square miles). This was 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) above the record low maximum extent, which occurred in 2006.
Sea ice extent seemed to reach a maximum during the early part of the month, but after a brief decline, ice extent increased slowly and steadily through the end of the month. By the end of the month, extent had approached the 1979 to 2000 average. During March 2010, ice extent grew at an average of 13,200 square kilometers (5100 square miles) per day. Usually there is a net loss of ice through the month.
Figure 3. Monthly March ice extent for 1979 to 2010 shows a decline of 2.6% per decade.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image March 2010 compared to past years
The average ice extent for March 2010 was 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) higher than the record low for March, observed in 2006. The linear rate of decline for March over the 1978 to 2010 period is 2.6% per decade.
Figure 4. The map of sea level pressure (in millibars) for March 2010 shows high pressure over the central Arctic (areas in yellow and orange) and areas of low pressure over the Bering and Barents seas (areas in blue and purple). The low pressure systems over the Bering and Barents seas have helped to push the ice edge southward.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy NOAA/ESRL Physical Sciences Division
High-resolution image Late-season growth spurt
The maximum Arctic sea ice extent may occur as early as mid-February to as late as the last week of March. As sea ice extent approaches the seasonal maximum, extent can vary quite a bit from day to day because the thin, new ice at the edge of the pack is sensitive to local wind and temperature patterns. This March, low atmospheric pressure systems persisted over the Gulf of Alaska and north of Scandinavia. These pressure patterns led to unusually cold conditions and persistent northerly winds in the Bering and Barents Seas, which pushed the ice edge southward in these two regions.
Figure 5. This map of air temperature anomalies for March 2010, at the 925 millibar level (roughly 1,000 meters or 3,000 feet above the surface), shows warmer than usual temperatures over most of the Arctic Ocean, but colder than usual temperatures in the Bering and Barents seas, where sea ice extent is above normal. Areas in orange and red correspond to positive (warm) anomalies. Areas in blue and purple correspond to negative (cool) anomalies.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy NOAA/ESRL Physical Sciences Division
High-resolution imageMeanwhile, elsewhere in the Arctic
This winter's strong negative mode of the Arctic Oscillation was moderated through the month of March. Average air temperatures for the month nevertheless remained above average over the Arctic Ocean region. Overall for the winter, temperatures over most of the Arctic were above average, while northern Europe and Siberia were colder than usual.
Figure 6. These images show the change in ice age from fall 2009 to spring 2010. The negative Arctic Oscillation this winter slowed the export of older ice out of the Arctic. As a result, the percentage of ice older than two years was greater at the end of March 2010 than over the past few years.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy J. Maslanik and C. Fowler, CU Boulder
High-resolution imageIce age and thickness
The late date of the maximum extent, though of special interest this year, is unlikely to have an impact on summer ice extent. The ice that formed late in the season is thin, and will melt quickly when temperatures rise.
Scientists often use ice age data as a way to infer ice thickness—one of the most important factors influencing end-of-summer ice extent. Although the Arctic has much less thick, multiyear ice than it did during the 1980s and 1990s, this winter has seen some replenishment: the Arctic lost less ice the past two summers compared to 2007, and the strong negative Arctic Oscillation this winter prevented as much ice from moving out of the Arctic. The larger amount of multiyear ice could help more ice to survive the summer melt season. However, this replenishment consists primarily of younger, two- to three-year-old multiyear ice; the oldest, and thickest multiyear ice has continued to decline. Although thickness plays an important role in ice melt, summer ice conditions will also depend strongly on weather patterns through the melt season.
At the moment there are no Arctic-wide satellite measurements of ice thickness, because of the end of the NASA Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) mission last October. NASA has mounted an airborne sensor campaign called IceBridge to fill this observational gap.
More Information
For more information, including animations and satellite images, visit the NASA Arctic 2010 Sea Ice Maximum Web page.
For previous analyses, please see the drop-down menu under Archives in the right navigation at the top of this page.
NSIDC scientists provide Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis, with partial support from NASA.
Archives
Arctic Sea Ice News 2010
Select a date 6 April 2010 3 March 2010 3 February 2010 5 January 2010
Previous Years
Select a year Arctic Sea Ice News 2009 Arctic Sea Ice News 2008 Arctic Sea Ice News 2007 Arctic Sea Ice News 2006
Press Resources
Arctic Sea Ice Press Announcements
Select a press announcement Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2010 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2009 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2009 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2008 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2008 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2007 Models Underestimate Loss 2007 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2007 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2006 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2006 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2005 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2005 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2004 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2003 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2002
Press Information
Select a topic Media Visits Quick Facts on Arctic Sea Ice Press Information Graphics Information Frequently Asked Questions
Contact
General public and data users:
Contact NSIDC User Services or call
+1 303.492.6199
Press direct line: +1 303.492.1497
See Also
Sea Ice Index
Explore current and archived sea ice data on the NSIDC Sea Ice Index Web site.
Movie of sea ice extent, 1979–2009, in Google Earth
2009 sea ice extent side-by-side with 1979–2009 climatology (QuickTime, 1.1 MB)
State of the Cryosphere: Sea Ice
Cryosphere Glossary
Scientists at NSIDC
Related Resources
NASA Visualization Studio: Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2010
AMSR-E Arctic Sea Ice: September 2009 to March 2010.
NASA Visualization Studio: Arctic Sea Ice 2009
Satellite images and animation: 2009 Arctic Sea Ice from AMSR-E data.
Sea Ice Outlook Report
This report, updated monthly during the summer melt season, synthesizes scientific projections concerning Arctic sea ice extent. From the Study of Environmental Arctic Change.
NOAA Arctic Report Card 2009: Sea Ice
NSIDC Scientist Walt Meier contributed to the sea ice section of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association's Arctic Report Card 2009.
University of Colorado at Boulder: Learn More About Climate
NSIDC Scientists Ted Scambos, Mark Serreze, and Shari Gearheard discuss climate change in a video, "Colorado's Changing Climate."
Melting Snow and Ice: A Call for Action
NSIDC scientist Richard Armstrong contributed to this report on how climate change is affecting the Earth's frozen regions.
Learn about update delays, which occasionally occur in near-real-time data. Read about the data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center Arctic sea ice reflects sunlight, keeping the polar regions cool and moderating global climate. According to scientific measurements, Arctic sea ice has declined dramatically over at least the past thirty years, with the most extreme decline seen in the summer melt season.
Read timely scientific analysis year-round below. We provide an update during the first week of each month, or more frequently as conditions warrant.
Please credit the National Snow and Ice Data Center for image or content use unless otherwise noted beneath each image.
Have a question about sea ice? Visit our updated Frequently Asked Questions page.
April 6, 2010
Cold snap causes late-season growth spurt
Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year on March 31 at 15.25 million square kilometers (5.89 million square miles). This was the latest date for the maximum Arctic sea ice extent since the start of the satellite record in 1979.
Early in March, Arctic sea ice appeared to reach a maximum extent. However, after a short decline, the ice continued to grow. By the end of March, total extent approached 1979 to 2000 average levels for this time of year. The late-season growth was driven mainly by cold weather and winds from the north over the Bering and Barents Seas. Meanwhile, temperatures over the central Arctic Ocean remained above normal and the winter ice cover remained young and thin compared to earlier years.
Figure 1. Arctic sea ice extent for March 2010 was 15.10 million square kilometers (5.83 million square miles). The magenta line shows the 1979 to 2000 median extent for that month. The black cross indicates the geographic North Pole. Sea Ice Index data. About the data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image Overview of conditions
Arctic sea ice extent averaged for March 2010 was 15.10 million square kilometers (5.83 million square miles). This was 650,000 square kilometers (250,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average for March, but 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) above the record low for the month, which occurred in March 2006.
Ice extent was above normal in the Bering Sea and Baltic Sea, but remained below normal over much of the Atlantic sector of the Arctic, including the Baffin Bay, and the Canadian Maritime Provinces seaboard. Extent in other regions was near average.
Figure 2. The graph above shows daily sea ice extent as of April 4, 2010. The solid light blue line indicates 2010; green shows 2007; dark blue indicates 1999, the year with the previous latest maximum extent, which occurred on March 29, 1999; and solid gray indicates average extent from 1979 to 2000. The gray area around the average line shows the two standard deviation range of the data. Sea Ice Index data.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image
Conditions in context
Sea ice reached its maximum extent for the year on March 31, the latest maximum date in the satellite record. The previous latest date was on March 29, 1999. The maximum extent was 15.25 million square kilometers (5.89 million square miles). This was 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) above the record low maximum extent, which occurred in 2006.
Sea ice extent seemed to reach a maximum during the early part of the month, but after a brief decline, ice extent increased slowly and steadily through the end of the month. By the end of the month, extent had approached the 1979 to 2000 average. During March 2010, ice extent grew at an average of 13,200 square kilometers (5100 square miles) per day. Usually there is a net loss of ice through the month.
Figure 3. Monthly March ice extent for 1979 to 2010 shows a decline of 2.6% per decade.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center
High-resolution image March 2010 compared to past years
The average ice extent for March 2010 was 670,000 square kilometers (260,000 square miles) higher than the record low for March, observed in 2006. The linear rate of decline for March over the 1978 to 2010 period is 2.6% per decade.
Figure 4. The map of sea level pressure (in millibars) for March 2010 shows high pressure over the central Arctic (areas in yellow and orange) and areas of low pressure over the Bering and Barents seas (areas in blue and purple). The low pressure systems over the Bering and Barents seas have helped to push the ice edge southward.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy NOAA/ESRL Physical Sciences Division
High-resolution image Late-season growth spurt
The maximum Arctic sea ice extent may occur as early as mid-February to as late as the last week of March. As sea ice extent approaches the seasonal maximum, extent can vary quite a bit from day to day because the thin, new ice at the edge of the pack is sensitive to local wind and temperature patterns. This March, low atmospheric pressure systems persisted over the Gulf of Alaska and north of Scandinavia. These pressure patterns led to unusually cold conditions and persistent northerly winds in the Bering and Barents Seas, which pushed the ice edge southward in these two regions.
Figure 5. This map of air temperature anomalies for March 2010, at the 925 millibar level (roughly 1,000 meters or 3,000 feet above the surface), shows warmer than usual temperatures over most of the Arctic Ocean, but colder than usual temperatures in the Bering and Barents seas, where sea ice extent is above normal. Areas in orange and red correspond to positive (warm) anomalies. Areas in blue and purple correspond to negative (cool) anomalies.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy NOAA/ESRL Physical Sciences Division
High-resolution imageMeanwhile, elsewhere in the Arctic
This winter's strong negative mode of the Arctic Oscillation was moderated through the month of March. Average air temperatures for the month nevertheless remained above average over the Arctic Ocean region. Overall for the winter, temperatures over most of the Arctic were above average, while northern Europe and Siberia were colder than usual.
Figure 6. These images show the change in ice age from fall 2009 to spring 2010. The negative Arctic Oscillation this winter slowed the export of older ice out of the Arctic. As a result, the percentage of ice older than two years was greater at the end of March 2010 than over the past few years.
—Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center courtesy J. Maslanik and C. Fowler, CU Boulder
High-resolution imageIce age and thickness
The late date of the maximum extent, though of special interest this year, is unlikely to have an impact on summer ice extent. The ice that formed late in the season is thin, and will melt quickly when temperatures rise.
Scientists often use ice age data as a way to infer ice thickness—one of the most important factors influencing end-of-summer ice extent. Although the Arctic has much less thick, multiyear ice than it did during the 1980s and 1990s, this winter has seen some replenishment: the Arctic lost less ice the past two summers compared to 2007, and the strong negative Arctic Oscillation this winter prevented as much ice from moving out of the Arctic. The larger amount of multiyear ice could help more ice to survive the summer melt season. However, this replenishment consists primarily of younger, two- to three-year-old multiyear ice; the oldest, and thickest multiyear ice has continued to decline. Although thickness plays an important role in ice melt, summer ice conditions will also depend strongly on weather patterns through the melt season.
At the moment there are no Arctic-wide satellite measurements of ice thickness, because of the end of the NASA Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) mission last October. NASA has mounted an airborne sensor campaign called IceBridge to fill this observational gap.
More Information
For more information, including animations and satellite images, visit the NASA Arctic 2010 Sea Ice Maximum Web page.
For previous analyses, please see the drop-down menu under Archives in the right navigation at the top of this page.
NSIDC scientists provide Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis, with partial support from NASA.
Archives
Arctic Sea Ice News 2010
Select a date 6 April 2010 3 March 2010 3 February 2010 5 January 2010
Previous Years
Select a year Arctic Sea Ice News 2009 Arctic Sea Ice News 2008 Arctic Sea Ice News 2007 Arctic Sea Ice News 2006
Press Resources
Arctic Sea Ice Press Announcements
Select a press announcement Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2010 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2009 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2009 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2008 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2008 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2007 Models Underestimate Loss 2007 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2007 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2006 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2006 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2005 Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2005 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2004 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2003 Arctic Sea Ice Minimum 2002
Press Information
Select a topic Media Visits Quick Facts on Arctic Sea Ice Press Information Graphics Information Frequently Asked Questions
Contact
General public and data users:
Contact NSIDC User Services or call
+1 303.492.6199
Press direct line: +1 303.492.1497
See Also
Sea Ice Index
Explore current and archived sea ice data on the NSIDC Sea Ice Index Web site.
Movie of sea ice extent, 1979–2009, in Google Earth
2009 sea ice extent side-by-side with 1979–2009 climatology (QuickTime, 1.1 MB)
State of the Cryosphere: Sea Ice
Cryosphere Glossary
Scientists at NSIDC
Related Resources
NASA Visualization Studio: Arctic Sea Ice Maximum 2010
AMSR-E Arctic Sea Ice: September 2009 to March 2010.
NASA Visualization Studio: Arctic Sea Ice 2009
Satellite images and animation: 2009 Arctic Sea Ice from AMSR-E data.
Sea Ice Outlook Report
This report, updated monthly during the summer melt season, synthesizes scientific projections concerning Arctic sea ice extent. From the Study of Environmental Arctic Change.
NOAA Arctic Report Card 2009: Sea Ice
NSIDC Scientist Walt Meier contributed to the sea ice section of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association's Arctic Report Card 2009.
University of Colorado at Boulder: Learn More About Climate
NSIDC Scientists Ted Scambos, Mark Serreze, and Shari Gearheard discuss climate change in a video, "Colorado's Changing Climate."
Melting Snow and Ice: A Call for Action
NSIDC scientist Richard Armstrong contributed to this report on how climate change is affecting the Earth's frozen regions.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Obama's healthcare victory clears path for climate change bill
The chances of US climate change legislation passing this year received a major boost after President Obama secured victory in his historic battle to pass healthcare reforms late last night.
The successful House vote on the legislation following over a year of intense and fraught negotiations will clear a path for the administration to turn to its next large piece of administrative business: climate change.
Some senior Democrat Senators have suggested that following such a long battle to pass healthcare legislation the Senate will have "no appetite" to deal with a climate change bill that is likely to prove equally contentious.
However, both the administration and Democrat leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives remain adamant that they want to pursue a vote this year and with the party still behind in the polls ahead of November's mid-term elections the race is now on to move the legislation forward as quickly as possible.
The key healthcare vote comes just days after the compromise version of the climate change bill being prepared by the bi-partisan trio of Senators Democrat John Kerry, Republican Lindsey Graham, and independent Joe Lieberman, received a further boost when both environmental and industrial groups signaled their support for the proposed legislation.
In a surprise move, Bruce Josten, the top lobbyist at the US Chamber of Commerce, told reporters last week that the work being done by the three senators was "largely in synch" with the business group's views.
Josten stopped short of fully endorsing the bill, but following a meeting with the Senator's last Wednesday he struck a markedly different tone to the outright opposition to previous versions of the bill that the Chamber adopted last year.
"The fairest comment would be, directionally speaking, the way they are trying to conform and shape this bill I would suggest is largely in sync with what most people in American industry think is the direction you are going to have to go if you are going to have a successful program," he told reporters.
"[The Senators] are being very constructive, they are trying to figure out how to make this work for the American economy, the different sectors of the economy that are going to be affected one way or another, and I think just as, if not more importantly, for the American consumer."
Significantly, a coalition of 20 environmental groups released a statement on Friday signaling that they were "encouraged" by the progress being made towards a final version of the bill. The statement warned that "legislative details are important, and are not settled yet," but suggested that the group - which included influential organisations such as the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Union of Concerned Scientists – is largely happy with the direction of the bill.
The moves follow a week in which Kerry, Graham and Lieberman have met with industrial and environmental groups to talk through draft versions of the compromise bill ahead of its expected later this month.
As a result fresh details of the structure of the bill have emerged, including confirmation that the proposed carbon cap-and-trade scheme for energy firms will emulate the early phase of the EU emissions trading scheme by awarding free emission allowances to participating firms.
On the campaign trail, Obama had said that he would like to see 100 per cent of emission allowances auctioned. However, after already agreeing to scale back the scheme to only cover utility firms, the bi-partisan group of Senators look set to further limit the potential impact on energy bills by initially allocating pollution permits for free.
The compromise version of the scheme is also reportedly expected to allow energy companies to purchase carbon offset credits from the developing world to help them comply with their emission caps.
Critics of free allocation argue that it limits the financial incentive for firms to curb carbon emissions and can result in sizable windfall profits. However, the approach would reduce inflationary pressure on energy bills and still ensure firms pay a penalty if they exceed their imposed emission caps.
The Senators have also signaled that the scheme will incorporate a price floor and a price ceiling, thought to stand at $10 and $30 a tonne respectively and designed to provide investors with certainty over future prices. And they said the scheme would become more demanding over time, with the bill proposing that industrial plants will be brought into the cap-and-trade regime from 2016.
Additional details of the draft bill emerged last week, including controversial proposals for a tax on oil designed top drive up fuel prices and incentivise motorists to switch to more efficient vehicles; a $10bn fund to drive investment in low carbon technologies, including clean coal; up to $54bn in loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants; and proposals for a carbon tariff on imports from countries without carbon regulations in place.
There were also reports that a proposed renewable energy standard designed to ensure a set amount of energy is generated from renewable sources could be expanded to cover all low carbon energy sources, including nuclear.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
India 2012, an e-waste bin
What a dump, and it is growing by the hour. Almost 40 per cent of the municipal and plastic waste generated in India is not collected, and half of the organic waste goes untreated. And then there is the growing problem of electronic waste.
By 2012, India will generate the most e-waste in the world, second only to China. Most cities do not have adequate infrastructure to manage the growing household and plastic rubbish, even though there are technologies available for treatment and reuse."There are only 110 facilities in the country for treating hardly 50 per cent of the organic waste generated," says the environment ministry's report on Road Map on Management of Waste in India A committee of the ministry has sought a law for waste-management with punitive action against defaulters.
The report call for higher penalty for those failing to properly dispose of municipal garbage. "Unless the city administrations get serious about waste management, the problem could become a major health risk," an official, who didn't wish to be identified, said. But, it's the economic growth that poses the biggest challenge - managing e-waste, which can be a discarded refrigerator or end-of-life cellphone or a laptop.
By 2012, India will generate over 800,000 million tonne (mt) of e-waste every year. At present, Mumbai tops the e-waste chart followed by Delhi. Western countries are adding to this mound. The estimate is not known as the ministry believes much of the e-waste is brought in illegally. NGOs such as Toxic Link have raised health concern over US and Europe dumping e-waste in India.
Even though disposing e-waste is defined under Hazardous Waste Management Rules in 2008, most cities don't have a system to collect and dispose of discarded gadgets. "Producers should be bound to take back their products after the life of the product is over and to get it recycled/disposed in. without health risks," says the report released on Thursday.
Poor management of the industry-generated hazardous waste is another worry. Annually 6.2 mt of the waste is generated and 2.1 mt goes untreated. The report talks of 36,000 hazardous waste industries, which include those manufacturing chemicals and plastic. Indiscriminate disposal has left many places environmentally degraded, says the report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)