Clear to Mostly Cloudy in Moments

The atmospheric patterns which give Florida its pleasant weather also used to provide it with adequate rainfall to keep skiable lakes and the aquifer topped off nicely during every month of the year.

Overdevelopment (which I refer to as urban sprawl), global warming and the El Niño effect have changed that in recent years. In fact, when I moved to Florida two decades ago, we enjoyed regular afternoon downpours during 9 months of the year or more. Residents, including this author, almost could set our clocks to the weather. If the time was 3PM, cloud fronts were due to begin building over the Atlantic Coast and move westward. If it was 5PM and the cable television or electrical service had not flickered, we were due for at least a brownout at any moment.

Different Pollutant, Similar Result

The world’s oceans are every bit as important to the inhabitability of the planet as forests and prairies are because they produce immense quantities of oxygen and, until we short circuited the atmosphere, absorbed billions of BTUs of solar radiation.

The oceans are their own unique biosphere, excreting and metabolizing in manners quite different from most terrestrial life. Like the rest of the planet, though, the atmosphere within the oceans is self-regulating, providing food and shelter in harmonious balance, until greedy Homo sapiens came along and treated the oceans like a garbage dump.

Soda Pop and Slushies

The dialog surrounding dead trees and bodies of fresh water in the Northeastern United States and Maritime Canadian Provinces (which I mentioned last time) ultimately yielded an hemispheric alert. Soon thereafter, the Clean Air Act of the United States was amended and updated to address acid rain, as it was known at the time, and thousands of lakes and surrounding forests were given a fair shot at recovery. As important as the landmark legislation was, though, it only postponed the inevitable, acidification of the world’s oceans.

If acid rain was caused by nitrogen and sulfur in smokestack and tailpipe emissions, why does an acidification problem remain if nitrogen and sulfur now are under control?

Giant Wind Storm Incubators

Everyone can be grateful that Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike left in their wake a death toll well below that of Hurricane Katrina. However, the similarities remain quite destructive. Hurricane Gustav gave us widespread flooding, displaced more than 1 million people and left more than 2 million homes without electrical service for weeks. At its worst, Hurricane Ike covered an area roughly equal in size to the unified nation of Germany and erased entire towns along the Texas coast rendering more than 100,000 people permanently homeless.

As regards global warming, Gustav’s acceleration from a relatively weak storm to a powerhouse category 4 hurricane in under 3 days’ time points us back to the contemporary effects of abnormally high water temperatures. Hurricane Ike approached the Caribbean Basin as a strong storm before raining down death and destruction on Hispaniola and Cuba. When it was done killing islanders, it took its dear, sweet time gathering ferocity on its way to shred Galveston and immerse Houston.

I have written about Katrina’s record acceleration. Frightening as it was, the record was broken just 2 years later by Hurricane Felix. Then, Gustav came along and nearly entered itself in the record books. When Gustav failed to break the record, residents of the Gulf Coast region of the United States breathed a sigh of relief. It lasted just a few days, though, because in crossing from the Atlantic Ocean to the Caribbean Sea, Hurricane Ike went from a category 1 to a category 4 in just 6 hours – 6 hours!

To global warming skeptics, I ask: how can you explain away these statistics? Atlantic hurricanes form in 2 two general ways:

1) When prevailing winds of central Africa meet the ocean; and

2) When tropical waves spawned by equatorial wind patterns are nourished by the recycling currents of the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico.

Hence, if the prevailing winds of Africa accelerated because of deforestation and desertification (both of which are ameliorated by a proper response to global warming), how can we ignore the effects on North America?

If the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico contain large dead zones because of skewed temperature cycles and atmospheric wind patterns which have shifted because of high carbon content, how can we ignore either the consequences or our responsibility?

The bottom line is this: everyone benefits from fighting global warming, even energy companies because winning the battle requires innovation. When humanity innovates, there are ancillary benefits. So, if you doubt the existence of global warming or the fact that human behavior is the main cause, you still can climb aboard the Remediation Express and help millions of people who live in coastal areas fret a little less often about the frequency of killer hurricanes.

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

The Intercontinental Smog Express

I told you recently about the awful reality of the North Pacific Gyre, an informal oceanic garbage dump which is caused by casual dumping of solid waste at sea and along the world’s shorelines and formed by planetary wind patterns and water currents. Larger in area than the continental United States, the North Pacific Gyre is as large a stain on the face of the Earth as the unspeakable loss of tropical rain forests on most every continent.

Sadly, it turns out that there is something of an atmospheric cousin to the North Pacific Gyre, known affectionately among climatologists and meteorologists as the Chemical Equator. Confined to a range of latitudinal boundaries, the Chemical Equator is a vast pocket of dirty air which shifts throughout the year with monsoon winds but remains confined to the Intertropical Convergence Zone – a belt of low-pressure air which circles the Earth near the equator.

Driven by Hadley cells, the same results of solar radiation on the atmosphere as give us jet streams, trade winds and subtropical deserts, these cells occupy the intersection of the oceanic and atmospheric patterns of each hemisphere. Strangely enough, this chemical equator generally is dirtier in the north because the land mass north of the Equator contains millions more people than the south and thus millions of additional sources of air pollution.

What strikes me the most is that smoggy metropolitan and industrial areas have an effect so vast that it can be measured on a global scale. Now, thanks to the fine work of the Natural Environment Research Council in the United Kingdom and Clean Up The World in Australia, it is possible for each of us to see with amazing accuracy just where the results of the air pollution which we create will be trapped in the sky and rotated as the planet spins on its axis.

That’s right, through the power of Google Earth, we can see where the dirty air which we caused is located. Give it a try. You may find the results quite compelling. I know I did. Just visit the interactive map at

activities.cleanuptheworld.org

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

Photocredit: sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov

Back in July, I posited an ice-free arctic during the summer of 2009. We came very close in 2008 but how can I be certain that it will occur next year? The reasons are all around us. At the top of the list is the fact that the ambient temperature within the Arctic Circle right now is 9 degrees Fahrenheit above normal!

The great ice shelf of Greenland continues not only to melt but accelerate in velocity of loss. In fact, the trillions of gallons of fresh water which are pouring into the Arctic Ocean and surrounding seas from Greenland and other ice shelves are causing enormous shifts in oceanic salinity factors. This is not good!

As a journalist, I will not ask you to envision a future based on a science fiction movie. However, in May of 2004, Fox released a film which was science fiction at the time but has become more of a documentary. It is The Day After Tomorrow and I exhort you to rent it on DVD or Blu-ray immediately. Why? The horrible devastation inflicted on humanity, which makes the special effects of the film so compelling, is spawned in large part by huge shifts in oceanic salinity factors.

Guess what is happening right now, today, as you read this?

My friend, we have been living on the environmental equivalent of borrowed time for about 30 years and the bill is about to come due. We all must take action and the excuses of uncertainty become more ridiculous with each passing moment. To learn what you can do to help abate the climate crisis, visit one of my favorite websites:

FightGlobalWarming.com

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

photo courtesy of NOAA

Last time, I told you about the alarming spike in mean temperature in the Arctic. I recommended that you watch the 2004 film The Day After Tomorrow. I hope that you have done so because I am about to use a plot spoiler to make a very important point.

A great many catastrophes occur in the aforementioned film but the bulk of the story is dedicated to the fact that a new ice age sets in within the span of a few days, preceded by the flooding of New York City. The instant deep freeze is caused by bore holes which open in the atmosphere, fissures which allow the icy cold of space to travel dozens of miles into our home, reaching the surface of the Earth.

The holes are facilitated in part by the rapid deceleration of our major ocean currents, including the North Atlantic Oscillation. This rapid deceleration is caused by broad, sudden shifts in salinity factors of our oceans. What could cause such shifts? How about cataclysmic melting of our polar ice caps? Yes, that would do it. And what, pray, tell, is happening today, as you read this? Our polar ice caps are melting at a rate even the loudest soothsayers of doom failed to predict just a few short years ago.

Now, I realize that you don’t come to my blog to read the worst-case scenario. So, allow me to brighten your day. The news is not all bad. However, I had to share some of the gloom with you in order to drive home a key point about tidal wave power. You see, in our quest to combat global warming, we must harness in a safe and sustainable way every source of renewable energy we have. Even if we poison and overfish our oceans so badly that they become lifeless, they still can help us but we must use them in the right way.

There are two schools of thought in the renewable energy industry when it comes to the best way of harnessing the motion of the oceans for electricity. The first school advocates the use of submerged propellers which are spun by currents. They claim that their way is better because the currents are swift and consistent. The second school advocates the use of buoys, either fully or partially submerged, because the oceans are in constant motion.

Neither school can claim the irrefutable argument but one offers the better choice. Next time, I’ll share the reason with you.

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

photo courtesy of NOAA

credit: Oregon State University

OK, so we have a debate between advocates of tidal wave power and advocates of harnessing ocean currents to provide us with clean, renewable energy. Who’s right? Well, there are advantages to both approaches but only one will serve us reliably for the long haul. It is tidal wave power. The reason is frightening but also very simple.

As I have shared previously, right now, in the final quarter of calendar year 2008, the acceleration of the climate crisis is sounding environmental alarms on every continent. The worst of the worst is happening and at a pace which outstrips the estimates of some of humanity’s best minds. The ultimate consequences are known only in part. One of them, though, will be the shifting and/or destruction of ocean currents. We don’t know precisely how bad the situation will become but we do know that ocean currents will change dramatically in the next few years.

How does this relate to harvesting tidal wave power? The answer could not be more clear: the tides are caused mostly by the moon and its orbit around the Earth, which also is in constant motion. That is why high tide does not occur at the same time every day. That is why the sunset is not the same color every day. The list of effects goes on.

Ocean currents, on the other hand, are caused mostly by wind patterns and the planet’s hydrologic cycle, precipitation patterns and the way fresh water is distributed and stored through precipitation patterns. So, as I have explained previously, if global warming will cause ocean currents to change, does it make sense to install submerged turbines to be propelled by currents which move?

Put another way, tidal wave power will be with us so long as we have a moon – an arrangement which is not affected by the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation or overfishing. So, there you have it. Harnessing tidal wave power is not without its environmental consequences, such as to mangroves and other natural coastal real estate, but once constructed, tidal wave pattern systems make sense as a long-term source of clean, renewable energy. This environmentalist, on the other hand, cannot support the quest for ocean currents to power our cities because those currents are about to become errant – or just plain vanish.

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

Noted professor Jean-Pierre Gattuso of France’s National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) is a leading authority on ocean acidification. Part of the broad EPOCA initiative (European Project on Ocean Acidification), Professor Gattuso and his esteemed team have been hard at work in the Arctic for more than a year providing fresh empirical evidence regarding the short-term, mid-term and long-term effects of this insidious problem.

As it turns out, Professor Gattuso’s findings are far worse than most experts had predicted for this point in humanity’s technological evolution and reliance on fossil fuels. First, a brief review.

Last year, I explained the dangers of ocean acidification and compared it to battery corrosion. In short, as we burn more and more fossil fuels, we are acidifying our oceans. We are changing the Ph of the sea water. The effect is not unlike the effect on the lungs of people who live downwind of chemical plants or petroleum refineries. Now, as it turns out, the news is even worse.

Professor Gattuso has pointed to a global collapse in sea life within a few short decades and the complete loss of sea life in the Arctic by the year 2018. This is no exaggeration and Professor Gattuso has the proof to back his statements. Gattuso concludes that, “The water will become so acidic it will actually dissolve the shells of living shellfish. This will affect the whole food chain, including the North Atlantic salmon, which feeds on mollusks.”

It’s terrifying, I know, but I suspect that you wonder why the Arctic is so close to biological implosion, right? Professor Gattuso explains that, too. “More carbon dioxide can dissolve in cold water than warm. Hence the problem of acidification is worse in the Arctic than in the tropics.”

So, what is to be done? Well, the solution to this cataclysm-in-the-making is the same as the solution to climate change: we must stop burning fossil fuels. To gather additional perspective, I recommend the following free 4-page Adobe document from the EPOCA blog:

http://epocaarctic2009.wordpress.com/the-science/the-experiments

In closing, I realize that the problem can seem abstract, especially since so few people live in the Arctic. So, I will close with this. The acidification of the Arctic is to the biological collapse of the oceans what the warming of the Arctic is to the warming of the climate. It is the canary in the coal mine, quite literally in this case.

I leave you with more from Professor Gattuso...

“10% of the Arctic Ocean will be corrosively acidic by 2018; 50% by 2050; and 100% ocean by 2100. Over the whole planet, there will be a threefold increase in the average acidity of the oceans, which is unprecedented during the past 20 million years. That level of acidification will cause immense damage to the ecosystem and the food chain, particularly in the Arctic.”

credit Juniors Bildarchiv/Alamy

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

I’ve been warning for more than 2 years about the dangers of polar ice cap melting. It is an ominous threat and a growing crisis which worsens every time another pound of greenhouse gas emissions is dumped capriciously into our atmosphere. However, other than the fact that most anyone can understand that an ice free Arctic is a bad thing for polar bears, walruses, whales and so on, what can the average person really say about this catastrophe-in-the-making?

When, specifically, will we have an ice free Arctic? Will it be completely free of ice during each of the 12 months of the year? Which Arctic zone will lose all of its ice first? The questions are daunting, which is why no one has given us definitive answers, yet, that is.

Meet noted explorer and Arctic advocate Pen Hadow. He has many great achievements to his name, including the first solo journey without resupply from Canada to the Geographic North Pole. Simply put, Mr. Hadow has more experience on the Arctic sea ice than most and he is gravely concerned with the terrifying changes to the Arctic over the last two decades, including, most especially, shifts in the thickness, location AND COLOR of the ice.

As a true advocate for the changes which we all must make in order to save ourselves from an ice free Arctic, Mr. Hadow has lent his name and vast expertise to the Catlin Arctic Survey, which describes itself as a pioneering scientific expedition to help determine the lifespan of the Arctic Ocean’s sea ice cover. Through this good work, soon we all will know precisely when humanity will lose its ability to witness the Aurora Borealis from the permanent ice pack of the Arctic.

I commend the intrepid efforts of Pen Hadow and his valiant allies at the Catlin Arctic Survey and invite you to visit the website of the initiative. There, you will find abundant and disturbing details of how these dedicated environmentalists can quantify for all of us just how much devastation we have meted out on the tender Arctic through our reckless consumption of fossil fuels.

The homepage of the Catlin Arctic Survey can be found at

CatlinArcticSurvey.com

credit: Catlin Arctic Survey

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

Eons ago, roughly 55 million years, to be specific, there was an horrific collapse of the food chain of our oceans due to massive increases in the acidity of the water. I have warned repeatedly about the impact of a modern repeat of ocean acidification, as a consequence of deforestation and our reliance on fossil fuels . Now, thanks to a report published in the journal Nature Geoscience, we know that the rate at which we are acidifying our oceans is 10 times faster than it was the last time the oceans became uninhabitable to sea life.

A common rebuttal to skeptics of global warming, when they hear scientific proof such as this, goes something like this: Humans are capable of moving between areas with clean air and dirty air with little problem. Fish can do likewise. If only it were that simple!

The truth is that people have adaptable pulmonary capabilities because we have needed them for a very long time. Many of the aquatic species which comprise the foundation of the food chain of our oceans have changed little or not at all during the aforementioned 55 million years. When they are exposed to large swings in their environment, they die.

Why haven’t they changed? Because they have had no exposure to changes in the atmosphere! They live deep underwater, miles below the surface. Dr. Andy Ridgwell of the University of Bristol explains the problem very well.

“Unlike surface plankton dwelling in a variable habitat, organisms living deep down on the ocean floor are adapted to much more stable conditions. A rapid and severe geochemical change in their environment would make their survival precarious.”

- Dr. Andy Ridgwell

School of Geographical Sciences

University of Bristol

In closing, if ever you have wondered why I advocate so vigorously for all of us to live carbon-neutral, now you know. We are creating a crisis of even greater magnitude than the planet did to itself during periods of massive geological instability. For that, there can be no apology, merely remediation.

Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line

Corbett Kroehler

jpg credit: © Keoki Stender, Fishpics Hawaii

coral.jpg credit: © Daniel and Robbie Wisdom