The Wrath of Demeter

ABOUT THE TITLE: In Greek mythology, Demeter was the goddess who presided over grains, the fertility of the earth, the seasons, the harvest, and the cycle of life and death. Demeter, believed to be literally translated as "earth mother", was a powerful goddess able to provide bountiful harvests and never-ending famine on a whim. The wrath of Demeter is popularly portrayed in the story of Erysichthon, a hero from Thessaly whose reputation of arrogance, selfishness, and greed far preceded him. After cutting down a sacred oak tree in order to fashion himself a banquet table, Demeter punished him by placing an unrelenting and insatiable hunger in his belly. Unable to be satisfied by anything on earth, Erysichthon eventually resorted to eating his own flesh, thus "consuming himself to death."


NEED INSPIRATION?

Oren Lyons in "The 11th Hour"

Contributing Authors
Welp… it’s been so long since I lasted posted on WOD that the tumblr dashboard now looks different and I have no idea how long it’s been that way. This is why I am back with the creeptastic nasonex bee in the hopes that you might read this short post on the connection between global warming and… yes, allergies.

To most people, the human population’s effect on the global climate seems an intangible issue. Because climate change occurs relatively slowly over time, incremental changes in weather patterns, agricultural yield, coastal erosion, ecosystem shifts that cause species extinction, etc. can go unnoticed or, without calling attention to emerging trends over the past 10-20 years, can be marginilized and explained as “anomolies” by folks whose interests can ultimately be tracked back to coal, oil, or hazardous waste. As an environmental professional concerned, primarily, with incentivizing the “everyday Joe”  to adopt increasingly sustainable behaviors, I believe the challenge exists in making the intangible tangible; turning the ”this doesn’t seem to effect me today” into “I see an urgent need to make a change.”

Climate change/global warming is a complex issue (there a number of greenhouse gases to be concerned about), but for the purposes of this post, I’m going to focus on carbon dioxide as it’s the GHG of highest concern AND it just so happens to be plant food; the subject of today’s incentive. In the short term (before the CO2 provides additional insulation and temperatures rise to the point where plant’s are no longer able to thrive in the same manner as before), studies at the USDA’s Crop Systems and Global Change Lab showed that higher levels of CO2 appeared to ”super charge” the growth of Ragweed and tree pollen; bolstering both pollen production and the allergic properties of the pollen itself. To further validate the study, researchers planted the Ragweed in both urban environments (epicenters of population AND CO2) and rural environments. I’m sure you won’t be surprised that the Ragweed in the urban environments produced 4 times the amount of pollen that the Ragweed in the rural environments produced. In addition to the higher levels of CO2 ratcheting up the amount of pollen in the air, higher temperatures (the result of unmitigated CO2 emissions before we ever cared about CO2 emissions) occurring earlier in the year (e.g., we hit 100 degrees at the beginning of June in Virginia) are causing plants to bloom earlier; elongating allergy season.
I’d be interested to know if allergy sufferers have perceived a difference in the length of allergy season and the severity of their allergies. If you have, global warming may just be to blame. Might want to consider recycling some cans and bottles or buying some renewable energy certificates at Dominion Power after all :)

Welp… it’s been so long since I lasted posted on WOD that the tumblr dashboard now looks different and I have no idea how long it’s been that way. This is why I am back with the creeptastic nasonex bee in the hopes that you might read this short post on the connection between global warming and… yes, allergies.

To most people, the human population’s effect on the global climate seems an intangible issue. Because climate change occurs relatively slowly over time, incremental changes in weather patterns, agricultural yield, coastal erosion, ecosystem shifts that cause species extinction, etc. can go unnoticed or, without calling attention to emerging trends over the past 10-20 years, can be marginilized and explained as “anomolies” by folks whose interests can ultimately be tracked back to coal, oil, or hazardous waste. As an environmental professional concerned, primarily, with incentivizing the “everyday Joe”  to adopt increasingly sustainable behaviors, I believe the challenge exists in making the intangible tangible; turning the ”this doesn’t seem to effect me today” into “I see an urgent need to make a change.”

Climate change/global warming is a complex issue (there a number of greenhouse gases to be concerned about), but for the purposes of this post, I’m going to focus on carbon dioxide as it’s the GHG of highest concern AND it just so happens to be plant food; the subject of today’s incentive. In the short term (before the CO2 provides additional insulation and temperatures rise to the point where plant’s are no longer able to thrive in the same manner as before), studies at the USDA’s Crop Systems and Global Change Lab showed that higher levels of CO2 appeared to ”super charge” the growth of Ragweed and tree pollen; bolstering both pollen production and the allergic properties of the pollen itself. To further validate the study, researchers planted the Ragweed in both urban environments (epicenters of population AND CO2) and rural environments. I’m sure you won’t be surprised that the Ragweed in the urban environments produced 4 times the amount of pollen that the Ragweed in the rural environments produced. In addition to the higher levels of CO2 ratcheting up the amount of pollen in the air, higher temperatures (the result of unmitigated CO2 emissions before we ever cared about CO2 emissions) occurring earlier in the year (e.g., we hit 100 degrees at the beginning of June in Virginia) are causing plants to bloom earlier; elongating allergy season.

I’d be interested to know if allergy sufferers have perceived a difference in the length of allergy season and the severity of their allergies. If you have, global warming may just be to blame. Might want to consider recycling some cans and bottles or buying some renewable energy certificates at Dominion Power after all :)

This is a pretty long read (although not unusual on this blog), but I HIGHLY recommend it for those of you who are interested in the empirical data supporting the effects of climate change.

mohandasgandhi:

The first anniversary of ‘Climategate’, Part 1: The media blows the story of the century

This week marks the one-year anniversary of what the anti-science crowd successfully labeled ‘Climategate’.  The media will be doing countless retrospectives, most of which will be wasted ink, like the Guardian’s piece — focusing on climate scientists at the expense of climate science, which is precisely the kind of miscoverage that has been going on for the whole year!

I’ll save that my media critiques for Part 2, since I think that Climategate’s biggest impact was probably on the media, continuing their downward trend of focusing on style over substance, of missing the story of the century, if not the millennia.

The last year or so has seen more scientific papers and presentations that raise the genuine prospect of catastrophe (if we stay on our current emissions path) that I can recall seeing in any other year.

Perhaps the media would have ignored that science anyway, but Climategate appears to be a key reason “less than 10 percent of the news articles written about last year’s climate summit in Copenhagen dealt primarily with the science of climate change, a study showed on Monday.”

But for those interested in the real climate science story of the past year, let’s review a couple dozen studies of the most important findings.  Any one of these would be cause for action — and combined they vindicate the final sentence of Elizabeth Kolbert’s  Field Notes from a Catastrophe:  “It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself, but that is what we are now in the process of doing.”

1. Nature: “Global warming blamed for 40% decline in the ocean’s phytoplankton”:  “Microscopic life crucial to the marine food chain is dying out. The consequences could be catastrophic.”

If confirmed, it may represent the single most important finding of the year in climate science.  Seth Borenstein of the AP explains, “plant plankton found in the world’s oceans  are crucial to much of life on Earth. They are the foundation of the bountiful marine food web, produce half the world’s oxygen and suck up harmful carbon dioxide.” Boris Worm, a marine biologist and co-author of the study said, “We found that temperature had the best power to explain the changes.”  He noted, “If this holds up, something really serious is underway and has been underway for decades. I’ve been trying to think of a biological change that’s bigger than this and I can’t think of one.”

2.  Science: Vast East Siberian Arctic Shelf methane stores destabilizing and venting:  NSF issues world a wake-up call: “Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.”

Methane release from the not-so-perma-frost is the most dangerous amplifying feedback in the entire carbon cycle. This research finds a key “lid” on “the large sub-sea permafrostcarbon reservoir” near Eastern Siberia “is clearlyperforated, and sedimentary CH4 [methane] is escaping to the atmosphere.”

The permafrost permamelt contains a staggering “1.5 trillion tons of frozen carbon, about twice as much carbon as contained in the atmosphere,” much of which would be released as methane.  Methane is  is 25 times as potent a heat-trapping gas as CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but 72 times as potent over 20 years!

The carbon is locked in a freezer in the part of the planet warming up the fastest (see “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss“).  Half the land-based permafrost would vanish by mid-century on our current emissions path (see “Tundra, Part 2: The point of no return” and below).  No climate model currently incorporates the amplifying feedback from methane released by a defrosting tundra.

The NSF is normally a very staid organization.  If they are worried, everybody should be.

It is increasingly clear that if the world strays significantly above 450 ppm atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide for any length of time, we will find it unimaginably difficult to stop short of 800 to 1000 ppm.

3.  Must-read NCAR analysis warns we risk multiple, devastating global droughts even on moderate emissions path.

The PDSI in the Great Plains during the Dust Bowl apparently spiked very briefly to -6, but otherwise rarely exceeded -3 for the decade (see here).  The National Center for Atmospheric Research notes “By the end of the century, many populated areas, including parts of the United States, could face readings in the range of -8 to -10, and much of the Mediterranean could fall to -15 to -20. Such readings would be almost unprecedented.”

4.   Nature Geoscience study: Oceans are acidifying 10 times faster today than 55 million years ago when a mass extinction of marine species occurred and Geological Society: Acidifying oceans spell marine biological meltdown “by end of century” — Co-author: “Unless we curb carbon emissions we risk mass extinctions, degrading coastal waters and encouraging outbreaks of toxic jellyfish and algae.”

Marine life and all who depend on it, including humans are at grave risk from unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases.  This can’t be stopped with geo-engineering and there is no plausible strategy for undoing it.

Ocean acidification may well be the most under-reported of all the catastrophic climate impacts we are risking.

5.  Sea levels may rise 3 times faster than IPCC estimated, could hit 6 feet by 2100 [see figure] and these related findings and studies:

For more on SLR, see Coastal studies experts: “For coastal management purposes, a [sea level] rise of 7 feet (2 meters) should be utilized for planning major infrastructure”

6.  Royal Society: “There are very strong indications that the current rate of species extinctions far exceeds anything in the fossil record.”

This is from a special issue of 16 articles in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (Biological Science), “Biological diversity in a changing world,”– which notes “Never before has a single species driven such profound changes to the habitats, composition and climate of the planet.”

7.  Science: Drought drives decade-long decline in plant growth

The NASA news release explains the importance of the work by researchers Maosheng Zhao and Steven Running,:

“These results are extraordinarily significant because they show that the global net effect of climatic warming on the productivity of terrestrial vegetation need not be positive — as was documented for the 1980’s and 1990’s,” said Diane Wickland, of NASA Headquarters and manager of NASA’s Terrestrial Ecology research program….

“This is a pretty serious warning that warmer temperatures are not going to endlessly improve plant growth,” Running said….

“The potential that future warming would cause additional declines does not bode well for the ability of the biosphere to support multiple societal demands for agricultural production, fiber needs, and increasingly, biofuel production,” Zhao said.

Precisely.

8.  Nature review of 20 years of field studies finds soils emitting more CO2 as planet warms

A biogeochemist quoted by Nature explained that “perhaps [the] most likely explanation is that increasing temperatures have increased rates of decomposition of soil organic matter, which has increased the flow of CO2. If true, this is an important finding: that a positive feedback to climate change is already occurring at a detectable level in soils.”

Another major study in the February 2010 issue of the journal Ecology by Finnish researchers, “Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon fractions in boreal forest soil,” had a similar conclusion.  The Finnish Environment Institute, which led the study, explained the results in a release, “Soil contributes to climate warming more than expected”

9.   Global Warming: Future Temperatures Could Exceed Livable Limits, Researchers Find.

There were so many important climate science findings this year I didn’t get to write on all of them.  This one in particular was misunderstood:

Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

The study notes that even a 12°F warming would be dangerous for many.  In fact, we could well see these deadly temperatures in the next century or century and a half over large parts of the globe on a very plausible emissions path.

10.  UK Met Office: Catastrophic climate change, 13-18°F over most of U.S. and 27°F in the Arctic, could happen in 50 years, but “we do have time to stop it if we cut greenhouse gas emissions soon.”

Right before Climategate broke, scientists were increasingly starting to realize that humanity might well ignore the increasingly strong evidence that we needed to take action.  They even held a conference on “4°C and beyond” just weeks before the scandal broke.  Some of the top climate modelers in the world finally did a “plausible worst case scenario,” as Dr Richard Betts, Head of Climate Impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, put it in a terrific and terrifying talk (audio here, PPT here).

As the Met Office notes here, “In some areas warming could be significantly higher (10 degrees [C = 15F] or more)”:

  • The Arctic could warm by up to 15.2 °C [27.4 °F] for a high-emissions scenario, enhanced by melting of snow and ice causing more of the Sun’s radiation to be absorbed.
  • For Africa, the western and southern regions are expected to experience both large warming (up to 10 °C [18 °F]) and drying.
  • Some land areas could warm by seven degrees [12.6 F] or more.
  • Rainfall could decrease by 20% or more in some areas, although there is a spread in the magnitude of drying. All computer models indicate reductions in rainfall over western and southern Africa, Central America, the Mediterranean and parts of coastal Australia.
  • In other areas, such as India, rainfall could increase by 20% or more. Higher rainfall increases the risk of river flooding.

In fact, though, this is ‘only’ the 5.4°C case, and if it doesn’t happen in the 2060s (which it probably won’t), it is merely the business as usual projection (!) for 2100 (see “M.I.T. doubles its 2095 warming projection to 10°F — with 866 ppm and Arctic warming of 20°F“).

CONCLUSION:  Unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases threaten multiple catastrophes, any one of which justifies action.  Together, they represent the gravest threat to humanity imaginable.  The fact that the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media ignored the overwhelming majority of these studies and devoted a large fraction of its climate ‘ink’ in the last 12 months to what was essentially a non-story is arguably the single greatest failing of the science media this year.

I didn’t have space here to report on the many studies that bolstered the case for our understanding that recent warming has been unequivocal and that humans are the primary cause.  But indeed the case is so strong that this year, even the normally staid U.S. National Academy of Sciences labeled as “settled facts” that “the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.”

I highly suggest reading all of this, particularly if your understanding of climate science is a bit fractured.

This move to cap the GHG emissions of the nation’s utility providers is the main instigator of the recent republican bills that will aim to strip the EPA’s power to impose GHG restrictions under the Clean Air Act:

The three [current] measures hamstring the agency’s authority in different ways: Blackburn’s would “amend the Clean Air Act to provide that greenhouse gases are not subject to the Act,” even though the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that they are; Capito’s would delay EPA from regulating carbon dioxide and methane for two years; and Poe’s would prohibit any agency funding “to be used to implement or enforce a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases.”  

Okay guys. Seriously?

I decided to write about this today, the national holiday celebrating Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, because I think climate/environmental legislation, in some ways, is a lot like civil rights legislation. In the 60’s integrationism, for example, was widely unpopular. Had we relied solely on the moral compass of the ruling class (i.e., rich white people), it’s hard (or, easy I guess in an awful way) to imagine where we’d be. Similarly, climate legislation is not the most popular choice among the ruling class (e.g., manufacturing corporations, utility providers, and the citizens being scared into thinking that climate legislation automatically equals sky rocketing energy prices (FYI - it won’t happen - if everyone has to follow the same rules, good ole capitalist competition will work out the pricing)). It’s a moral choice. It’s the hard choice, but it’s the right one.

Bottom Line - of course the industry special interest groups are pissed and have sent the conservative attack dogs to strip the EPA’s power to enforce environmental regulations (just saying that outloud sounds ridiculous). I know… it’s much easier and more financially attractive to maintain the status quo or make only the changes you want, but sorry dudes, you show absolutely no progress towards making the right decision so you’ve made the ONE agency, responsible for the earth’s ability to continue to sustain human life, force you to do it. 

US industry is responsible for 40% of the nation’s GHG emissions. 40%!!! And with the US’s GHG emissions topping EVERY OTHER COUNTRY’s, we are literally the world’s biggest assholes if we don’t do something about it.

New Uses for Old Things

So - I’m a big fan of Real Simple magazine for a million reasons, but among them is my love for finding new uses for old things. I’ve got a natural knack for jerry rigging (I’m not sure this is a very PC term… if it’s not, sorry… seriously, I’d welcome alternatives for “constructing things in an improvised manner” if you’ve got them) - a skill that has come in handy lately with my quest for sustainable options to everyday items.

I thought this use for an old dryer sheet was pretty cool. A way to use the sheet twice before it gets thrown out AND ease up on the chemicals used to the clean the shower. I definitely recommend taking a look at this entire database (click the picture)… especially on those cleaning days where you’re looking at something saying to yourself “I’m never going to use this again… I might as well throw it out.” It’s also a chance to be creative… like when you’ve got a million wine corks left over from a party (throw them in a vase for a decorative effect) or when you’ve run out of tissues (use the box as a holder for the plastic bags we all keep when we forget our reusable bags at the grocery store).

Happy re-using!

Seasonal Produce - The Alternate Strategy to Purchasing a CSA Share
Well… I suppose I should apologize first for the unintended and really long break I took from WOD. It turns out that real life can be really distracting sometimes. However, I’m back - in semi-full force - with some everyday environmental strategies for the average everyday person. On today’s agenda: eating seasonal produce.
You may remember my impassioned post on organic foods and participating in local CSA’s, but a simpler way to buy organic foods in your regular old grocery store is to plan meals around what is in season.  Logically speaking, organic produce should be much easier to find if you stick to the right (seasonal) stuff. Since it’s the appropriate time of year for it to be grown without the help of genetic modifications or chemical pesticides and fertilizers, you may find, for instance, that organic spinach is a little more accessible this week than it was in July. These days in the produce section at, say, a Giant or a Bloom, you’re likely to find a small organic stand with a limited variety of fruits and veges. It probably looks half hazardly thrown together and the produce may look a little smaller or seem a little more fragile - but the aesthetic characteristics of the organic produce stand at Giant or Bloom are only an indicator of how little a) chemical pesticides and freaky genetic alterations have been made to that food and b) the big chains give a shit about your health. I know - it seems easier to go to the surrounding displays for your produce (they’re prettier, more robust, there’s more of a variety), but by picking from the organic stand you a) put your consumer powers to good use and potentially incentivize the grocery store to expand its organic product offering and b) end up putting healthier stuff in your body more often. I mean, what’s the point of eating the vegetables if, by the time Monsanto is done with them, all their healthy attributes are completely cancelled out? You might as well just stick to cheese, bread, and wine (god, that would be the life). 
The picture above is a list of commonly grown fruits and vegetables in Virginia and their respective peak months (source: Virginia Department of Agriculture); sorted for the upcoming fall season. My winter share from Virginia Green Grocer starts next week and, personally, just the idea of the curried squash soup I plan on making (inspired by a lunch I had at Equinox the other day) already has my mouth watering. 
So, in sum, give it a try - plan some meals with seasonal produce and see how often you can buy organic. Also (and, maybe, most importantly) feel free to share some ridiculously delicious seasonal sweet potato, asian pear (who knew?), apple, or cabbage recipes to help ensure my winter season CSA survival!

Seasonal Produce - The Alternate Strategy to Purchasing a CSA Share


Well… I suppose I should apologize first for the unintended and really long break I took from WOD. It turns out that real life can be really distracting sometimes. However, I’m back - in semi-full force - with some everyday environmental strategies for the average everyday person. On today’s agenda: eating seasonal produce.


You may remember my impassioned post on organic foods and participating in local CSA’s, but a simpler way to buy organic foods in your regular old grocery store is to plan meals around what is in season.  Logically speaking, organic produce should be much easier to find if you stick to the right (seasonal) stuff. Since it’s the appropriate time of year for it to be grown without the help of genetic modifications or chemical pesticides and fertilizers, you may find, for instance, that organic spinach is a little more accessible this week than it was in July. These days in the produce section at, say, a Giant or a Bloom, you’re likely to find a small organic stand with a limited variety of fruits and veges. It probably looks half hazardly thrown together and the produce may look a little smaller or seem a little more fragile - but the aesthetic characteristics of the organic produce stand at Giant or Bloom are only an indicator of how little a) chemical pesticides and freaky genetic alterations have been made to that food and b) the big chains give a shit about your health. I know - it seems easier to go to the surrounding displays for your produce (they’re prettier, more robust, there’s more of a variety), but by picking from the organic stand you a) put your consumer powers to good use and potentially incentivize the grocery store to expand its organic product offering and b) end up putting healthier stuff in your body more often. I mean, what’s the point of eating the vegetables if, by the time Monsanto is done with them, all their healthy attributes are completely cancelled out? You might as well just stick to cheese, bread, and wine (god, that would be the life). 


The picture above is a list of commonly grown fruits and vegetables in Virginia and their respective peak months (source: Virginia Department of Agriculture); sorted for the upcoming fall season. My winter share from Virginia Green Grocer starts next week and, personally, just the idea of the curried squash soup I plan on making (inspired by a lunch I had at Equinox the other day) already has my mouth watering. 


So, in sum, give it a try - plan some meals with seasonal produce and see how often you can buy organic. Also (and, maybe, most importantly) feel free to share some ridiculously delicious seasonal sweet potato, asian pear (who knew?), apple, or cabbage recipes to help ensure my winter season CSA survival!

Anyone who watched Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” knows about predictions that climate change will produce millions of coastal refugees.  The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that rising sea levels, saltwater intrusion and accelerated coastal erosion could lead to as many as 200 million environmentally induced refugees worldwide by 2050.  Many skeptics still doubt that the sea level could rise 20 feet leaving much of Manhattan underwater as discussed in the former Vice President’s movie.  However, much of what is downplayed in the mainstream media proves that the effects of climate change are creating underwater disappearing acts around the globe.  Eight years ago the first uninhabited islands in the Pacific nation of Kiribati were completely lost to the ocean.  And, this year the Lohachara Island, in India’s part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, and once home to 10,000 people was completely submerged.  Refugees from the vanished Lohachara Island and the disappearing Ghoramara Island have fled to Sagar Island, but this island has already lost 7,500 acres of land to the sea. In all, a dozen islands, which are home to 700,000 people in India’s delta region, are in danger of being submerged by the rising seas. The area’s 400 tigers are also in danger.  Even less notable in the news was the loss of several islands in the Niger Delta region this year that disappeared due to erosion from the Atlantic Ocean.  People that were living and working on the islands had to be relocated throughout Africa. Twenty years ago, two professors at the Nigerian Institute for Oceanography and Marine Research had warned that Nigeria was losing coastal land at an alarming rate and there was a chance that the islands could erode. Chidi Ibe and Benjamin Akpati said that weathering from the ocean, along with rising waters, could endanger the islands, and as it turns out their predictions were right.

As the sea level continues to rise, a number of other islands are in danger of being lost forever, and many coastal cities across the globe are also at risk.  Considering coastal areas are the most populated, housing more than fifty percent of the world’s population, countries with large amounts of coastal land have to start preparing for how they can adapt to the changing coast.  Islands most at risk are also starting to take pre-emptive action to deal with their possible submersion.  The people of low-lying islands in Vanuatu, located in the Pacific, have been evacuated as a precaution, but the land still sits above sea level. The Carteret Islands of Papua New Guinea were expected to be some of the first populated islands to disappear until the loss of Lohachara this year.  However, the islands are expected to be under water by 2015, and Papua New Guinea’s mission to the United Nations has already announced it would evacuate the approximately 2,000 islanders to Bougainville Island, about a four-hour boat ride away.  Two-thirds of nearby populated island Ghoramara has also been permanently inundated and it will only be a matter of time before it is completely underwater. Islands from the Maldives in the Indian Ocean to the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean are predicted to be some of the next in line to disappear into the sea. President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives declared upon entering office that he would create a sovereign fund, something of a last-resort insurance policy, in the event that the country’s 305,000 citizens would require relocation. The fund was victim to budget shortfalls, but Maldivian officials have said it had the desired effect of raising awareness in the international community.

Nations have ceased to exist throughout history, but it has been through war or state secession where the government returned to its territory or a new government was formed.  However, the effects of climate change and the submersion of whole islands presents new, tough questions that have not had to be answered in the history of nations.  Nations have to start thinking about answers to questions, such as: What about largely populated cities like Manhattan that could fall victim, how should they start preparing for the effects of climate change?  If the victims of climate change become refugees what will their status be if they have to move across international borders?  If a country disappears, is it still a country? Does it keep its seat at the United Nations? What nation controls its offshore mineral rights, shipping lanes, and fish? What citizenship, if any, can those displaced people claim?

As glaciers continue to disappear and the sea-level continues to rise, the leaders of these disappearing coastal lands have a hard road ahead to make the right decisions for their nations and people.  With that in mind, it is anyone’s guess which island or coastal area will disappear next and how many coastal refugees will be left to find a new place to call home.

My environmental consulting partner in crime, environmentaldiva (as she decided she wants to be called), will soon be contributing posts to WOD. Keep on the lookout for a southern accent and allusions to “environmental chicks taking over the world”

Interesting article on the debate about the increased frequency of extreme weather events as an indicator of global warming

Thousands of Dead Fish Wash Up on Jersey Shore (click the picture for the story on msnbc)


This is what happens when ocean surface temperatures warm and cause increased stratification (the formation of static layers in the ocean). Temperature stratification restricts water movement so it affects the ocean’s natural “pump” from bringing nutrients to the surface, stimulating photosynthesis (of which oxygen is a bi-prodcut), and then churning the oxygen back down into the depths. This causes an overall decrease in total oxygen concentration in the ocean (which is the basis of the entire system) and crazy shit starts happening - like thousands of ONE species of fish washing up on 8 miles of coast line in New Jersey overnight.