Fw: Apocalypse Now: Sleepwalking to End of the Earth

----- Original Message -----
From: "Flyby News"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 3:39 AM
Subject: Apocalypse Now: Sleepwalking to End of the Earth

>
> Flyby News
> Editor - Jonathan Mark
> 08 February 2005 - Part 1
> Apocalypse Now: Sleepwalking to End of the Earth
>
> "Then the biggest-ever study of climate change . . .
> reported that it could prove to be twice as
> catastrophic as the IPCC's worst predictions.
> And an international task force - also reporting
> to Tony Blair, and co-chaired by his close ally, Stephen Byers -
> concluded that we could reach "the point of no return" in a decade."
>
> - Geoffrey Lean
> Apocalypse Now:
> How Mankind is Sleepwalking to the End of the Earth"
>
> *************************************************************************
> This issue is posted in best format for Reading, Linking, and Printing,
> from recent issues = = = > http://www.FlybyNews.com
> *************************************************************************
>
> Editor's Notes:
>
> "How Mankind is Sleepwalking to the End of the Earth" is blatant reality!
> Please consider to read this, and links at the end for more on Global
Warming,
> and on appropriate technology to significantly reduce CO2 pollution
emissions.
> Let's do something for seven generations, for those here now and for the
> future. The mentioning in this following article that nuclear power should
be
> considered to lessen the threat of global warming is ludicrous. This would
> only make matters worse, by the emissions released by truckloads of
shipments
> to build and care for the material, never mind the threat of nuclear harm
by
> sabotage, terrorism, and earth-climate changes.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
> 1) How Mankind is Sleepwalking to the End of the Earth
>
> Apocalypse Now: How Mankind is Sleepwalking to the End of the Earth
> Published on Sunday, February 6, 2005 by the lndependent/UK
>
> Floods, storms and droughts. Melting Arctic ice, shrinking glaciers,
oceans
> turning to acid. The world's top scientists warned last week that
dangerous
> climate change is taking place today, not the day after tomorrow. You
don't
> believe it? Then, says Geoffrey Lean, read this...
>
> by Geoffrey Lean
>
> Future historians, looking back from a much hotter and less hospitable
world,
> are likely to play special attention to the first few weeks of 2005. As
they
> puzzle over how a whole generation could have sleepwalked into disaster -
> destroying the climate that has allowed human civilization to flourish
over
> the past 11,000 years - they may well identify the past weeks as the time
when
> the last alarms sounded.
>
> Last week, 200 of the world's leading climate scientists - meeting at Tony
> Blair's request at the Met Office's new headquarters at Exeter - issued
the
> most urgent warning to date that dangerous climate change is taking place,
and
> that time is running out.
>
> Next week the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty that tries to
control
> global warming, comes into force after a seven-year delay. But it is clear
> that the protocol does not go nearly far enough.
>
> The alarms have been going off since the beginning of one of the warmest
> Januaries on record. First, Dr Rajendra Pachauri - chairman of the
official
> Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - told a UN conference in
> Mauritius that the pollution which causes global warming has reached
> "dangerous" levels.
>
> Then the biggest-ever study of climate change, based at Oxford University,
> reported that it could prove to be twice as catastrophic as the IPCC's
worst
> predictions. And an international task force - also reporting to Tony
Blair,
> and co-chaired by his close ally, Stephen Byers - concluded that we could
> reach "the point of no return" in a decade.
>
> Finally, the UK head of Shell, Lord Oxburgh, took time out - just before
his
> company reported record profits mainly achieved by selling oil, one of the
> main causes of the problem - to warn that unless governments take urgent
> action there "will be a disaster".
>
> But it was last week at the Met Office's futuristic glass headquarters,
> incongruously set in a dreary industrial estate on the outskirts of
Exeter,
> that it all came together. The conference had been called by the Prime
> Minister to advise him on how to "avoid dangerous climate change". He
needed
> help in persuading the world to prioritize the issue this year during
> Britain's presidencies of the EU and the G8 group of economic powers.
>
> The conference opened with the Secretary of State for the Environment,
> Margaret Beckett, warning that "a significant impact" from global warming
"is
> already inevitable". It continued with presentations from top scientists
and
> economists from every continent. These showed that some dangerous climate
> change was already taking place and that catastrophic events once thought
> highly improbable were now seen as likely (see panel). Avoiding the worst
was
> technically simple and economically cheap, they said, provided that
> governments could be persuaded to take immediate action.
>
> About halfway through I realized that I had been here before. In the
summer of
> 1986 the world's leading nuclear experts gathered in Vienna for an inquest
> into the accident at Chernobyl. The head of the Russian delegation showed
a
> film shot from a helicopter, and we suddenly found ourselves gazing down
on
> the red-hot exposed reactor core.
>
> It was all, of course, much less dramatic at Exeter. But as paper followed
> learned paper, once again a group of world authorities were staring at a
> crisis they had devoted their lives to trying to avoid.
>
> I am willing to bet there were few in the room who did not sense their
> children or grandchildren standing invisibly at their shoulders. The
> conference formally concluded that climate change was "already occurring"
and
> that "in many cases the risks are more serious than previously thought".
But
> the cautious scientific language scarcely does justice to the sense of the
> meeting.
>
> We learned that glaciers are shrinking around the world. Arctic sea ice
has
> lost almost half its thickness in recent decades. Natural disasters are
> increasing rapidly around the world. Those caused by the weather - such as
> droughts, storms, and floods - are rising three times faster than those -
such
> as earthquakes - that are not.
>
> We learned that bird populations in the North Sea collapsed last year,
after
> the sand eels on which they feed left its warmer waters - and how the
number
> of scientific papers recording changes in ecosystems due to global warming
has
> escalated from 14 to more than a thousand in five years.
>
> Worse, leading scientists warned of catastrophic changes that once they
had
> dismissed as "improbable". The meeting was particularly alarmed by
powerful
> evidence, first reported in The Independent on Sunday last July, that the
> oceans are slowly turning acid, threatening all marine life.
>
> Professor Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey,
presented
> new evidence that the West Antarctic ice sheet is beginning to melt,
> threatening eventually to raise sea levels by 15ft: 90 per cent of the
world's
> people live near current sea levels. Recalling that the IPCC's last report
had
> called Antarctica "a slumbering giant", he said: "I would say that this is
now
> an awakened giant."
>
> Professor Mike Schlesinger, of the University of Illinois, reported that
the
> shutdown of the Gulf Stream, once seen as a "low probability event", was
now
> 45 per cent likely this century, and 70 per cent probable by 2200. If it
comes
> sooner rather than later it will be catastrophic for Britain and northern
> Europe, giving us a climate like Labrador (which shares our latitude) even
as
> the rest of the world heats up: if it comes later it could be beneficial,
> moderating the worst of the warming.
>
> The experts at Exeter were virtually unanimous about the danger, mirroring
the
> attitude of the climate science community as a whole: humanity is to
blame.
> There were a few skeptics at Exeter, including Andrei Illarionov, an
adviser
> to Russia's President Putin, who last year called the Kyoto Protocol "an
> interstate Auschwitz". But in truth it is much easier to find skeptics
among
> media pundits in London or neo-cons in Washington than among climate
> scientists. Even the few contrarian climatalogists publish little research
to
> support their views, concentrating on questioning the work of others.
>
> Now a new scientific consensus is emerging - that the warming must be kept
> below an average increase of two degrees centigrade if catastrophe is to
be
> avoided. This almost certainly involves keeping concentrations of carbon
> dioxide, the main cause of climate change, below 400 parts per million.
>
> Unfortunately we are almost there, with concentrations exceeding 370ppm
and
> rising, but experts at the conference concluded that we could go briefly
above
> the danger level so long as we brought it down rapidly afterwards. They
added
> that this would involve the world reducing emissions by 50 per cent by
2050 -
> and rich countries cutting theirs by 30 per cent by 2020.
>
> Economists stressed there is little time for delay. If action is put off
for a
> decade, it will need to be twice as radical; if it has to wait 20 years,
it
> will cost between three and seven times as much.
>
> The good news is that it can be done with existing technology, by cutting
> energy waste, expanding the use of renewable sources, growing trees and
crops
> (which remove carbon dioxide from the air) to turn into fuel, capturing
the
> gas before it is released from power stations, and - maybe - using more
> nuclear energy.
>
> The better news is that it would not cost much: one estimate suggested the
> cost would be about 1 per cent of Europe's GNP spread over 20 years;
another
> suggested it meant postponing an expected fivefold increase in world
wealth by
> just two years. Many experts believe combating global warming would
increase
> prosperity, by bringing in new technologies.
>
> The big question is whether governments will act. President Bush's
opposition
> to international action remains the greatest obstacle. Tony Blair, by
almost
> universal agreement, remains the leader with the best chance of persuading
him
> to change his mind.
>
> But so far the Prime Minister has been more influenced by the President
than
> the other way round. He appears to be moving away from fighting for the
> pollution reductions needed in favor of agreeing on a vague pledge to
bring in
> new technologies sometime in the future.
>
> By then it will be too late. And our children and grandchildren will
wonder -
> as we do in surveying, for example, the drift into the First World War -
"how
> on earth could they be so blind?"
>
> WATER WARS
>
> What could happen? Wars break out over diminishing water resources as
> populations grow and rains fail.
>
> How would this come about? Over 25 per cent more people than at present
are
> expected to live in countries where water is scarce in the future, and
global
> warming will make it worse.
>
> How likely is it? Former UN chief Boutros Boutros-Ghali has long said that
the
> next Middle East war will be fought for water, not oil.
>
> DISAPPEARING NATIONS
>
> What could happen? Low-lying island such as the Maldives and Tuvalu - with
> highest points only a few feet above sea-level - will disappear off the
face
> of the Earth.
>
> How would this come about? As the world heats up, sea levels are rising,
> partly because glaciers are melting, and partly because the water in the
> oceans expands as it gets warmer.
>
> How likely is it? Inevitable. Even if global warming stopped today, the
seas
> would continue to rise for centuries. Some small islands have already sunk
for
> ever. A year ago, Tuvalu was briefly submerged.
>
> FLOODING
>
> What could happen? London, New York, Tokyo, Bombay, many other cities and
vast
> areas of countries from Britain to Bangladesh disappear under tens of feet
of
> water, as the seas rise dramatically.
>
> How would this come about? Ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica melt. The
> Greenland ice sheet would raise sea levels by more than 20ft, the West
> Antarctic ice sheet by another 15ft.
>
> How likely is it? Scientists used to think it unlikely, but this year
reported
> that the melting of both ice caps had begun. It will take hundreds of
years,
> however, for the seas to rise that much.
>
> UNINHABITABLE EARTH
>
> What could happen? Global warming escalates to the point where the world's
> whole climate abruptly switches, turning it permanently into a much hotter
and
> less hospitable planet.
>
> How would this come about? A process involving "positive feedback" causes
the
> warming to fuel itself, until it reaches a point that finally tips the
climate
> pattern over.
>
> How likely is it? Abrupt flips have happened in the prehistoric past.
> Scientists believe this is unlikely, at least in the foreseeable future,
but
> increasingly they are refusing to rule it out.
>
> RAINFOREST FIRES
>
> What could happen? Famously wet tropical forests, such as those in the
Amazon,
> go up in flames, destroying the world's richest wildlife habitats and
> releasing vast amounts of carbon dioxide to speed global warming.
>
> How would this come about? Britain's Met Office predicted in 1999 that
much of
> the Amazon will dry out and die within 50 years, making it ready for
sparks -
> from humans or lightning - to set it ablaze.
>
> How likely is it? Very, if the predictions turn out to be right. Already
there
> have been massive forest fires in Borneo and Amazonia, casting palls of hi
ghly
> polluting smoke over vast areas.
>
> THE BIG FREEZE
>
> What could happen? Britain and northern Europe get much colder because the
> Gulf Stream, which provides as much heat as the sun in winter, fails.
>
> How would this come about? Melting polar ice sends fresh water into the
North
> Atlantic. The less salty water fails to generate the underwater current
which
> the Gulf Stream needs.
>
> How likely is it? About evens for a Gulf Steam failure this century, said
> scientists last week.
>
> STARVATION
>
> What could happen? Food production collapses in Africa, for example, as
> rainfall dries up and droughts increase. As farmland turns to desert,
people
> flee in their millions in search of food.
>
> How would this come about? Rainfall is expected to decrease by up to 60
per
> cent in winter and 30 per cent in summer in southern Africa this century.
By
> some estimates, Zambia could lose almost all its farms.
>
> How likely is it? Pretty likely unless the world tackles both global
warming
> and Africa's decline. Scientists agree that droughts will increase in a
warmer
> world.
>
> ACID OCEANS
>
> What could happen? The seas will gradually turn more and more acid. Coral
> reefs, shellfish and plankton, on which all life depends, will die off.
Much
> of the life of the oceans will become extinct.
>
> How would this come about? The oceans have absorbed half the carbon
dioxide,
> the main cause of global warming, so far emitted by humanity. This forms
> dilute carbonic acid, which attacks corals and shells.
>
> How likely is it? It is already starting. Scientists warn that the
chemistry
> of the oceans is changing in ways unprecedented for 20 million years. Some
> predict that the world's coral reefs will die within 35 years.
>
> DISEASE
>
> What could happen? Malaria - which kills two million people worldwide
every
> year - reaches Britain with foreign travelers, gets picked up by British
> mosquitos and becomes endemic in the warmer climate.
>
> How would this come about? Four of our 40 mosquito species can carry the
> disease, and hundreds of travelers return with it annually. The insects
breed
> faster, and feed more, in warmer temperatures.
>
> How likely is it? A Department of Health study has suggested it may happen
by
> 2050: the Environment Agency has mentioned 2020. Some experts say it is
> miraculous that it has not happened already.
>
> HURRICANES
>
> What could happen? Hurricanes, typhoons and violent storms proliferate,
grow
> even fiercer, and hit new areas. Last September's repeated battering of
> Florida and the Caribbean may be just a foretaste of what is to come, say
> scientists.
>
> How would this come about? The storms gather their energy from warm seas,
and
> so, as oceans heat up, fiercer ones occur and threaten areas where at
present
> the seas are too cool for such weather.
>
> How likely is it? Scientists are divided over whether storms will get more
> frequent and whether the process has already begun.
>
> © 2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd.
>
> ----------
>
> Also in Environment by the lndependent/UK
> Greenhouse gas 'threatens marine life'
> The ultimate high-pressure job: surviving on the seabed
> Global warming: scientists reveal timetable
> Dramatic change in West Antarctic ice could produce
>
> For original posting with above links, see:
> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=608209
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
> For more Flyby News resources, see:
> The Mounting Evidence of Global Warming!!!.
>
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1014396414,102
78
> ,
>
> For information on a technology to reduce CO2 pollution emissions, see:
> STIRLING Solution for Onsite Power Production
>
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1019075905,598
98
> ,m
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
> The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those
of
> Flyby News.
> A "Fair Use Policy" that describes Flyby News' use of copyrighted material
is
> posted at flybynews.com.
> Your feedback for story suggestions and networking Flyby News are welcomed
and
> appreciated.
> You can write to the publisher/editor Jonathan Mark via email:
> info@flybynews.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> --
>
> Flyby News is educational and nonviolent in focus,
> and has supported critical campaigns for a healthy
> environment, human rights, justice, peace, and nonviolence,
> since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.
>
>
> >-----------------------Flyby News--------------------====>
> News Fit to Transmit in the post Cassini flyby era
> <<<>>> http://www.flybynews.com <<<>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>