Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Q&A:  "We're Running the Risk of Unstoppable Climate Change"

Mi tocca enunciare un'altra banalità (mi scusi redfiddler, che le 
detesta). Nel suo complesso l'umanità non dimostra maggiore intelligenza 
di una colonia di afidi: succhieremo fino all'ultima goccia di linfa, 
fino a quando la pianta non sarà morta, poi moriremo tutti.
P.S.  Non ci sono altri pianeti per noi, dunque, tutto sommato, gli 
afidi sono più intelligenti.
----------------------------------------
Q&A:  "We're Running the Risk of Unstoppable Climate Change"
By Stephen Leahy
Chris Reid
GIJON, Spain, Jun 4 (IPS) - Warming seawater, melting sea ice and 
glaciers, sea level rise, storm intensification, changes in ocean 
currents, growing "dead zones", and ocean acidification are just some of 
the signs that the oceans that cover 71 percent of our watery planet are 
changing.
Changes in the oceans also means major impacts on the land and the 
atmosphere. "Policy makers and the public do not realize that the oceans 
are the drivers of the climate system," says Chris Reid, recently 
retired professor of oceanography at the Sir Alister Hardy Foundation 
for Ocean Science in Plymouth, England.
Reid will be producing a report this summer on the impacts the altered 
oceans are having and will have on the global climate.
IPS environment correspondent Stephen Leahy spoke to Reid at an 
international scientific symposium held late last month in Gijon, Spain 
on the effects of climate change on the world's oceans.
IPS: What is happening in the oceans that will affect the global climate?
CR: The oceans have absorbed 30 percent of all human emissions of carbon 
dioxide (CO2) since the start of the industrial age. There is now good 
evidence that the oceans are absorbing less carbon as a result of 
climate change. The warming of surface waters, glacial and sea ice 
meltwater, acidification and so on are inhibiting or slowing a number of 
the oceans' mechanisms for absorbing carbon from the atmosphere and 
safely storing them in the deep ocean.
IPS: How will that affect us?
CR: It means the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 will rise much faster 
than has been previously projected by climate scientists. Human carbon 
emissions are already on pace for the worst case scenario as envisioned 
by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). These changes 
in the oceans means the rate of warming will increase, bringing even 
more severe hurricanes and cyclones, flooding events and so on.
IPS: Cyclones like the one that recently devastated Burma?
CR: Yes. Research presented at this meeting shows that South Korea and 
Japan are experiencing more powerful cyclones. While a single event 
can't be precisely connected to climate change, the Burma cyclone fits 
what is expected with climate change.
IPS: What is the scale of the changes in the oceans from climate change?
CR: The sub-tropical zones in the North Atlantic and North Pacific have 
shifted northward 10 degrees latitude (approximately 1,000 kilometres). 
That's an enormous change in the last 30 to 40 years. Water temperatures 
in the North Sea have warmed by 0.5 [degrees] C and we're seeing a major 
shift in the biology of the region with a 70-percent decline in cold 
water plankton.
In 70 to 100 years, temperatures above 60 degrees north latitude 
(Alaska, northern Canada, Scandinavia and Russia) are projected to 
increase by an average of 6 [degrees] C. That's the average, it will be 
even warmer in some areas.
IPS: Won't temperatures that high release massive amounts of carbon and 
methane stored in the northern region's permafrost?
CR: Yes. We are running the risk of catastrophic, unstoppable climate 
change. And with the changes we're observing in the oceans such 
temperatures could come sooner.
IPS: How do we prevent this from happening?
CR: We need to shift to a no-growth society. Our resources are largely 
depleted and are being used unsustainably so it makes sense to recycle 
and reuse what resources we have and redesign our lives and economies on 
this basis. For instance, with the proper insulation and ventilation our 
bodies alone could heat our homes. But rather than investing in research 
and development that could make this possible and affordable, 
governments are subsiding the use of fossil fuels. If solar energy was 
subsidised in the same way, solar panels would be far cheaper and better.
IPS: What will it take to make this major shift?
CR: Strong leadership from governments, especially the U.S. and Canada. 
The lack of leadership on climate change is a major problem. All 
governments can do simple things such as taxing motor vehicles so that 
people will only buy the smallest, most efficient. I'm afraid it is 
going to take a major catastrophe in the developed world to get that 
kind of leadership. And that could come too late when we're already in a 
runaway climate change situation.
IPS: What keeps you so busy even though you're retired?
CR: I want my children and grandchildren to have a world that's 
comfortable to live in.
(END/2008)
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42662
-- 
[namib] Posso legalmente inneggiare al comunismo, ma non al fascismo.
L'una appartenenza è appunto *criminale*, l'altra no.
[tonibaruch] Purtroppo abbiamo questa legge idiota, è vero.
http://groups.google.it/group/it.politica.internazionale/tree/browse_frm/thread/3f0249225d16ae1d/9d60fe69c1a4658e

 C'e' solo da notare che tra 30 anni invece di sei saremo 9 miliardi
a parte il fatto che l'ONU dà per certo il sorpasso di quota 9 solo
nel 2050 (ovvero 42 anni e non 30) non scommetterei neppure su quelle
previsioni (
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2007/
pop952.doc.htm)...quando ero piccolo io (20 anni fa) davano per
imminente la nascita del 6miliardesimo essere umano, e poi entro pochi
anni il 7miliardesimo (entro il 2005, mi pare dicessero le stime di
allora). Il sesto è arrivato nelle previsioni, per il settimo ci
vorranno ancora almeno 4 anni (
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/
060224_world_population.html). Stiamo frenando alla grande.
Ah, una bella notizia per Antola: se la prenda pure comoda, che tanto
gli tocca andare in pensione a 85 anni...
http://www.livescience.com/health/060221_retire_later.html

 da masochisti
nessun piacere,  constato che già hanno cannato di brutto le
previsioni, per cui niente ci dice che tra 40 anni ci sarà davvero
l'aumento di popolazione previsto. Adesso non trovo la fonte, ma se 20
anni fa davano i 7 miliardi entro il 2005 e hanno cannato di ben 7
anni (ovvero hanno di oltre il 40%, visto che ci arriveremo in 24 anni
anzichè in 17), chi mi dice che saranno buoni i 42 per i 9 miliardi?