Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Blog

Mass Extinctions from Mass Poisonings?

By

About 250 million year ago, during the late Permian the world’s oceans stagnated causing a huge and lethal build up of hydrogen sulphide produced by anaerobic bacteria. Up to 95 percent of marine species and 85 percent of those on the land went extinct.

At least that is the view of Peter Ward writing in last week’s issue of New Scientist (Precambian strikes back, February 9, 2008)

The oceans stagnated because global warming from massive emissions of greenhouse gases from sustained volcanic eruptions warmed the high latitudes more than the equator, slowing the ocean currents.

A reader of this weblog, Dr Steve Short, recommends everyone read the article:

“This subject is not only close to my personal interests (as a geochemist) but raises some very interesting issues I have been mulling over for some years about the immense significance of the ‘partnership’ which actually applies on Earth between oxygen-breathing animal life and the oxygen-creating and CO2-absorbing cyanobacteria and plant kingdoms and the roles of methanogens and sulfur reducing bacteria.

I am coming round to the view that this is the real paradigm which the human race needs to embrace in order to manage issues such as AGW (if it actually exists) and (perhaps more importantly) the levels of dissolved CO2 and O2 in the surface layers of the ocean and the sustainability of the continental plant biomass.

Realization of this over-arching paradigm has deep implications for how we look at coal, oil and gas, how we may re-create it sustainably, how we manage our partnership with the oceanic cyanobacteria, the sea floor methanogens and continental plants in a truly intelligent and symbiotic way.

In my view this article might almost be classed as seminal, so profound are the issues which it raises in a popular science context.”

Norwegian Whaling Quota Unchanged for 2008: A Note from Ann Novek

By

Mainstream media , Reuters and Norwegian paper Aftenposten, have reported the Norwegian whaling quota this season will be the same as for the previous 3 years, 1052 minke whales.

“ We set quotas not according to what is likely to be caught , but what is sustainable” , director at Norway’s Fisheries and Coastal Affair Ministry, told Reuters on Friday.

The ministry said in a statement that it sets quotas “conservatively”, ensuring “complete safety in regard to conserving minke whale stock”.

Prowhaling paper Fiskeribladet, wrotes on Saturday that the area of whaling will be halved, and the whalers are not satisfied with this decision.

A rough and short translation from Fiskeribladet :

“A maximal quota of 10 whales is set for each whaling vessel. The Ministry states this is due to that 2008 is the last year in the five year management period, which is based on the regulation of the minke whale quota calculation, states State Secretary, Vidar Ulriksen.”

Ann Novek
Sweden

Science and Public Policy by Aynsley Kellow: Part 2, Virtual Extinctions in Virtual Ecosystems

By

How many plant and animal species go extinct each year?

Some years ago Greenpeace claimed 50,000 -100,000 species each year.

In the comment thread of an earlier blog post Lamna nasus suggested a figure of 90 species of mammal over the past five centuries.

Professor Aynsley Kellow in his new book ‘Science and Public Policy – The Virtuous Corruption of Virtual Environmental Science’ describes the Greenpeace figure of 50,000 – 100,000 species as “virtual reality” made possible by mathematical modelling.

Professor Kellow links the Greenpeace claims, to the modelling of a so-called species-area relationship dependent on the idea that ecosystems are self-regulating and tend towards equilibrium.

Quotable quotes include:

“Ecology lacked a scientifically respectable method for studying life, and the ecosystem approach provided scientific respectability by supplying ecologists with mathematical tools developed by physicists.”

“An ecosystem is nothing more than a construction… Ecologists tried to study ponds as examples of ecosystems, but soon found even they were not closed systems but connected to the watertable, and affected by groundwater flows, spring run-off, migrating waterfowl…”

Professor Kellow goes on to explain the origin of the species-area equation and the theory of island biogeography as developed by Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson. While the theory can explain the number of insect and arthropod species colonizing mangrove islands off the coast of Florida as a function of their distance from the mainland, the theory’s extrapolation to non-island situations and terrestrial ecology more generally is questionable. Furthermore predicting species loss by extrapolating backwards to suggest, for example, that a reduction in the area of forest will produce the same rate of species reduction as does its growth, has no basis in observational data but is common practice in conservation biology.

More quotable quotes include:

“In the absence of hypotheses which might be falsified by observational data, the extensive use of mathematical models introduces a virtual landscape where species, real and virtual, live and die, and where their utility to noble political causes restricts the scepticism of those who might question the validity of such ‘science’.

“Endangered species become not just trumps, but face cards in the game of politics used to create advantage.”

“The increased emphasis on mathematics which lent ecology its scientific gravitas helped steer it towards virtual science rather than experimental science, and it never shook off its normative shackles.”

“It perhaps became too abstract, a discipline attracting deskbound number crunchers more than those who liked to tramp about the woods in wool shirts counting deer scat.” [Kellow quoting Alton Chase]

“Wilson obviously finds beauty in nature, which is all very well, but to privilege this above other human needs as measured by opportunity cost is undoubtedly elitist and inherently anti-humanist.”

“There are, of course, all sorts of objections that can be raised against this virtual science. One fundamental problem is that it is based on the erroneous notion of ecosystem stability, since equilibrium lies at both the base of the theory and in the prescriptive concern with ecosystem maintenance.”

Why I am a Dynamist

By

In 1960 famous Austrian economist and political philosopher Friedrich Hayek wrote an essay entitled ‘Why I Am Not a Conservative’ explaining that a fundamental trait of the conservative attitude is a fear of change while the liberal position is based on courage and confidence, on a preparedness to let change run its course.

In the same essay he wrote that conservatives are inclined to use the powers of government to prevent change or to limit its rate. Of course the Left also known as the Social Liberal, or simply Liberal in the US, is also inclined to use the powers of government, but to instigate change. An obvious manifestation of this today is the various rules, regulations and regulated trading systems being imposed by governments across the world with the aim of stopping climate change – something any empiricists (but particularly evolutionary biologists) recognise as impossible.

In the essay Hayek went on to explain that the correct name for his ideas was Whiggism, because it was the ideas of the seventeenth century English Whigs that inspired what later came to be known as the liberal movement in Europe that provided the conceptions that the American colonists took with them but which was later altered by the French Revolution, with its “totalitarian democracy and socialist leanings”. Hayek ends his essay by coming to an unsatisfactory conclusion as to what any new movement based on his political philosophy might be best called, but this has not stopped many labelling him, incorrectly a Libertarian.

Libertarians believe in freedom as long as the person and property of others is not harmed and that a combination of personal and economic freedom will inevitably produce creativity, abundance and peace.

But in a world of increasingly rapid technological change and increasing concern about the impact of development on the state of the world’s environment and increasing competition for limited resources (including water) there will always be impacts on person and property (particularly if you live downstream). Change brings winners and losers and Libertarianism is not a realistic or sophisticated enough political philosophy to deal with this.

In 1998 Virginia Postrel, the editor of Reason magazine, introduced a new label for a new political philosophy, a philosophy that she explained has given us greater wealth, opportunity and choice than at any time in history. In ‘The Future and Its Enemies – The Growing Conflict over Creativity, Enterprise and Progress’ Postrel suggests, like Hayek, that conservatives and social liberals have much in common and as a consequence the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ are of little relevance. Instead she suggests we use the terms ‘stasis’ versus ‘dynamism’ to describe the chasm between those who want to control the future (conservatives and social liberals) and those who believe in the capacity of human beings to improve their lives through trial and error, spontaneous adjustment, adaptation and evolution (dynamists).

Postrel explains that dynamists keep the underlying rules neutral and transparent – a flat tax, for instance – and they stigmatize changes designed to favour particular groups. They believe in free markets but they are not just libertarians with a new name, as they include people with a more expansive view of public goods. So some dynamists support forms of paternalism including seat belt laws, antismoking regulations and a safety net for the poor. But instead of grand plans or ad hoc solutions they have the patience to let trial and error work within well-established and understood rules.

In short, the dynamist recognises that change is real and that our values are not things that have always existed, and will always exist. The future will be a consequence of the legacy of past generations and our own activities and should not be left to chance but neither should we seek to specify in advance exactly what the future will look like.

New Analysis of the 2002 Larsen B Ice Shelf Collapse

By

A new paper has been published which examines the factors involved in the 2002 collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf in Antarctica.

The lead author, Professor Neil Glasser of Aberystwyth University (Wales, UK) was interviewed about the findings in the Western Mail on 7th February:

‘Antarctic ice shelf did not just melt away’

Excerpt: Prof Glasser told the Western Mail, “Climate change may have been the last straw, but it was not the only straw.”

“Ice shelf collapse is not as simple as we first thought,” said Prof Glasser, lead author of the paper.”

“Because large amounts of meltwater appeared on the ice shelf just before it collapsed, we had always assumed that air temperature increases were to blame.”

“But our new study shows that ice-shelf break-up is not controlled simply by climate. A number of other atmospheric, oceanic and glaciological factors are involved.”

“The location and spacing of fractures on the ice shelf such as crevasses and rifts are very important too, because they determine how strong or weak the ice shelf is.”

Prof Glasser pointed out that he is not a climate change sceptic.

The full paper entitled, ‘A structural glaciological analysis of the 2002 Larsen B ice shelf collapse’ is currently available for free download from the Journal of Glaciology.

The Abstract reads:

This study provides a detailed structural glaciological analysis of changes in surface structures on the Larsen B ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula prior to its collapse in February–March 2002. Mapped features include the ice-shelf front, rifts, crevasses, longitudinal linear surface structures and meltwater features. We define domains on the ice shelf related to glacier source areas and demonstrate that, prior to collapse, the central Larsen B ice shelf consisted of four sutured flow units fed by Crane, Jorum, Punchbowl and Hektoria/Green/Evans glaciers. Between these flow units were ‘suture zones’ of thinner ice where the feeder glaciers merged. Prior to collapse, large open-rift systems were present offshore of Foyn Point and Cape Disappointment. These rifts became more pronounced in the years preceding break-up, and ice blocks in the rifts rotated because of the strong lateral shear in this zone. Velocity mapping of the suture zones indicates that the major rifts were not present more than about 20 years ago. We suggest that the ice shelf was preconditioned to collapse by partial rupturing of the sutures between flow units. This, we believe, was the result of ice-shelf front retreat during 1998–2000, reducing the lateral resistive stress on the upstream parts of the shelf and glacier flow units, ice-shelf thinning and pre-shelf-break-up glacier acceleration.

While we are on the subject of the Larsen B (and A) ice shelf, I am reminded of a paper from 2006, published in QUATERNARY SCIENCE REVIEWS, entitled: ‘Ice shelf history from petrographic and foraminiferal evidence, Northeast Antarctic Peninsula’

This paper suggests that there was “widespread ice shelf breakup in the mid-Holocene.” This finding is harmonious with the earlier finding of Pudsey and Evans (2001) that the adjacent Prince Gustav Channel ice shelf also retreated in mid-Holocene time, but that subsequent colder conditions, in their words, “allowed the ice shelf to reform.” It is also in harmony with the finding of Vaughan et al. (2001) that from 6000 to 1900 years ago the Prince Gustav Channel ice shelf, as they describe it, “was absent and climate was as warm as it has been recently.” Consequently, and most recently, Pudsey et al. concluded that “the maximum ice shelf limit may date only from the Little Ice Age,” which they report is “widely recognized” to have held sway in that part of the world between 700 and 150 years ago.

A large body of data makes it pretty clear that the greatest extent of the Larsen ice shelf during the current interglacial likely occurred only a few hundred years ago, and that the portions of it that recently disintegrated (Larsen-A and Larsen-B) were probably created about that same time. In addition, it would appear that some 2000 years ago the Larsen-A and B ice shelves likely were altogether absent, and that temperatures of that time were likely as warm as, or even warmer than, they have been recently. Furthermore, there was approximately 100 ppm less CO2 in the air of that time than there is in the air of today; and this fact suggests that something other than anthropogenic CO2 emissions was the cause of the earlier “balmy” conditions of northeast Antarctica, which implies that that same something else, or something different yet, could well be responsible for the current warmth of the region.
(CO2Science.org, December 2006)

The Abstract reads:

A detailed record of late Pleistocene deglaciation followed by mid-Holocene ice shelf breakup and late Holocene re-growth is contained in continental shelf sediments in the northern Larsen area, northeast Antarctic Peninsula. The zero age of core tops is confirmed by new and published 210Pb profiles, and 70 accelerator mass spectrometer (AMS) 14C dates on bulk organic carbon define sedimentation rates of 7.6–92 cm/ka. The varied geology in the local ice drainage basins facilitates the use of ice-rafted debris (IRD) provenance in determining the presence or absence of ice shelves. All inshore cores contain an interval of non-local IRD in the post-glacial section, demonstrating widespread ice shelf breakup in the mid-Holocene. Both breakup and re-growth may have taken centuries and there are no widespread debris layers associated with breakup. Cores beyond and up to 30 km inside the historical ice shelf limit exhibit a varied IRD provenance throughout the Holocene, suggesting the maximum ice shelf limit may date only from the Little Ice Age. Benthic foraminiferal assemblages are related to water masses and position on the continental shelf and have been modified by taphonomic processes. Nevertheless we discern a deglaciation signal in Prince Gustav Channel of a calcareous spike in predominantly agglutinated assemblages, and this is repeated at the time of mid-Holocene ice shelf breakup. The inferred mid-Holocene warm period occurred later in the northern Larsen area than on the west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula.

The above papers suggest that the collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf in 2002 wasn’t simple or unprecedented.

Evidence for Abiogenic Oil from a New Paper Published in the Journal ‘Science’

By

Some readers of this blog may recall that Louis Hissink sometimes brings up the subject of at least some oil being ‘abiogenic’ or ‘abiotic’ rather than fossil in origin. Most of us remain sceptical of such claims, which seem to be backed by anecdotal evidence at best.

However, an article published in Science on 1st February 2008 entitled, ‘Abiogenic Hydrocarbon Production at Lost City Hydrothermal Field’ states in the Abstract that, ” Our findings illustrate that the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in nature may occur in the presence of ultramafic rocks, water, and moderate amounts of heat.”

So, there is now evidence of a mechanism for the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons. This is not to say that significant amounts of oil are abiotic in origin, but it is interesting nevertheless.

Readers may also remember my recent blog post, ‘Natural Gas from Bacteria: A Renewable Resource Linked to Climate Change?’

Imagine that – oil and natural gas as renewable resources!