Dr Madhav Khandekar is a former research
scientist from Environment Canada and is an expert reviewer for the
IPCC 2007 Climate Change Documents. Khandekar has been in the fields
of weather & climate for over 52 years. He has agreed to write this
very informative guest weblog.
Global warming and glacier melt-down debate: A tempest in a teapot?
Madhav L Khandekar
The debate over global warming &
"rapid" melting of world-wide glaciers and in particular the
Himalayan glaciers is once again heating up. There were a flurry of
reports, a few weeks ago, in the media and in particular on the BBC
(UK) world-wide news service about the Himalayan glaciers melting
rapidly in the face of global warming. As this debate was raging, a
comprehensive report by Dr V K Raina (Himalayan glaciers: A
state-of-the art review of glacial studies, glacial retreat and
climate change) was released by the Indian Minister of Environment &
Forestry in New Delhi , India.
Vijay Kumar Raina, a senior glaciologist and
an avid mountaineer himself, has carefully analyzed some 20 glaciers
to document retreat as well as advance of some of the glaciers and
has cautiously concluded that it is premature to make a statement
that the Himalayan glaciers are retreating abnormally because of
global warming. The Indian Minister of Environment Mr Jairam Ramesh
hailed the report as an excellent latest study on glaciers and
tacitly agreed with the conclusion.
Predictably, the IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri
reacted angrily citing the IPCC 2007 climate change reports which
asserted that the (Himalayan) glaciers are receding faster than in
any other part of the world and if the present rate ( of melting)
continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and
perhaps even sooner is very high if the earth keeps warming at the
current rate. Several other Indian scientists and glaciologists have
got into the debate now with some of them criticizing the Indian
Government with an ostrich-like attitude in the face of impending
disaster.
What is the reality? Let us take a closer
look:
First, where did this number 2035 (the year
when glaciers could vanish) come from?
According to Prof Graham Cogley (Trent
University, Ontario), a short article on the future of glaciers by a
Russian scientist (Kotlyakov, V.M., 1996, The future of glaciers
under the expected climate warming, 61-66, in Kotlyakov, V.M., ed.,
1996,
Variations of Snow and Ice in the Past
and at Present on a Global and Regional Scale, Technical Documents
in Hydrology, 1. UNESCO, Paris (IHP-IV Project
H-4.1). 78p estimates 2350 as the year for disappearance of
glaciers, but the IPCC authors misread 2350 as 2035 in the Official
IPCC documents, WGII 2007 p. 493!
So we have a raging debate about
impending glacier melt-down because of sloppiness of some IPCC
authors! Further, according to Kotlyakov, the present glacier area
of some 500,000 km2 could shrink to 100,000 km2 and this could
happen NOT in 2035 but in 2350, if the current rate of warming
continues. Also this estimated glacier area and its shrinkage does
not include internal drainage basin of central Asia with an
estimated area of some 40,000 km2 .
Let us now look at the statement
that Himalayan glaciers are receding faster than in any other part
of the world. How true is this statement?
Prof Graham Cogley (Trent University
Peterborough Ontario Canada ) who has analyzed shrinkage rates of
many glaciers also refutes the IPCC claim that Himalayan glaciers
are shrinking faster than in any other part of the world. A recent
news item from Science ( V 326 13 November 2009, p.924) cites Prof
Jeffrey Kargel's ( University of Arizona USA)
study which suggests that many glaciers in the Karakoram
Mountains ( straddling India and Pakistan) have stabilized or
undergone an aggressive advance in recent years.
Among many important conclusions drawn by
Raina in his comprehensive report, the following statement best
describes the present state of the Himalayan glaciers: Glaciers in
the Himalayas, over the past 100 years, behave in contrasting ways.
Some glaciers (e.g. Sonapani) have retreated by as much as 500m in
the last 100 years, while others ( e.g. Kangriz) have retreated
just by an inch or so during the same period.
What is the cause for
some glaciers to retreat while others to advance, sometimes in
adjoining areas?
Not an easy
question to answer. Many local and regional features like strong
local winds causing erosion, small-scale temperature and
precipitation differences and most certainly large-scale atmospheric
circulation changes come into play in determining glacier retreat
and advance. Most glaciologists now agree that it is the moisture
depletion, not temperature increase that is the primary cause for
glacier retreat. The depleting ice cap on Mt Kilimanajaro (in east
Africa, near equator) is often cited as an "evidence" of global
warming, however an excellent paper by Kaser et al ( 2004, Int'l J
of Climatology) documents how the peculiar geography of the Mountain
together with gradual decline of moisture at mid-tropospheric level
since the late nineteenth century has resulted in depletion
of its ice cap. These authors discount
recent temperature increase as the cause of ice cap shrinking. In
case of the Himalayan glaciers, precipitation patterns, especially
snow precipitation and its intra-seasonal variations, seem to be an
important parameter. Heavy late winter snow precipitation seems to
improve the health of some glaciers in the Himalayas (Koul & Ganjoo
Climatic Change 2009).
Finally two glaciers in the Himalayas deserve
special attention: The Siachen glacier (second largest outside of
polar latitudes) is about 75 km long and advanced 700 m between 1862
and 1909, then retreated 400 m between 1929 and 1958. In the last 50
years, the Siachen has stayed about same. The Gangotri glacier, the
source of water for the Holy River Ganga was retreating at 20 m per
year up to 2000, but then slowed down. In the last two years, the
glacier is at a standstill.
In summary, the glaciers in the
Himalayas are retreating, but NOT any faster than other glaciers in
the Arctic and elsewhere. The two large and most important glaciers
of the Himalayas show very little retreat at this point in time. The
primary reason for retreat of some of the other glaciers seems to be
lack of adequate winter snow accumulation.
This depletion of winter snow could be due many factors like
inter-annual variability of winter precipitation or possible
southward displacement of the sub-tropical jet stream which
straddles the Himalayan Mountains over a long 1500 km path.
It is premature at this stage to link global
warming to the deteriorating state of Himalayan glaciers at this
time. The Indian Environment Minister MR Jairam Ramesh has correctly
observed "let us not write an epitaph on Himalaya glaciers at this
time"
Acknowledgements: I am grateful to Prof Roger
Pielke Sr for inviting me to write this commentary for his webblog
and Prof Graham Cogley's internet commentary was helpful in
identifying the misread of the year 2350 to 2035 in the IPCC WGII
2007.
“I think it’s really important that no
suspicion or shadow fall on the foremost advocates
of climate change
legislation, so I wanted to give you the opportunity
to kind of clear the air about your motives and
maybe set the record straight for some of your
former constituents,” Ms. Blackburn said (see the
video clip above).
____________________
November 12, 2007
Former Vice
President and Nobel Prize winner Al
Gore has joined venture firm Kleiner Perkins
Caufield & Byers as a partner to concentrate on green
technology investments.
(Credit: CNET News.com)
To date,
Kleiner Perkins has had something of a mixed record when
it comes to clean tech. The firm has invested in Miasole,
which recently swapped CEOs and has had to delay
products. It is also an investor in EEStor, a mysterious
supercapacitor company that has delayed its product and
is going through some management changes. The firm has
also not been part of some
of the early, successful IPOs in clean tech like EnerNoc
or First Solar.
On the other
hand, it has placed money in some companies that many
believe have a lot of promise: Ausra, the Australian
solar thermal company and Mascoma, a cellulosic ethanol
company that has laid plans to build three plants in the
U.S. (with millions in state subsidies). It also has a
stake in Amyris Biotechnologies, one of the early
companies in synthetic biology. Amyris makes compounds
for treating malaria and wants to get into feedstocks
for synthetic fuel.
So who knows.
Compared with these guys, I live in abject squalor.
Gore is one of a number of
"name" individuals the firm has recruited over the
years. Others include heir Will Hearst III, former
Oracle honcho Ray Lane, and Sun Microsystems scientist
Bill Joy.
_________________
Conflict-of-interests
concerns
Various politicians,
journalists, and public-policy wonks have raised concerns about
KPCB partners having conflicts of interests as they play the
dual role of investors and governmental advisers. For example,
in November 2009, the
National Center for Public
Policy Research
drew attention to the fact that KPCB partner
John Doerr
remains a member of President Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory
Board while KPCB has simultaneously been directly benefiting
from millions of dollars of newly created U.S. taxpayer
subsidies.[9]
High-profile KPCB partner
Al Gore
has been under even more scrutiny. On April 24, 2009, during a
congressional hearing, Tennessee Congresswoman
Marsha Blackburn
asked Gore if he was a member of KPCB,
and then inquired: "The legislation that we are discussing here
today, is that something that you are going to personally
benefit from?”[10]
She cited constituent concerns about Gore's
role with KPCB as the reason for her inquiry.[11]
The exchange ended with Gore stating:
“Do you think there is something wrong with being active in
business in this country? . . . I am proud of it. I am proud of
it.”[12]
The Gore-Blackburn exchange was not
widely publicized by major news outlets like
The New York Times and
The Los Angeles Times until November 3, 2009 -- more
than five months after its occurrence -- upon the revelation
that KPCB had indirectly landed a $560 million taxpayer-funded
contract from the U.S. government.[13][14]
______________________
Kleiner Perkins:
WASHINGTON — Former Vice
President
Al
Gore
thought he had spotted a winner last year when a small
California firm sought financing for an energy-saving
technology from the
venture capital
firm where Mr. Gore is a partner.
The company,
Silver Spring Networks,
produces hardware and software to make the electricity grid
more efficient. It came to Mr. Gore’s
firm,
Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers,
one of Silicon Valley’s top venture capital providers,
looking for $75 million to expand its partnerships with
utilities seeking to install millions of so-called smart
meters in homes and businesses.
Mr.
Gore and his partners decided to back the company,
and in gratitude Silver Spring retained him and
John
Doerr,
another Kleiner Perkins partner, as unpaid corporate
advisers.
The deal appeared to pay
off in a big way last week, when the Energy Department
announced $3.4 billion in
smart grid grants.
Of the total, more than $560 million went to utilities with
which Silver Spring has contracts. Kleiner Perkins and its
partners, including Mr. Gore, could
recoup their investment many times over in coming years.
Silver Spring Networks
is a foot soldier in the global green energy revolution Mr.
Gore hopes to lead. Few people have
been as vocal about the urgency of
global warming
and the need to reinvent the way the world produces and
consumes energy. And few have put as much money behind their
advocacy as Mr. Gore and are as well
positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and
when it comes.
Critics, mostly on the
political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr.
Gore is poised to become the world’s
first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government
policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars
to the business ventures he has invested in.
Representative Marsha
Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, asserted at a
hearing this year
that Mr. Gore stood to benefit
personally from the energy and climate
policies he was urging Congress to adopt.
Mr.
Gore says that he is simply putting his money where
his mouth is. (more)
____________________________________________
Occidental Petroleum -
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Recent
controversies
Occidental met with
substantial resistance from 1992 to 2001 when it tried to
drill for oil in the territory of the
U'wa people
in northeast
Colombia.
The locals were concerned about environmental damage and
feared that development would bring strangers and invite
violence to the region. There also were tribal beliefs that
oil is the "blood of the earth" and should not be removed.
They believed that oil infrastructure would be a target for
violent leftist guerillas in the country. After years of
shareholder resolutions,
legal battles, protests, and a failed test well, the company
abandoned the project.
Repsol YPF
took over the project and continues to work on it.
In
1998, the US government sold the Elk Hills naval petroleum
reserve to Occidental for $3.65 billion. According to the
government, the reserve was no longer strategically
necessary, and the reserve was sold to reduce the national
debt and the size of the government. Critics cited the
"no-bid" nature of the sale, together with
Vice President Al
Gore's involvement with the company as
evidence of graft.[12]
In 2005, Occidental and
partner
Liwa
won eight out of 15 exploration spots on the
EPSA-4
auction, making both companies among the first to enter the
Libyan
market since the
United States
lifted its embargo on that country.
In August 2005, the
company was accused of 42 legal violations in
Ecuador,
including environmental destruction and
espionage.
The Ecuadorian government subsequently refused to renew a
contract for oil field exploration. Protesters in the
northeastern part of the country called for the withdrawal
of Occidental.[citation
needed]
=
Gore family
Occidental's coal
interests were represented for many years by
attorney
and former
U.S. Senator
Albert
Gore, Sr.,
among others. Gore, who had a
long-time close friendship with Hammer, became the head of
the subsidiary Island Creek Coal Company, upon his election
loss in the
Senate.
Much of Occidental's coal and phosphate production was in
Tennessee,
the state Gore represented in the
Senate, and Gore owned shares in the
company. Former
Vice President
Albert
Gore, Jr.
received much criticism from environmentalists, when the
shares passed to the estate after the decease of Albert
Gore Sr., and Albert
Gore Jr. was a son and the executor
of the estate.[12][14]
Albert Gore Jr., however, did not
exercise control over the shares, which were eventually sold
when the estate closed.[15][16]
__________________________________________
