Himilayan Melting Glacier Alarm Version 2.0

No mention of the IPCC’s flawed 2035 date, but still many of the same talking points are used. It pays to recycle I suppose. This statement:

“But climate change is still happening and we do need to prepare for it. That’s especially true in this part of the world, where poverty and other concerns make its residents very vulnerable to any change.”

…strikes a chord. I’ll point out that our climate now is different than 100, 200, 500, 1000, and 2000 years ago. Did anybody “prepare for it” then? No, and we all seem to be doing better than ever now as a species. – Anthony

The Himalayas. The IPCC had warned that Himalayan glaciers were receding faster than in any other part of the world and could “disappear altogether by 2035 if not sooner”. Photograph: Wikimedia commons

From the DOE Pacific Northwest National Laboratory News:

Time to prepare for climate change

Himalayan region’s glaciers melting slowly, but impacts still coming

WASHINGTON – Though the massive glaciers of the greater Himalayan region are retreating slowly, development agencies can take steps now to help the region’s communities prepare for the many ways glacier melt is expected to impact their lives, according to a new report. Programs that integrate health, education, the environment and social organizations are needed to adequately address these impacts, the report states.

“The extremely high altitudes and sheer mass of High Asian glaciers mean they couldn’t possibly melt in the next few decades,” said Elizabeth Malone, a Battelle sociologist and the report’s technical lead. “But climate change is still happening and we do need to prepare for it. That’s especially true in this part of the world, where poverty and other concerns make its residents very vulnerable to any change.”

The report, Changing Glaciers and Hydrology in Asia: Addressing Vulnerability to Glacier Melt Impacts, was prepared in collaboration with Battelle and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Battelle operates the Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Wash. Malone works from the Joint Global Change Research Institute in College Park, Md., a collaboration between PNNL and the University of Maryland.

Malone will join Mary Melnyk, a USAID natural resource management senior advisor, and Kristina Yarrow, a USAID health advisor, to discuss the findings Tuesday at 10 a.m. Eastern time at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. Geoff Dabelko, director of the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program, will moderate the discussion.

The event is open to the public, though RSVPs should be sent to ecsp@wilsoncenter.org. The Wilson Center is located inside the Ronald Reagan Building at 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. Directions are available online at www.wilsoncenter.org/directions. A live webcast will also be hosted at http://www.wilsoncenter.org. The report will be available at the event and posted online at www.usaid.gov.

Vulnerable to change

High Asia is dominated by many steep, dramatic mountain ranges that run through parts of Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, India, China, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and other countries. The region is home to more than 50,000 glaciers that are vital water lifelines to Asia’s largest rivers, including the Yellow, Yangtze, Mekong, Indus and Ganges. Roughly two billion people depend on these rivers for their water and food supply.

Unfortunately, many people who live in High Asia and along the river basins fed by the region’s glaciers already experience malnutrition and food insecurity, insufficient access to clean water and sanitation, and other issues that will be exacerbated by climate change and population growth. The challenge for agencies like USAID is to incorporate climate change into their existing development efforts so that quality of life continues to improve in the developing world.

“This report lays out what are the potential impacts of glacier melt on sectors such as health and agriculture while exploring how USAID programs could respond to the challenges of changing water supplies,” Melnyk said.

More information needed

Although the world’s glaciers have slowly been retreating since 1850 — the end of what climate scientists refer to as the Little Ice Age — those in High Asia haven’t melted as quickly, mostly due to the glaciers’ location in elevations higher and colder than many other glacier systems, the report notes.

But there’s little historical information about High Asian glaciers to predict their future. The data that does exist consists mostly of physical measurements taken at the glaciers’ most accessible spots, their lowest ends. Glaciers are dynamic and routinely grow in some areas while shedding ice in others. The lower segments are more prone to change due to the higher temperatures associated with lower elevations, making the measurements taken there less reliable. Remote sensing technology has allowed researchers to measure glaciers over larger areas in recent years, but there isn’t much historical data to provide a long-term picture.

The report states that many Himalayan glaciers are retreating, especially at lower elevations, but that no region-wide evidence supports the claim that they’re retreating faster than any other location in the world. The report also recommends that scientists collaborate internationally to show the glaciers’ overall ice balance on a regional scale.

Preparing for the future

One of the most pressing near-term impacts that scientists can study are glacier lake outburst floods. Unlike the widespread deluges that some inaccurately fear could follow sudden glacial melting, these floods are due to slow melting and occur on a smaller scale. They typically happen when an advancing glacier dams a river or water builds up behind soil and rocks deposited by a glacier.

Those most affected by the floods are residents of the rural villages close to glaciers. Although the number of people directly impacted can be small, the damage is often extensive.  Glacier lake floods can be so destructive “that people who survive must move and begin to rebuild their lives in other places,” the report notes. More than 25 glacier lake outburst floods have been recorded in Bhutan, Nepal and Tibet since the 1930s and more will likely occur as climate change progresses.

Retreating glaciers can also heighten existing water worries. In the Indus River Basin, for example, glacier melt accounts for about 30 percent of the river’s water supply. Retreating glaciers would lessen the river’s overall flow, but that impact would likely be more dramatic as the region’s population growth increases the demand for water. The Indus River Basin is already home to more than 200 million people, and the region’s high fertility rates mean its population will continue to grow rapidly. As a result, the region’s per capita water availability will decline steeply. The issue is compounded by the large amount of irrigated land there. “The current vulnerabilities will likely worsen with increasing uncertainties related to water supply,” the report notes.

Human health also stands to be affected by climate change in High Asia. Less available water could mean higher pollution levels and increased difficulty obtaining clean water and sanitation “for hundreds of millions in these watersheds,” reads the report. Diarrhea and other diseases linked to biological and chemical contamination are likely, the report notes. Decreased water availability could also cause declining crop yields and food availability, which would worsen existing hunger issues in the region.

Other impacts discussed in the report include increased civil conflict across country borders due to unstable water supplies and declining ecosystem health that further endangers threatened animals and plants.

Many birds with a few stones

Such expected impacts make for a fairly daunting list. But the report makes several suggestions to address multiple issues at once with cross-sectoral development programs.

For example, programs that focus on agriculture, one of the largest water-use activities, could improve water efficiency and help address water scarcity. This approach could increase crop productivity to address hunger and malnutrition, and strengthen local water-user associations to improve governance capabilities.

Another threat to High Asia’s glaciers, soot, can be reduced while also improving local health, the report suggests. The region’s rural residents cook over traditional stoves that burn wood, agricultural waste, dung and other biomass. The stoves are inefficient and release soot, also known as black carbon, and other aerosols. The black carbon travels through the air and can land on glaciers, which then absorb more sunlight and melt faster. People – mostly women and children – living in the homes where the stoves are used are also harmed. They experience respiratory diseases, heart disease, stillbirth, cataracts and more from the indoor air pollution. More than 1.6 million people in the region die each year as a result.

To counteract this, development agencies could work with scientists, health specialists, technology experts and government officials to develop and make accessible cooking stoves that are more efficient and create fewer emissions. The collaborators could also work closely with women to address health issues by offering alternative cooking practices. And scientific organizations could improve observations and models of glacier melt in relation to soot. Such information could be used by local leaders to develop local methods to reduce soot emissions and improve glacier stability.

“Agencies like USAID already have assets and expertise that have advanced the developing world for years,” Malone said. “This report offers a menu of options on how those assets can also be used to address the many issues that will arise from climate change.”


EVENT: “Changing Glaciers and Hydrology in Asia: Developing a Blueprint for Addressing Glacier Melt in the Region,” Elizabeth Malone, Mary Melnyk and Kristina Yarrow. 10 a.m.- 12 noon, Eastern time, Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2010, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Ronald Reagan Building , 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, D.C. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=events.event_summary&event_id=641631

 

REPORT: “Changing Glaciers and Hydrology in Asia: Addressing Vulnerabilities to Glacier Melt Impacts,” Elizabeth Malone, Mary Melnyk, Kristina Yarrow, Richard Armstrong, Leona D’Agnes, Jessica Ayres, John Gavin, Scott Harding, Ken McNamara, Brian Melchior, Fred Rosenweig, George Taylor, Heather D’Agnes and Rochelle Rainey.  CDM International and TRG collaborated to develop the report.  www.usaid.gov

Tags: Environment, Fundamental Science, Climate Change

Battelle is the world’s largest non-profit independent research and development organization, providing innovative solutions to the world’s most pressing needs through its four global businesses: Laboratory Management, National Security, Energy Technology, and Health and Life Sciences. It advances scientific discovery and application by conducting $5.2 billion in global R&D annually through contract research, laboratory management and technology commercialization. Headquartered in Columbus, Ohio, Battelle oversees 20,400 employees in more than 130 locations worldwide, including seven national laboratories which Battelle manages or co-manages for the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and two international laboratories—a nuclear energy lab in the United Kingdom and a renewable energy lab in Malaysia.

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is a Department of Energy Office of Science national laboratory where interdisciplinary teams advance science and technology and deliver solutions to America’s most intractable problems in energy, the environment and national security. PNNL employs 4,900 staff, has an annual budget of nearly $1.1 billion, and has been managed by Ohio-based Battelle since the lab’s inception in 1965. Follow PNNL on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.

Frances White, PNNL, (509) 375-6904

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
83 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kev-in-UK
November 15, 2010 3:07 pm

kwik says:
November 15, 2010 at 2:19 pm
thanks for the link – just reading the exec summary is enough to make me wonder why this has obviously been ignored by Messrs Pachauri and Co?

G.L. Alston
November 15, 2010 3:08 pm

“That’s especially true in this part of the world, where poverty and other concerns make its residents very vulnerable to any change.”
Poverty stricken areas can be subject to continued poverty given any and all possible changes, and climate of all things changes so slowly that this statement is simply mendacious nonsense. If anything, the exact opposite is true — drought stricken areas aren’t going to be more impoverished due to more of the same, but they COULD show signs of improvement if the climate changed for the better.
I’d regard the assumption that any/all change is for the worse (wouldn’t any change in reality be a coin flip?) as simply idiotic, but the people making these claims are enabling their would-be totalitarian masters. Hence it’s much worse than merely idiotic; it’s a f****g lie.

P Walker
November 15, 2010 3:08 pm

BravoZulu ,
I was thinking the same thing . Has it occured to them that more water probably comes from snow melt than melting glaciers ?

November 15, 2010 3:08 pm

Elizabeth Malone, a Battelle sociologist and the report’s technical lead.
So a sociologist knows more about climate change than a climate pscientist.
Says it all really

Braddles
November 15, 2010 3:09 pm

I disagree that no one in the past did anything about climate change. They used to throw virgins into volcanoes and stuff. These measures would have been every bit as effective in controlling the climate as carbon taxes, emissions trading, renewable energy subsidies etc, and quite a bit cheaper as well.

RayG
November 15, 2010 3:18 pm

Why is anyone supposed to pay attention to the lead author, Elizabeth Malone? She is a sociologist, not a “climate scientist.”

simpleseekeraftertruth
November 15, 2010 3:23 pm

AIUI, 90% of all folk that ever became scientists are still alive today. The growth of that career is exponential and therefore cannot be sustained. So much ‘scientific’ output relies on an assumed effect with a construct of cause attached to it and so little on true discovery in the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. There needs to be a reset button, a catalyst to allow sanity to return. Perhaps the addition of the word ‘climate’ to any scientific communication will soon assume that role in the wider community as it has done at WUWT and other sceptical blogs.

P.F.
November 15, 2010 3:31 pm

Anthony wrote “Did anybody “prepare for it” then? No, . . .”
The Frysans did in the Lowlands (Nederlands). They developed the polders by connecting hills with dikes. They were first developed in the 1500s — just after the low sea levels in the 1400s began rising again after the first cold dip of the Little Ice Age.

Peter Dunford
November 15, 2010 3:41 pm

The whole article is one big collection box rattle for more funding.

Jimbo
November 15, 2010 3:42 pm

The lower segments are more prone to change due to the higher temperatures associated with lower elevations, making the measurements taken there less reliable.

Sorry Anthony, but I’m not going to beat around the bush.
SOOT
Glaciers in northern hemisphere partly melting due to soot.
James Hansen
http://www.pnas.org/content/101/2/423.full
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2005/Koch_Hansen.html
Soot could equal up to 60 percent of the current global warming effect of carbon dioxide
http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2010/july/072710global-warming.html
Are all Himalayan glaciers melting?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8387737.stm
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/326/5955/924
Himalayan glaciers ‘melting’ due as much to soot and dust as CO2
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/himalayan-soot.html
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/himalayan-warming.html
http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/26593/2009/acpd-9-26593-2009.html
and
“Most of the earth’s glaciers have been shrinking in recent decades,…..”
American Geographical Society – 1947
http://www.jstor.org/pss/211127
“The great number of glaciers of which we have any information are retreating; the glaciers of the Scandinavian Alps alone are entering a period of advance;….”
International Committee on Glaciers – 1907
http://www.jstor.org/pss/30058579
“But we can say, in general, that the dominating tendency of glaciers at the present time is to retreat.”
International Committee on Glaciers – 1904
http://www.jstor.org/pss/30056705
Sorry for the links but I find it’s easier just to pre-prepare pages for the inevitable claims. I could find more but this should be enough for Warmist to read through for now.

Engchamp
November 15, 2010 3:47 pm

This a wee bit off the main topic, but I felt the urge to comment…
It really does seem obvious to me that the supporters of AGW and its sceptics will never agree.
The former are, to put it bluntly brainwashed, and the latter are are fighting a rearguard action; all the time, because the greens insist on moving the goal-posts whenever a new source of data is revealed. Do not ask me to verify a source for this comment, because the greens hardly ever do so either. Having said that, I may be able so to do.
So, does this mean a majority vote in Mexico will pronounce doom for Joe and Jane?
Maybe not. If the previous debacles of so-called democratic meetings are to be made meaningful, then hope for a world order domination may, for the time being, be put in abeyance.
I for one, really hope so.

Jason F
November 15, 2010 3:49 pm

OT
Ok I know that given the source this might seem dubious.
Released by FOI the patent suppression list from 1973 that includes
“Fuel Conservation Technology” and 
“Alternative Fuels”. 
as being subject to Suppression… also 
“Pollution Reduction Technology” and
“Apparatus for Increasing Efficiency” and
“Hydrogen Enrichment Technologies”.
Photo-voltaic panels “in excess of 20% efficient” !!
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6720-suppression-document-youtube.html

Bob Johnston
November 15, 2010 3:49 pm

Actually I didn’t see a whole lot wrong with the article. It says that Himalayan glaciers are retreating slowly due to climate change, which is probably true. I may have missed it but I didn’t see anything that said the climate change was attributable to man, which was refreshing for a change.
I do question why a US entity is butting into an issue that is obviously a SE Asian problem though.

Anything is possible
November 15, 2010 3:51 pm

Glaciers ALWAYS melt., it’s what they do. Trying to stop them is futile. If the Himalayan glaciers are indeed retreating, the probable cause is just as likely to be precipitation starvation – which prevents them from replenishing – as it is rising temperatures. Given the widespread de-forestation that has occurred in the Himalayan foothills, depriving the glaciers of a vital source of moisture, why has it not seemingly occurred to anybody involved in these studies that it is this, and NOT rising temperatures due to CO2, which is the cause of the perceived problem?
My take…..
It is not PC to suggest that local problems may caused by the behaviour of impoverished local people, but it is PC to throw actual science out of the window and blame them on the rich industrialised West.

bubbagyro
November 15, 2010 3:58 pm

kwik says:
November 15, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Thanks also for the link.
In the summary of the report you cited, this stands out:
“Glacier snout fluctuation can be in response to: Secular movement; Periodic movement, Seasonal movement or even Accidental. The problem of resolving glacier movement into its various components, secular, periodic, seasonal is extremely complicated. Unless and until the basic difference between the types of the glacier snout movement is understood, it may be erroneous to co-relate glacier snout fluctuation with one atmospheric parameter or the other. The more glaciers we can examine in a given area, the better are the chances of coming to a correct conclusion. Every glacier in a region should be studied, for there are few that will not teach us something.”
AND
“The problem, however, is not as simple. A glacier is not only effected by complicity of the physical features that affect the glacier itself, but there are so many complications of climate that it is surprising that the snout movement of any glacier should reveal the periodic climate variation or the phases of the climatic variations till many centuries of observations become available. These complicated factors affect the periodic movements of the snouts of glaciers in a very marked manner. Ultimately the movements are due to climate and snowfall in particular, but the factors are so varied that the snout movements appear to be peculiar to each particular glacier. There may be little resemblance between the periodic movements in neighbouring glaciers of a range, even if they have the same exposure. Sometimes there is no similarity between the periodic movements in two branches of the same compound glacier; and, occasionally, one side of a glacier tongue may be advancing while the other is stagnant or even retreating.”
The Himalayas are still upwelling as the land masses continue to collide, and upwelling also happens greater than this due to the end of the ice age reducing the weight of ice overall (land rebound) at higher elevation. These increase the speed of the glacier proportionate to the length of the glacier (lever length). Archimedes knows this. Seismic upwellings (and subsidences) also complicate this, for example, a subsidence fault could “gobble up” a glacier that passes over it and cause the snout to lose ice contribution, causing apparent “retreat”.

November 15, 2010 3:59 pm

There is more to the Himalayas than the glaciers melting. There appear to be serious geological movement further down. Just take a look at the change in the secular variation of GMFz from 1995 to 2005.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/HGMFzsv.htm
Rapid changes in the magnetic field are usually accompanied by change in temperatures. I will look into this one more closely.

David O
November 15, 2010 4:01 pm

As long as the technical lead is a sociologist, seems to me they should bring Naomi Oreskes on board too, to show that the “consensus” of “climate change” scientists still believe in an early loss of the Himalayan glaciers! This would be good PR for the anti-skeptic campaign of the American Geophysical Union. See L A Times article Nov. 8th, “Scientists form a climate PR strategy” [“researchers will take on global warming skeptics”]. Whatever happened to looking at the skeptic research, as suggested by the Inter-Academy Council?

Jimbo
November 15, 2010 4:10 pm

Although the article above accepts Himalyan glacial retreat since 1850 it’s good to get some more info.

Himalayan and Trans-Himalayan Glacier Fluctuations Since AD 1812
“In a gross regional sense Himalayan and Trans-Himalayan glaciers have been in a general state of retreat since AD 1850. Filtering of the fluctuation records with respect to glacier type and regional setting reveals that the period AD 1870 to 1940 was characterized by alternations in the dominancy of retreat, advance, and standstill regimes. “

Himalayan And Trans-Himalayan Glacier Fluctuations And The South Asian Monsoon Record
“Termini fluctuations for glaciers in the Himalayas and Trans-Himalayas are examined for the period AD 1850 to 1960. This period can be characterized as one of general retreat. Differentiation by geographic subdivision, however, reveals that Himalayan glaciers (best exemplified in Lahaul-Spiti, Kolahoi, Nanga Parbat, and Garwhal) show consistent retreat throughout the period, while Trans-Himalayan glaciers…”

Couple this natural retreat with the effects of man-made soot release and what do we have? Co2 (gas) caused melting for the future????? I’m still waiting for the evidence.

jason
November 15, 2010 4:15 pm

“I do question why a US entity is butting into an issue that is obviously a SE Asian problem though.”
The americans have always felt the need to get involved in south east asia….

latitude
November 15, 2010 4:19 pm

Warren in Minnesota says:
November 15, 2010 at 2:00 pm
Why is the United State’s Department of Energy working on ice in the Himalayas?
=========================================================
Programs that integrate health, education, the environment and social organizations are needed to adequately address these impacts
==========================================================
Barack Obama, quote, “spread the wealth”

R. Shearer
November 15, 2010 4:30 pm

I’m with John from CA. We (U.S. Fed Gov) need to reduce spending by at least $1 trillion/year and I think we should defund USAID to help.

DesertYote
November 15, 2010 4:37 pm

RayG
November 15, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Why is anyone supposed to pay attention to the lead author, Elizabeth Malone? She is a sociologist, not a “climate scientist.”
#
We should listen because she is a socialist and not a scientist. She is able to see past cold logic of real science to meet the real needs of people with compassion that comes from soft science, like stalin.

TomRude
November 15, 2010 4:54 pm

This is BS. Professor Martine Tabeaud from Paris University, a geographer had already to correct quite strongly the IPCC french delegation alarmism on that very question. She explains that this is the monsoon that influences the agriculture and water levels in river about 80-90% of it! not the glaciers water.

JEM
November 15, 2010 4:56 pm

Let’s see here…Battelle, $5.2B, I assume PNNL’s $1.1B is separate from that?
That sounds like $6.3B that could stand a bit of a budget-balancing haircut if this is the kind of thing they’re producing.

kwik
November 15, 2010 5:03 pm

Kev-in-UK says:
November 15, 2010 at 3:07 pm
“kwik says:
November 15, 2010 at 2:19 pm
thanks for the link – just reading the exec summary is enough to make me wonder why this has obviously been ignored by Messrs Pachauri and Co?”
Ah, but Kev!!! Pachauri did not ignore it at all!!!! This is the report Pachauri called Voodoo Science, remember?
While it really was the IPCC that was doing Voodoo science, and this report is the real deal. So why isnt the MSM spreading the good word? Because they are biased.