Humans Are Melting The Ice

While headlines are dominated by articles discussing the topic of the endangerment of polar bears for instance, or the effect increasing greenhouse gas emissions is having on Polar Regions and climate change in general. The fact that anthropogenic (human) activity is causing the Arctic to melt may seem obvious to you.

While it is clear to most that human activity such as industrialisation, urbanisation or even modernisation may result in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions for instance. Research was unclear as to how big a part greenhouse gases,played in the loss of Arctic sea ice. Earlier research seemed to suggest that some loss of sea ice may be attributable to greenhouse gases, yet a more recent study by Jennifer Kay has now managed to determine that human activity is definitely to blame.

The study, funded by the US National Science Foundation is the first to attribute a specific proportion of the ice melt to greenhouse gases and pollution. The study was an attempt to differentiate how much melting could be attributed to “natural variability” and how much to greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. Using one of the most sophisticated climate models in the world, she also managed to look ahead to future fluctuations [1]. 4,000 years worth of data was run through the model to encompass a period when volcanoes, solar variations and other factors which were known or believed to have forced climate changes to test the theory [2].

The study concluded that conditions would become more volatile from year to year. This means sometimes there may be years, or perhaps decades, when the ice pack expands; but that overall, the trend would be in the other direction [1].

”There’s no doubt about it – sea ice is going away,” she said. ”What we found was that about half of that trend is related to the increasing greenhouse gases.” Other sea ice loss, as observed over the late 20th century, was ”just related to variability [natural] in the system’’ [2].

This study comes at an important time as public policy and climate change are causing various international debates in the north. Due to the reduction of ice, Arctic waters have exposed areas which can be used for transportation, possible sites for oil drilling, development and other military activities. The impacts of these findings also have a significant impact on current legal and political fight of the US federal government’s listing of polar bears. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed polar bears on the assumption of the loss of sea ice [2]. As it is an essential part of their habitat this may soon have dramatic effects on their survival.

Impacts of Arctic Melt

Located miles away from your home perhaps, yet as science has proven in more ways than one, the effect of change in one region of the earth could always have vast implications on other regions [3, 4]:

Global

Temperatures in the Arctic have risen at almost twice the rate as temperatures in the rest of the world. This is causing an alternation in greenhouse gas release and uptake in various environments – soils, vegetation, and coastal oceans – and will inevitably result in global sea level rise. The effects of this of course will inundate low lying regions.
Ocean acidification – as Alice Hands points out, increased CO₂ absorption will affect marine calcifiers and their ability to develop shells or skeletons [5].
Increased areas of tree growth in the Arctic could serve to take up carbon dioxide (CO₂, the principal greenhouse gas emitted by human activities) and supply more wood products and related employment, providing local and global benefits. However, tree growth would mean absorption of additional sunlight (as the land surface would become darker and less reflective) and add to regional warming.
Migratory species may soon lose habitats or breeding grounds; depending on the location of these grounds in the Arctic.
In some parts of the Arctic, toxic and radioactive materials are stored and contained in frozen ground. Thawing may release these substances in the local and wider environment with risks to humans and wildlife alongside significant clean up costs.

Regional

Impacts on fauna, food chains and as mentioned above, habitats and breeding grounds – polar bears, seals, and other animals. A subsequent domino effect occurs because many local people use these animals as a primary food source.
As frozen ground thaws, many existing buildings, roads, pipelines, airports, and industrial facilities are likely to be destabilized.
Warmer temperatures also represent new economic opportunities but also challenges in the Arctic. Reduced sea ice is likely to increase marine access to the region’s resources, expanding opportunities for shipping and possibly for offshore oil extraction (although operations could be hampered initially by increasing movement of sea ice in some areas), and of course fishing. A comprehensive sustainable development plan is urgently needed for the region to maximize the opportunities and minimize potentially damaging impacts.
Some impacts of climate change may improve human well-being. Opportunities for agriculture and forestry may increase. There is evidence that Arctic warming could reduce the level of winter mortality as a result of falls in cardiovascular and respiratory deaths.
But this will have to be set against possible increases in drought in some areas, the emergence and survival of new pests and diseases, likely contamination of freshwaters and health and psychological impacts of the loss of traditional social and ‘kinship’ structures.

So if that’s the Arctic, what about Antarctica?

Antarctica being even larger than the Arctic in theory, will pose an even greater threat to global changes than changes in the Arctic, although, this should not dampen or reduce the associated impacts to the smaller polar north.

Antarctica has its own major problems. Despite managing to stay cool during the last 30 years – due to ozone depletion and other factors – this trend is likely to reverse. The Antarctic Peninsula for instance, is one of the world’s fastest warming regions. The peninsula warmed faster than any other place on Earth. Winter temperatures increased by 11 degrees F over the past 60 years. Year round temperatures increased by 5 degrees F [1].

The result is that sea ice now covers three months less than the year before and has caused 90 percent of glaciers to retreat and many large floating ice shelves to crumble. The most famous of these, and also one that can be visualised here, is the Larsen B Ice Shelf which crumbled in 2002.

Similar to the Arctic, Antarctica has its own positives and negatives to melting ice.

The ‘Can Do’ Approach

The most important point to stress is that while sometimes positive aspects may be attainable from change. The fact of the matter is that sometimes, when we as humans are speeding up change in our own regions, these changes could have negative impacts for other people and other areas of the world.

Remember the advertisement for Ariel washing power? Wash at 30^oC in order to save polar bears? It is small actions such as these which could make the difference. The difficulty of course is to understand how our actions may have implications on other people and other regions. Perhaps you should investigate it yourself and see what actions you can take, and what affects these may have on the environment, climate and society.