9 ms·
Why are Alaska's rivers turning orange?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- notamy 3y agohttps://archive.is/2024.01.10-221938/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-are-alaskas-rivers-turning-orange/ https://archive.is/2024.01.10-221938/https://www.scientifica... https://web.archive.org/web/20240125064804/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-are-alaskas-rivers-turning-orange/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240125064804/https://www.scien...
- gmuslera 3y agoThey focused on the water color, acidity, and the effect on the fishes, but they are not putting enough stress in the elephants in the room, the 2.4+ºC increase of average temperature northern regions over very few years (not since preindustrial times) and the massive permafrost thawing that is happening there. Yes, it is causing this. And many more things in those regions and all the world, for more time than a single framed picture.
- crazygringo 3y agoThey literally say exactly all of that at the start of the article: > Scientists who have studied these rusting rivers agree that the ultimate cause is climate change. Kobuk Valley National Park has warmed by 2.4 degrees Celsius (4.32 degrees Fahrenheit) since 2006 and could get another 10.2 degrees C hotter by 2100, a greater increase than projected for any other national park. The heat may already have begun to thaw 40 percent of the park's permafrost, the layer of earth just under the topsoil that normally remains frozen year-round. McPhee wanted to protect the Salmon River because humans had “not yet begun to change it.” Now, less than 50 years later, we have done just that. The last great wilderness in America, which by law is supposed to be “untrammeled by man,” is being trammeled from afar by our global emissions.
- mc32 3y agoGood news is it's not because of what happened to the Rio Tinto in Spain... This is ecology running its course.
- smallerfish 3y agoAs a sibling pointed out, they state that as the cause. Further, right under the image at the top of the article: "Tukpahlearik Creek in northwestern Alaska's Brooks Range runs bright orange where permafrost is thawing". It doesn't help climate's cause to be hysterical without actually reading things you want to critique.
- grecy 3y agoYep, climate change is coming very fast across the North. It's already very noticeably different up there since I lived there from 2011-2015. Way, way warmer temperatures in the winter, the glaciers have retreated and shrunk drastically to the point I don't recognize photos of places I've spent a lot of time. Heck, I live 2000 miles south now, and we can see our local glacier retreating yearly with our own eyes. Also it's raining today. In the middle of winter. Not good.
- kortilla 3y agoAre you suggesting that there is some kind of global warming going on?! Someone should really say something.
- aaomidi 3y agoMan if only we knew about it a few decades ago.... Oh wait.
- graphe 3y agoNo, it snowed.
- jklinger410 3y agoWe got a snow storm last week, how would that be possible if the globe was warm?
- dionian 3y agoIs it time that we finally addressed the massive escalation of fossil fuels by countries like china?
- tejtm 3y agoI would settle for cleaning our own house and setting a good example
- genman 3y agoFossil fuel usage in US and EU has stagnated but is increasing in China. I would say that the house is pretty tidy and waiting for major renovation - but the fact is - what ever pace of usage reduction does not counterbalance exponential usage increase.
- maxglute 3y agoEU has stagnated. PRC fossil usage is tapering. US became the largest oil and lng exporter in the world. 10 million barrels of oil per day, 10 billion cubic feet of LNG per day. Enabling exponential usage. If PRC fossil imports is counted against her usage, then US fossil exports should be counted against hers to balance the account (and other major fossil producers). And that front, US is both the greatest fossil fuels user - 30% more than PRC in aggregate, and 6x more per capita, while also enabling other to use fossil fuels post shale boom. More than ANY other fossil exporter.
- genman 3y agoYou are missing the forest behind the trees, I'm afraid of. The reason behind the increase of US fossil fuel production is geopolitical to suppress Russian profits and its ability to finance its genocidal war. Russia can't lower much of its production cost. Major part of the Russian state budget is based on profits from the fossil fuel sales - no profits, no war. If US didn't increase its production then Russia could sell at higher price and many countries would be forced to buy it as there would be no alternative. This would allow it to continue the war longer and possibly attack more countries. Unfortunately the formula of the problem is complex with many variables. There are no easy solutions. The best strategy we have right now is to convince China to reduce its fossil fuel usage so everyone else could scale down.
- kirubakaran 3y agoI don't think there are elephants in Alaska, let alone indoors, in rooms or otherwise.
- rolph 3y agowe have mammoths and mastodons, but most of them are not available until thawed from the permafrost
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- phkahler 3y agoWhat nobody ever talks about is that some of the old organic stuff (roots, leaves) in the thawing permafrost did not grow there in recent times because that stuff won't grow in permafrost. This means the thawing of the permafrost is not new and that the area used to have more stuff growing there than it does now. We should expect a greening of parts of Alaska if the warming continues and growth resumes.
- itishappy 3y agoWonder if anything might still be alive in there?
- mrspuratic 3y agohttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/jan/21/arctic-zombie-viruses-in-siberia-could-spark-terrifying-new-pandemic-scientists-warn https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/jan/21/arctic-zombi... You're welcome.
- mort96 3y agoWhy do you think people should be talking about that more? I would think people aren't talking about it much because, well, it's kind of obvious.
- phkahler 3y agoThere is a narrative that melting permafrost is new and some kind of global catastrophe. That narrative falls apart if we point out that there's really nothing new going on. Sea levels have risen more than present levels in prior interglacial periods too, but that's another related catastrophe.
- Johnny555 3y agoI don't understand how greening formerly frozen Alaska is not part of a global catastrophe?
- 3y ago
- avgcorrection 3y ago> Scientists who have studied these rusting rivers agree that the ultimate cause is climate change. quelle surprise
- samstave 3y ago>"The only constant in the Universe is change..." Seems obvious now, doesn't it.
- avgcorrection 3y agoI don’t get it.
- samstave 3y agoIn almost all Spiritual/Religious teachings - they say "The only constant in the universe is change" - so Its kind of banal to say "Scientists who studied the rivers simply allot it to Climate Change" as if its the profundity of Science here...
- avgcorrection 3y agoIf `cl` is the climate change function then Climate Change really specifically is referring to the derivative of `cl` right now.
- freejazz 3y agoProbably orders of magnitude less banal than your comments here on it.
- samstave 3y agoI guess you missed I was pointing to that they put in a whole bunch of meat in the article about the apparent study and they boil it down to a very simple conclusion of "climate change"? That's not banal? (im not being flippant - I just thought the conclusion was weak, and didnt feel like I learned much.
- itishappy 3y ago> Kobuk Valley National Park has warmed by 2.4 degrees Celsius (4.32 degrees Fahrenheit) since 2006 and could get another 10.2 degrees C hotter by 2100, a greater increase than projected for any other national park. Holy shit. 10°C is currently the difference between NY and DC, or Ohio and the Gulf of Mexico, or Montana and Southern California...
- JohnMakin 3y agoThis is what people don’t realize when we talk about “average” global temperature rise. 2 Celsius average doesn’t mean 2 Celsius everywhere - it means some regions are going to be much higher than that.
- rob74 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ProgrammerMatt 3y ago[flagged]
- graphe 3y agoPermafrost melts mean more habitable land for humans! This is wonderful for humanity. Russian and Canada will be way more populated in the future.
- kspacewalk2 3y agoYeah, especially Russia, at the rate it's collapsing demographically.
- graphe 3y agoI suspect the borders will be very different. Much of Russia's population was taken from China. Siberia if warmed would probably be fought over. It's currently closer to china but the transportation was designed to only benefits the Russian government.
- csours 3y agoBefore reading, iron dissolving due to higher reactivity (including bacterial action) because temperatures are higher ___ After reading: > "Scientists who have studied these rusting rivers agree that the ultimate cause is climate change. Kobuk Valley National Park has warmed by 2.4 degrees Celsius (4.32 degrees Fahrenheit) since 2006 and could get another 10.2 degrees C hotter by 2100, a greater increase than projected for any other national park. The heat may already have begun to thaw 40 percent of the park's permafrost" > "Some researchers think acid from minerals is leaching iron out of bedrock that has been exposed to water for the first time in millennia. Others think bacteria are mobilizing iron from the soil in thawing wetlands." ___ Other thoughts: iron bearing silicates often contain gold. New gold rush? - Things like this have surely happened before but not while there were so many people around Extinctions have happened before too, but that doesn't make them good
- UncleOxidant 3y ago> Other thoughts: iron bearing silicates often contain gold. New gold rush? Could a significant amount of gold be extracted from the water that way? It would likely be a much more environmentally friendly way to mine gold given that there would be no digging required.
- RajT88 3y agoIf they could make it work at scale, they'd have done it with ocean water by now. That's the sci-fi dream: all the elements you could want end up dissolved in varying amounts in seawater. It's unfortunately a hard engineering problem.
- csours 3y agoIt would be significantly more concentrated in this river water. As far as environmentally friendly, maybe, but not necessarily.