Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Web-exclusive comment

We should warm to the idea of melting poles

BARRY S. ZELLEN

Special to Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 3:41 PM EDT 06/05/08

Ice melting so quickly that prospect of navigable, ice-free Arctic Ocean is no longer stuff of fancy ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. William Haworth from Minneapolis, United States writes: The creative destruction inherent in change is a universal law (vide the Big Bang), and this perspective on the future will hopefully encourage us to embrace the opportunities the great variables of the universe present.

    Once wine was made in England and Vikings farmed Greenland. Once a verdant Sahara bloomed and glaciers covered continents miles deep in ice. All this will come and go again and again.
  2. The Radish from London, Canada writes: It will be terrible to see vast polar regions which have been largely inaccessible become the target of commercial exploitation through oil drilling, mining and increased shipping traffic. The wildlife in these areas will be pressured enough from climate change without the additional pressure cause by increased human activities. If there is a bright side to be found in climate change it will be the realization (if it ever comes) that we cannot continue to consume the way we do, that the economic theory of continual growth that western society is based on is simply not viable in the long term and is rapidly bringing us toward crisis.
    Maybe when we stop the environmental lip service and really try to solve our problems by changing our behaviors I'll start to feel optimistic. Until then, please, lets try to keep the arctic as unspoiled as we can.
  3. ImaCANADIAN ! from Canada writes:
    "He directs the Arctic Security research project at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School's Center for Contemporary Conflict"

    What geo-political plans does the U.S. have for Canada's Arctic waters?

    The author's position, his employer, combined with his quoting of Francis Fukuyama, a leading neoconservative figure and Project for a New American Century participant, do not reassure.
  4. Jonathan Braun from Vancouver, Canada writes: A good article. Makes sense. All of this warming is going to help us in the future for sure. We'll have more places to grow food and more land to house people and trips to Northern Russian will be really quick. But ya, although this warming may be bad... we should look at the consequences and make the best of them. I don't think we are gonna shut down factories and stop driving vehicles and jet planes for a long time. We do need to start building barriers and levies around cities that are close to the sea if rising sea levels are going to be that much of a problem, solution though... Move North it's warmer there.
  5. Kent Blaker from rock creek, Canada writes: Half a story as usual. Here is the rest they don't want you to know about. While 2007 saw the lowest level of sea ice in the Arctic.It also saw the largest growth of sea ice ever recorded. They also forgot to mention that this years arctic sea ice was the highest in five years. While they like to tell us that open sea water absorbs more solar energy than sea ice they forget to tell you that this only happens "when the sun is shining" when the sun goes down more energy is lost to space from open sea water than sea ice because sea ice acts like an insulator. Open sea water radiates between 10 and 100 times as much energy as sea ice does and If there is snow on the sea ice it radiates less Then there is the whole story of how sea water freezes completely differently than fresh water.
    The level of Sea icea in the Antarctic has been increasing for the last five years. The level is well ahead of last year's highest level ever recorded.
  6. 20 20 from Canada writes: Kent Blaker wrote: "Open sea water radiates between 10 and 100 times as much energy as sea ice does"

    Umm Kent, could it be that sea WATER is at a warmer temperature than sea ICE, hence it will radiate more warmth?

    "While they like to tell us that open sea water absorbs more solar energy than sea ice ... more energy is lost to space from open sea water than sea ice."

    Again, if open sea water gives back more heat than sea ice, isn't it because it absorbed more heat in the first place?

    Your argument (or wherever you got it from) is like saying that an ice box with its cover removed will release more heat than if the cover is on and keeping the contents cool.
  7. Antonio San from Canada writes: Another "specialist" in strategy and other fine political matters who uses data he doesn't understand: "Indeed, the 2005 record was broken “as Arctic sea ice extent shrank through the summer of 2007 to its record-setting minimum in September.” Not only it has been explained and proved that the 2007 record thaw had much to do with high pressure fields -strong MPHs, thus the opposite of AGW rhetorics, allowing melting through lack of cloud coverage -Walter Meier from Denver Colorado quoted in CBC, Yahoo but NEVER explained in the Globe. According to a new World Wildlife Fund report released on April 24, “recently observed changes are happening at rates significantly faster than predicted,” and the melting of Arctic sea ice and the Greenland ice sheet “was found to be severely accelerated, now even prompting the expert scientists to discuss whether both may be close to their ‘tipping point.'.” It is needed to point out what another scientist is saying: "In an article entitled "Losing Greenland" the "dramatic" ice loss of 250 to 340 Gt ice per year in 2006 and 2007 is discussed. However, it is NOT mentioned that this loss is only 0.01 % of the total Greenland ice shield. If this would continue with the same loss rate, the "meltdown" would require some 10 000 years." The GISS temperature chart for Nuuk (Godthab) in Greenland shows a temperature increase between 1992 and 2002, then a decrease, but also the fact that in the 40ies the temperature in Greenland was about 1 deg higher, and probably also the ice loss and glacier retreat. However, at that time nobody did care about that. Also the temperature apparently ignores the CO2-increase. Today, a variation of 0.01 % (within the measurement accuracy) is made a dramatic event ! End of part one
  8. Peter Versteeg from Toronto, Canada writes: Barry Zellen takes an interesting position in this article, but a few points should be kept in mind.

    1. Climate change will most likely impact poor agricultural societies first (for a glimpse of the consequences, see “Riots, instability spread as food prices skyrocket” April 14, 2008 CNN).

    2. The potential economic gains Barry stresses are most likely to be gains for a select few. The rest can expect to see continued increases in income disparity.

    3. An increase in our human population is a problem not of physical space but of limited resources. Consider an Antarctica cleared of ice. Freshwater abounds, but lack of fertile soil and thin natural sunlight would remain a potent asphyxiant for most crops attempted, especially the grains we require to feed our current population.

    Global warming is one of the top issues among scientists today because the transition into a world where Arctic Seas and large portions of Antarctica are clear of ice would be hard for humans and other species alike.
  9. Baad Daddy from Northwest Ontario, Canada writes: If northwest Ontario does not get any more storms like that one last weekend which produced a foot of heavy wet snow on my freshly raked backyard, then the whole frickin' ice cap can melt. Fine by me.
  10. Antonio San from Canada writes: Peter Versteeg, the eastern Antarctica representing 85% of the continent is cooling, not melting. It is proven that the peninsula that represents 15% of the continent is subjected to returns of warm air due to increasing strength in polar mobile anticyclones (Leroux, 1996, 2005). Increasing MPH strength is a signof cooling not warming. So consider the real planet not the Goreacle one, not the IPCC modeled one, not the reuters globemedia one, and forget your Club Med in Terre Adelie!
  11. BiB AmomA from Canada writes: It is spring.... ice melts in the spring.... even the record amount of ice that formed on the planet this year will melt.... hopefully.

    This Global Warming myth is so 2nd millenium... I didn't happen.

    here is the ice data... TODAY...

    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

    I wonder where the author is getting his misinformation. I can get it in 10 seconds from the source.

    and it doesn't show that the pole is melting faster than normal.
    ..//
  12. CD W from Canada writes: I for one welcome the ants!-Kent Brockman
  13. hossein hajiagha from Victoria, Canada writes: I am happy with this and is nice to see some large home close to water get problems and rich guy move out ..Then I have chance to move in and own a roof....if is a temporary......poor guy like me never worry about any things , because I don't have any things to lose....
  14. hossein hajiagha from Victoria, Canada writes: to day in swimming pool sauna a canadian women she complaining about china or india why they are having better life and they buy car .....and cost price of gas and living going high......look what kind people live here? complaining why others nation going to have better life......I told you why I do not like selfish British.here so many time's....is better get warm water came up and up and all this large home belong to a lazy British in BC go under water and we have some fun...is better earthquake came is better storm land in BC ....I don't care .....
  15. Mahatma Gandhi from Calgary, Canada writes: Antonio San from Canada writes: Addendum: Ross McKitrick, Guelph University.

    We know who Ross McKitrick is. He's the nitwit who gets degrees mixed up with radians. (http://timlambert.org/2004/08/mckitrick6/).

    BiB AmomA from Canada writes: I wonder where the author is getting his misinformation. I can get it in 10 seconds from the source.

    and it doesn't show that the pole is melting faster than normal.

    Gotta love these pseudo-scientists. Dude, it's on film, from space: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/03/070330-warming-arctic.html
  16. P Bell from Canada writes: So we have caused a disaster with our energy mining and fossil fuel burning but this guy is rubbing his hands together with glee at the thought of more opportunities for energy mining and fossil fuel burning. Not surprising that he is an Amercian, they just can't wait to get their hands on more resources and use 'em up.
  17. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Global warming rocks.

    Longer growing seasons, more CO2, more plants, more oxygen, more food...

    More everything!

    Embrace global warming.

    Global warming is your friend.
  18. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Resources are not resources until we figure out how to exploit them. Personally I think the arctic melting has been exagerated, but if it does come to pass, all the better. What is the point of resources if we can't exploit them? Those who wish to see human progress and humans in general as a virus upon the planet can get stuffed. Let them waste their time worshiping Gaia or the great Gorezuki or whatever diety they choose. The human race will continue to advance, explore, exploit and improve. There will be problems to be sure, but the human race also has within it the ingenuity to solve these problems and allow progress to continue.
  19. larry hallatt from Canada writes: They are enlarging the Panama Canal at great expense.

    However as the Arctic Ocean become ice free travel between Asia and europe will go through the Arctic as well as shipments to Central North America.

    As the Article points out Churchill and Moosinee with the rail terminals becomes key to supplying central North America. Direct shipments from Asia to Ontario and then the resupply of central US states.

    Within 10 years a half year transit season May through September will be economical.

    The polar Bear Express Line will open up northern Ontario and cities like Sudbury and Sault Ste Marie will become major inland terminals.
  20. Open Mike from Canada writes: Yep. The extinction of species such as polar bears, the destruction and decimation of ecosystems, and this dope just sees a business opportunity. Sigh.
  21. Marcus Bingham from vancouver, Canada writes: as far as i know, none of the current climate models are predicting substantial net melting of the Antarctic Ice Cap under the various CO2 emission scenarios. some of the predictions are for cooling and increased snowfall over much of Antarctica.
  22. aging oldtool from Canada writes: Fanciful bunk!
  23. Marvist Clank from Alberta, Canada writes: There's a mine being built on Baffin Island you can invest in.

    Should be easy to get it out.
  24. John Smith from Canada writes: Can any of you psoudo scientists explain why the ice caps are melting but I can't seem to get rid of the six feet of snow in my yard? The weather service cannot accurately predict weather ttommorrow let alone 50 years from now. The sky is not falling. Bring on the palm trees!
  25. Rachelle W from Kirkland, United States writes:
    Re: Increased shipping traffic.

    Don't let them through. They'll pollute it beyond hope, just as they have done to the Pacific, dumping all sorts of garbage not only from their travel, but also from landfills!
  26. D K from Canada writes: I should be looking for real estate up there!
  27. D K from Canada writes: "John Smith from Canada writes: Can any of you psoudo scientists explain why the ice caps are melting but I can't seem to get rid of the six feet of snow in my yard? The weather service cannot accurately predict weather ttommorrow let alone 50 years from now"

    Repeat after me: Weather.....climate...Weather....climate. They are not the same word and they don't have the same meaning. They are using CLIMATE models to predict the future. Your meteorologist is using WEATHER patterns.
  28. Ray Crawford from toronto, Canada writes: Hasn't Al Gore and that other mutt David Suzuki done enough damage with their call for more biofuels. If you've been living in a monastery for the past year, the production of biofuels has contributed to a world-wild food shortage.

    In my book, all these left-leaning, longhaired, jazz loving CBC types are a bunch of strung out wackos who don't have a clue about economics, paleogeology, etc. The earth has always had climate change. It's also had a surfeit of cranks and assorted crackpots throughout history.
  29. John Smith from Canada writes: Oh, so sorry DK. What I should have said is: The climate where I live has always been very cold & continues to be very cold. I suggest you hide in your hybrid Subaru which should keep you safe from the falling sky1
  30. ken g from Canadian in Mexico City, Canada writes: The earth has been changing since the beginning of time and will continue to change and humans can't stop this. We need to accept and adapt to change versus trying to play god and stop it.
  31. BiB AmomA from Canada writes: ..//

    POLITICS AS USUAL.

    Zellan is a guy who make his money talking about antic sovereignty. NOT ICE AREA.

    The university of Illinois, specifically,

    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

    make their living studying ice area and they show in the plot that the ice are is ABOVE normal. In fact, the area of ice hasn't melted down to normal yet ans it has been melting for a month.

    The simple assertion in th introductory sentence is completely FALSE.

    But you need a little hype to pump your agenda... right.. the arctic sovereignty agenda?

    ..//
  32. Earl Anthony from Sudbury, Canada writes: Nice story but the Earth warms and cools in cycles.

    I worked up on the Arctic coast in the mid-1980's. People visiting from the south expected to take pictures of icebergs and ice sheets in summer. All they got was open water.
  33. Richard Martin from London, Canada writes: Experts agree. Everything is fine.

    Move along, now. Nothing to see here.

    What we've been doing isn't working, so clearly we need to do more of it.

    Ignorance is strength.
  34. Mike Quinlan from Gatineau QC, Canada writes: Ray get it through your head its the rising price of oil, for which biofuels are a substitute and whose value is consequently linked in the marketplace. But more to the point, perhaps we should deeply reflect on the law of unintendent consequences. No human action is without reaction, and always has larger significance than initially conceived.
    I admire imagination, and the author of this article is not lacking in the ability to spin a picture. The problem is the glare from his mental projection is blinding him to greater reality. He is so busy looking at the poles that he seems to have forgotten the areas in between where humanity evolved. The vast majority of us live in a relatively narrow band of the planet whose centre is the equator. Its insanity to pretend that new travel routes represent a potential boon for mankind when the condition of their creation is a not so positive transformation of the areas that are the most inhabitated on the planet.
  35. J Dapena from Halifax, Canada writes: Everyone is entitled to their opinion...but enough already. The Flat Earthers must be out in force today. Listening to the anti-climate change crowd is as bad as listening to the anti-evolution crowd. Sure guys...we six billion humans have had NO impact on the planet...none at all...really. The planet is exactly the same as it was 10,000 or 1,000,000 years ago and any talk of melting ice is so bloody left-wing and socialist, that it makes me want to go out and beat up a tree hugger. There is nothing to see here, right??? Yeah, right. The majority of people who disbelieve the factual research that the Earth's climate is changing and that it may not be a good thing are simply people who are selfish and have something to lose if the enviro-crusaders get their way. They may have to drive smaller SUVs or make some other, equally tough personal sacrifices. Woe is them. A world without Humvees - I can barely imagine it *tear, sob*. I happen to be a capitalist as well, and I see a better future for the global economy and for my mutual funds, provided the climate change issue is addressed. Mass displacement of people living near the water, increased erratic and severe weather, possible disruption of global water currents, and the general mass panic that all of this will create...is not going to be good for the TSX or the Dow. Being Canadian, I'd love to see less snow and less ice...but sadly, that is NOT what climate change is about. And seeing entire polar ecosystems be destroyed isn't my idea of progress. If you want to believe that six billion people and the trash/pollution that they output has no impact on the planet, I hope that you are right for your kids' and grandkids' sake. But you're not speaking for me.
  36. Paul Thompson from Canada writes: I guess it isn't your fault Sharp, but you just aren't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, are you?
  37. Geoffrey May from Canada writes: Very creepy article , and posts.It's like arguing over Granny's estate, when she still has years left.
  38. D K from Canada writes: "John Smith from Canada writes: Oh, so sorry DK. What I should have said is: The climate where I live has always been very cold & continues to be very cold. "

    You must be really old and lived in lots of places, to notice that the climate hasn't changed. Have you also not noticed the shifting of the tectonic plates? Could you also tell us if there really were dinosaurs?
  39. guy tozer from Saskatoon, Canada writes: J Dapena from Halifax: you are totally wrong in saying the earth is exactly the same as it was 1,000,000 yeares ago. There was a tropical forest covering what is now the Arctic, at one time, and also over the Sahara desert. So come off your money seeking high horse and see reality as it is. Global warming is cyclic.
  40. Comments closed, censored, deleted or made to disappear from Mini Bushland, Canada writes: We should all rejoice, I guess, at the thought that when self-destructive humankind finally disappears from the face of the earth, extra-terrestrials will at last have a free hand at exploiting this planet... There is nothing like being wildly optimistic. Just ask the polar bear, who just can't wait for that "new era" to begin!
  41. M.O SAB from Toronto, Canada writes: Geo politics at its best.... interesting that no media have mentioned that the gigantic ice flows that melted in the Antarctic a year ago, are back bigger,wider and thicker than ever before. Not a peep.... I wonder why??
    PS We had a "living green show" in town this past weekend... the transit system went on strike.... I wonder how all the eco warriors got to the show.
  42. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: M.O SAB from Toronto, Canada writes: "We had a "living green show" in town this past weekend... the transit system went on strike.... I wonder how all the eco warriors got to the show."

    In their SUVs, just like always. But they recycled their soda straws so it was a wash.
  43. J Dapena from Halifax, Canada writes: Guy Tozer - evidentally, detecting sarcasm isn't one of your strengths. I was being sarcastic when I made the comment that the Earth is exactly the same now as it was 1,000,000 years ago. Once the haze lifts, I'm curious what research you have suggesting a tropical forest covered the Arctic...and as for the Sahara Desert, you might read up on WHY there's no forest there now before shooting your mouth off. It certainly wasn't "nature's" design. Reasonable climate change is cyclical - what we have now isn't. But don't let me stop you from burying your head in the sand.
  44. D. B. from Canada writes: So it will be utter hell in most parts of the earth, but ships will be serenely sailing the ice-free Arctic waters?
  45. Wayne Morrison from Toronto, Canada writes: It isn't news that the Arctic is warming, and it certainly isn't news that it will soon be a well used navigation route. The real story is what is Canada going to do about it? We have a major stake in the area, but if we are going to let our presence be known and, by extension, have a say in how the area is to be exploited, we need to get engaged. Shipping is only the tip of the iceberg [excuse the pun] since there are oil, gas and mineral fields to be developed. If we don't do it, someone else will, so let's get past the handwringing, plant the flag everywhere possible and store the polar bears out of harm's way.
  46. Johnny Canuck from Canada writes: What nonsense. People are forgetting how long and how cold winters can be. This is just more fear mongering imho.
  47. John Smith from Canada writes: Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: "What is the point of resources if we can't exploit them?"

    Sure, let's go for infinite growth based on finite resources. Let's really ram this rig into the wall.
  48. barey lowen from okanagan, Canada writes: So, let's pollute a little more vigorously, say goodbye to many species of animals, and sail through the arctic zones. Maybe enjoy a massive relase of methane from polar regions and wipe off a few billion people with appropriate catastrophes, so that a few leftover people can enjoy a diminished earth. I assume this is the hope of the author. It is not mine.
  49. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: J Dapena, so are you saying that the Sahara is the creation of man? If it wasn't "nature", what was it?
  50. Chris Michaels from Oakville, Canada writes: Oh joy, oh bliss.
    Another opportunity to take a pristine environment and conquer it with oil rigs, shipping ports and smoke stacks. Brilliant plan.

    Not only do we get to rationalize global warming as an opportunity, we can lay a further beat-down by aiding its acceleration.

    And people be damned. As the article states, explorers ventured to the 'undiscovered' new world and reap the riches. That should read that our forefathers raped and pillaged a land that was already inhabited. Rah-Rah. Go Explorers! A pretty insensitive statement given that many First Nations are in desperate-measures territory and trying scratch tiny bits of their land back. Having been relieved of these 'riches', now reside in abject poverty.

    Better give the Inuit nation a heads up. Take a good look at the Caribou -- they'll soon be replaced by compact SUV's...but won't taste as good.
  51. r r from Canada writes: "Canada is home to Steve McIntyre and Rob McKitrick (sic) who debunked the Mann Hockey Stick"

    Those two are a national disgrace, and, no, they have not debunked the 'hockey stick'. Data collected since Mann's work has supported his position. Apart from a few cranks, the climate science community has agreed that recent global warming is a reality and that it is largely a man-made event.

    It would be better if we spent more time on planning what to do about the impact of ice melt, given the implications for Canadian sovereignty in the north. Are we bulking up our military presence there? The Americans and the Russians certainly will. Is the Dept of National Defense planning and equipping for this, or are they planning to stay in Afghanistan forever?
  52. Brenton E. from Canada writes: What about rising sea levels? I love P.E.I..
  53. Dish Washer from Canada writes: The earth's climate will still change no matter how many hybrids we drive so let's make the most of it instead of wasting energy fighting it. To me, human life is far more important than polar bears. This planet is ours to use and exploit for our benefit.
  54. Imperial K from Toronto, Canada writes: Yes, and after it's riches become available, all those delicious resources will be pillaged in under 100 years and we'd be right back to right now right here, watching everything collapsing around us.

    Lack of vision and foresight drive thinking like this. The tortoise like pace of technology innovation in our principal industries is so obvious now. Oh the cars get fancier, but the fundamental flaw of using fossil fuels is so slowly addressed, that doing nothing isn't much less.

    We have to change what we're doing, but sadly no one will. They will take the easiest cheapest route, and then adapt to change as a drowing man learning to swim.

    Sic transit gloria mundi, as we plunder the world to pretty up our houses and ensure another generation of flat panel tv watchers.

    Such wonders and such greatness our race as accomplished. Comfort yes, but no legacy and no future. Comfort is great, but it's not lasting and definitely doesn't go anywhere.

    Without changes to how we use the world and live in it, I would suggest you enjoy life now...because yes, it likely is going to get worse.

    Again, I enjoy these things too. I mean I like my computer, my games, my life and all the comforts, but we'll have to change to make these things last...at least until the technology can catch up and provide us with a less harmful approach to the life we live right now.

    I would suggest, instead of a mad 100 yard dash digging up every resource, hoping that during that dash someone will create the technologies that will save us, we take a more marathon approach and jog rather than run. Yes, we'll have to curb some of our lifestyle, but we won't be destroyed at least. We'll have to cut back and change, but we'll survive.

    Sadly, the people making the money don't want that, they want to use the cheapest route up first, and then move over to the alternatives. Unfortunately it may be too late, again I hope not, but it may be.
  55. A Allan from vancouver, Canada writes: Look it's really simple. If you see the words World Wildlife Fund in an article, don't bother reading it. They have an agenda and they'll say and do anything to achieve it. Just don't bother reading it.
  56. The Work Farce from Canada writes: Yup and think of all the money we'll save on ice cubes.it's gunna be a brave new world up there - but a cold one. Like a white Woodstock we'll all go skinnydipping in the Arctic. And, hey, isn't the North Pole where Santa Claus lives? Imagine the commercial opportunities. There'll be nude dancing virgins gyrating around the Pole. Dancing with polar bears.And imagine the deep sea fishing tours. Chartered scuba diving. The world's largest ice-skating rink. A new world hockey league. Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. As for Canada... it will become another Afghanistan inundated with a tsunami of enviro-refugees from 150 countries. And now you know the rest of the reason why Canadian troops are making war in Afghanistan. They're practicing for the time when all the tim bits are gone and Canada is invaded by 1.2 billion Muslims.
  57. Liberals Face Criminal Charges from Canada writes: Quite good news actually! This will expose enormous resources to enrich the human race. The ice caps have receded many times before, and will do so again over a period of millions of years.
  58. William J Gillies from Canada writes: A Allan from vancouver, Canada writes: "They have an agenda and they'll say and do anything to achieve it. Just don't bother reading it."

    And what is your agenda? Pillage, plunder and rape until there's nothing left?
  59. William J Gillies from Canada writes: Dish Washer from Canada writes: "To me, human life is far more important than polar bears. This planet is ours to use and exploit for our benefit."

    Sure, let's go for infinite growth based on finite resources. Let's really ram this rig into the wall.
  60. Antonio San from Canada writes: MG from Calgary, next you'll quote desmoblog... and you'll smell Hoggan all over.
  61. Antonio San from Canada writes: MG are you disputing the Wegman report? Try because Mann and the team can't.
  62. A guy from Vancouverislandopolis from wayoutwest, Canada writes: The author writes "While at the top of our world sits the polar sea, at its bottom lays the ice-covered continent of Antarctica. And as its ice cover melts, this long-isolated continent will rise from the shadows, like Atlantis transmigrating from imagination to reality, with all its long-hidden treasures revealed, its resources becoming accessible, its land mass in time becoming suitable for human habitation."

    Good luck with that. Aside from the submarine resources there really isn't much "land mass" under all that ice. Check it out sometime...I don't even think it's enough to fight over.
  63. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Anybody think it odd we discuss things in terms of 80 year lifespans when we should be discussing them in terms of hundreds of millions of years?

    I do.

    I think it's insane.
  64. John Collier from Durban, South Africa writes: Good thing the Arctic will open to shipping. We will need to build new ports when Vancouver and Halifax are flooded. This author reminds me of the front end of a horse: only half the story.
  65. Green Canada from Canada writes: wait a minute the opening of the Arctic is a left wing socialist conspiracy to divert funds out of Canada.
  66. John Collier from Durban, South Africa writes: Earl Anthony from Sudbury, Canada writes: "Nice story but the Earth warms and cools in cycles.

    I worked up on the Arctic coast in the mid-1980's. People visiting from the south expected to take pictures of icebergs and ice sheets in summer. All they got was open water."

    Funny about that. You must have been in a different Arctic. I was working for the Federal Earth Physics Branch up there as a research scientist in the mid 80s, and the extent of open water was well within normal variation, as far as we could tell. I am shocked by the recent developments. But then, I actually measured things when I was there, like sea ice thicknesses and ocean temperatures at intervals down to the bottom, which I wrote reviewed reports on. Anecdotes don't count for much in comparison. You don't really need data to tell the difference, actually. Just look at satellite photos of ice extent in summer of '86 and compare it to the last five years.
  67. L Harder from Canada writes: Sure climate change has happened in the past. It has either been a result of cataclysmic events (that would probably wipe out civilization) such as massive meteor strikes or large scale vulcanic activity, or processes happening on scales of millions to hundreds of millions of years such as continental drift and the sequestration of carbon in fossil fuel deposits. Overlay this with cyclic solar events and you have some idea of the complexity of the subject.

    The problem with current warming is the rate it is happening. More akin to a cataclysmic event than a gradual process (global time scales of 2 to 3 hundred years are quite small). Species have differing abilities to adapt or migrate to new areas of suitable climate regimes. This will create uncoupling of regulatory processes in ecosystems. The second problem is the uncertainty about how the change will take place. Will climate bounce around different states before settling into a new regime, or will it gradually shift to a new state. If it bounces around, then the transistion will be tough as you never know what you are going to get.
  68. Jeff Pritchard from Canada writes: Finally, an article that describes global warming in optimistic, forward-looking terms: namely, as a once in a lifetime opportunity to create the world's largest, funnest water park.
  69. Tim Cares from Canada writes: Maybe we should figure out how to benefit from all of this additional water.
    Can we figure out how to send it to parched areas of the planet? The water running into the oceans from the various continents is fresh water so maybe diverting a small percentage of it will be useful and not harm the ecosystem nearby.
    Studies should begin immediately.
  70. Antonio San from Canada writes: L Harder where do you back claims such as "The problem with current warming is the rate it is happening"? Check the latest paleo-temperature reconstructions over the last 1000 year, those with proper use of statistical techniques and avoiding questionable proxies such as the proved enriched carbon fertilized Bristlecones of MBH and Team, and NONE of them display anything close to "unprecedented warming" in temperature range and rate of change.
    Extend your knowledge to INFORMATION not OPINION: read Climateaudit.org and world climate report.
  71. Ed Joseph from Ottawa, Canada writes: With all due respect to the theories expoused by the individuals in Mr. Zellen's article, I would invite people to google Phil Chapman's article of April 23, 2008 in The Australian. But of course anyone disagreeing with the Suzukis or Gores of the world must be a kook. Billions of dollars being spent on something we have no control over, i.e. the climate, while our infrastructure, health care, etc., are going to hell in a hand-basket.
  72. Bob Van Derlay from Toronto, Canada writes: Zellen says: "According to scientists from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), the Arctic Ocean will be ice-free by 2060 if current warming trends continue." But the current trend (last 10 years) is down. This article may be worth a read. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html .
    Surely we can believe The Australian if not the G&M.
  73. jenny g from Ottawa, Canada writes: I find it so funny the number of people who say "Hurrah" to the vast changing of an ecosystem, just so they can "move north because it's warmer."

    By the way, global warming won't change the solar irradiation up there - I hope you like 6 months of darkness. I wonder what that will do to the "longer growing seasons". Last I heard, plants need light. Sounds like we're heading for a dark desert to me.
  74. Ted Mousseau from Victoria, Canada writes: Nature bats last.
  75. William J Gillies from Canada writes: jenny g from Ottawa, Canada writes: "Last I heard, plants need light."

    They also need soil with tilth. Nature will provide that in about 1000 years.
  76. David heath from Toronto, Canada writes: It is a sad day in the world when a journalist actually believes that the melting of the Arctic can only bring good things to the world. It is not surprising that he is an American, who views everything from a business point of view and as an opportunity to make money. Afterall, is that not the raison d'etre of life....to make money? In fairness to Americans, they do not all have this attitude, but too many do. What about the destruction of the native animals and the way of life of the indigenous population as the ice melts, or doesn't that count for something? And can't the author appreciate something as simple and yet as profound as the loss of the barren beauty of a peaceful land covered in snow and ice? Assuming the author has travelled to the Arctic, he has obviously never openned his eyes to the beauty of the place. That will all be gone forever! No doubt, the increase in shipping and oil exploration in the area will also result in a dramatic increase in pollution levels. Just wonderful! Man will succeed in destroying one of the last pristine areas of the world. We seem to destroy everything we touch, and maybe until we learn to live in harmony with the environment, we should just stay out of the Arctic and concentrate on trying to reverse global warming and repair the massive damage we have already done to the planet.
  77. William J Gillies from Canada writes: Bob Van Derlay from Toronto, Canada writes: "Surely we can believe The Australian if not the G&M."

    Sure, try hard enough and we can always find someone supporting our own beliefs -- not that it represents any scientific consensus necessarily.
  78. Antonio San from Canada writes: David Heath, nice speech, wrong planet.
  79. John Williams from Georgetown, Canada writes: Man, do people ever love Polar Bears.
  80. Terry F from Edmonton, Canada writes: Seeing that we can't do anything about melting ice anyway we might as well get with the program and stake our claim.
  81. J S from Toronto, Canada writes: Antonio San from Canada - I think you're a blind fool.
  82. David Heath from Toronto, Canada writes: PART I In reading through the comments that have been posted, it is disheartening to see that fully half of the people commenting, either don't believe global warming is happening or just don't really care, as long as they are comfortable in their lives. For you non believers, all I can say is look around you. Yes, there are a handful of scientists that say it is not happening, but they are in the minority by a ratio of about 50 to 1. They are sometimes getting rain now in the northern Arctic in the middle of January; this is unprecedented and the people living there are awestruck by this. And if you need further evidence, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from 280 to 380 ppm in the last 150 years. This is not speculation; it is a measured fact! This just happens to coincide with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Do you think just maybe, that man is the cause of that CO2 increase? Duhhh? Furthermore, ice core samples from the Antarctic have shown that the natural variation of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has always stayed in the range of 200 to 290 ppm for the last 600,000 years. So clearly, we are today way above the "normal" CO2 range. Any simple chemist knows that more CO2 in the atmosphere = warmer temperatures. This is also an undisputed fact! Venus, whose atmosphere is 99 % CO2, has a surface temperature of 900 F degrees due to a runaway greenhouse effect. No scientist can be certain of just how much warming this will ultimately cause in the long run, but the early indications are not encouraging. If we get a modest amount of warming (say 5 F degrees over 100 years) we may well adapt, but there will be lot of misery and forced relocation of people in the world as temperatures and sea levels rise. If the warming proves to be much greater and more rapid, we may well see the collapse of human civilization as we know it, with mass starvation resulting in a die off of perhaps as much as 85% of the world's population.
  83. Alberto Bayo from Canada writes: The Panama canal Authority charges 63 bucks per container to pass through. Some Container ships have thousands of containers. The North-West passage is a lot longer and in Canadian territory...Ching...Ching...We'll clean up!
  84. gabriel draven from Toronto, Canada writes: When I read analysis like this I always think about how profoundly morally impaired and psychically damaged one has to be to see the world only in terms of how it can be exploited. If you see the world around you only in utilitarian terms, the inevitable result will always be death.
  85. Gary Blades from Halifax, Canada writes: The ice caps are melting because of carbon dioxide released from burning petroleum. But world petroleum production has now peaked. And very soon it will decline. Within a scant 5 to 10 years there won't be enough petroleum to sustain our completely oil dependent industrial civilization. Within 20 to 30 years, there will so little petroleum that industrial civilization will cease to be. There is no alternative source of energy which can replace the massive amount of energy that petroleum provides. So forget about future navigation of the Arctic Ocean. Most people will be struggling to survive living an agrarian existence 50 years from now, after the Age of Oil has ended. All of the things we take for granted will be gone forever:

    http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

    ===
  86. Antonio San from Canada writes: David Heath, prehistoric level of CO2 have been much higher. Moreover using ice cores isitopes ratio as temperature proxy is quite a stretch technique as the data is so smoothed that any statistical value in relation to the causation of the variability has disappeared. HOWEVER, what Ice core measurements tells you is that temperature changes ALWAYS preceded CO2 changes.
    But hey you do not seem interested in science: you just love writing about doom and gloom.
    JS from Toronto, it's easier to insult: you do not need to to have it peer reviewed and no needs for facts.
  87. Alastair james Berry from Nanaimo BC CANADA, Canada writes: I'm old at 78 and in all my life I have very seldom felt hot......except about 50 years ago in the desert South of Basrah where I'll admit I did feel warm.......it could get the thermometer up to 118 F............ as late as the late 60's and early 70's GLOBAL COOLING was the dire forecast, due to clouds forming from Sulphur Dioxide which was responsible for killing our forests, our fish and poisoning our First Nations Brothers at Grassy Narrows because acid rain was leaching Mercury from the Granitic Rocks of N.W.Ontario. Now I found the winters in Ontario just too cold so I moved out on to Vancouver Island, 20 years ago, hoping to avoid the chill that gells the marrow in my bones and at first the winters were milder but now I'll swear on a stack of bibles that the winters on VANCOUVER ISLAND have been getting colder and longer over the last 10 years. Now, the weather in winter in B.C. is such, that I'm forced to winter in Hawaii! I have yet to experience Global Warming but I'm quite sure I'll recognize it IF IT EVER ACTUALLY ARRIVES ON VANCOUVER ISLAND....and I'll be happy to welcome it on board as will most of my horticulturally inclined friends.
  88. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    gabriel draven, in a fit of enlightenemtn declares, "If you see the world around you only in utilitarian terms, the inevitable result will always be death."

    I got news for you, sport.

    The inevitable result of anything is death.
    It says so right here in the brochure.
  89. David Heath from Toronto, Canada writes: Part II So if you don't believe anything that I have said, please take "Mahatma Gandi from Calgary" 's advice and look at the NASA photos of the Arctic ice coverage over the last 35 years. They say pictures don't lie..at least I think I would trust NASA's photos. The website link is www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2005/arcticice_decline.html . The Earth is under assault by mankind on ALL ecological fronts, and by all accounts we only have a short time in which to turn things around. I don't know about you, but I for one would rather err on the side of caution, by changing our polluting detructive ways today, all over the world, rather than risk bringing the worst case global warming scenario down on our heads. What is the worst that could happen if we changed our ways, even if the scientists are wrong? We would have an unpolluted environment with cleaner air and water and abundant wildlife and beautiful natural vistas to leave our children. In the lingo of the businessman, making changes now to fight global warming would create a "win win" situation!
  90. David Heath from Toronto, Canada writes: Imperial K from Toronto,
    You are a wise man! Keep trying to convince others around around you to make the changes you talked about.
  91. Antonio San from Canada writes: By the way for those who have actually read the Nature "letter" this article is about, figure 1 shows atmospheric CO2 variations during the Pleistocene -the last 610k years-. Contrary to Reuters article reprinted by the Globe and Mail in the science section stating "The average change in the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 600,000 years has been just 22 parts per million by volume, Dr. Zeebe said, which means that 22 molecules of carbon dioxide were added to, or removed from, every million molecules of air." it shows that according to the methodology used by Zeebe and Caldeira, the highest natural concentration occured 325,000 years ago and the value was slightly above 300ppm!!! Moreover, the same curve shows the natural jump in value from the 180ppm level to the high 200s or 300 ppm level occurred in a steep curve over a miilenium or two. And the methodology -isotopes as temperature proxy in ice cores and statistical treatment- does smooth data out, so any higher or lower value deviation from that curve would bve simply eliminated, conveniently I may add so present day value can look extreme. Not only this paper is only in Nature letters, but its methodology needs the X ray vision of undisputed statisticians to be deemed relevant but its finding are hardly the frightening ones the Reuters journalist is making of them. Thomson, Reuters, CTV, Globe media, BNN... what's your cut in this pro AGW campaign?
  92. martha stewart from Canada writes: Once again I see the 'yes but its unprecendented' story. So, once again I'll post this. This whole book is essentially about these cultures adapting to climate change, or not.

    From: McGhee, R. 2001. Ancient people of the Arctic. Canadian Museum of Civilization/UBC Press.

    From Chapter 6, 'When the Climate Changes'

    "The last Ice Age came to an end about 11,000 years ago. The climate of the Arctic suddenly warmed, soon reaching mean annual temperatures a few degrees warmer than today. The ice sheets... began to thaw and retreat, and the sea invaded channels freed from melting ice... The tree line advanced well to the north of its present position, and in more northerly regions the warm summers probably produced a relatively luxuriant tundra vegetation."

    ------------

    It goes on to explain that then it "rapidly cooled" about 2000 B.C., rapidly warmed again to the Mediaeval Warm Period peak (1000 AD), then cooled (Little Ice Age), then warmed again.

    A changing world.
  93. Antonio San from Canada writes: David Heath is not a true believers otherwise he would not write "even if the scientists are wrong"... Perhaps 18 months Gore boot camp should straighten him as he should know the debate is over... LOL
    "In the lingo of the businessman, making changes now to fight global warming would create a "win win" situation! " yes David, and the businessman in question is AL GORE who can spend $300 million dollars, without disclosing the name of his contributors, over a 3 year PR campaign... This is Big Green: what's your cut?
    • Posted 29