Over the past few months, we've had a look at some of the impacts of the disappearing cryosphere. The effects are wide ranging, affecting people, habitats and climate not only on regional scales, but also on a global scale.
I think it's true to say that the bulk of the issues discussed are negative. Amongst the most important of these problems are the loss of albedo associated with the decrease in sea ice extent, the rise in sea level due to the loss of ice sheet mass and the impacts on wildlife which depend on cold conditions. It must also be stressed that the problems we've encountered are only set to increase as global climates continue to warm, thereby fuelling additional ice mass loss.
However, we've also seen that there may be some silver linings. namely improved opportunities for resource extraction and the possibility of improving the efficiency of global trade networks.
But can we really view opportunities for getting more oil and gas as a positive? Isn't this part of the cause of the loss of ice masses in the first place?
Yes, we are dependent on hydrocarbons, and no one would say no to a few more diamonds or rare earth minerals, but in our haste to get at them we may destroy some of the only truly pristine environments left on the planet. In procuring more hydrocarbons, we are only accelerating the rate at which global climates warm up.
Over and above the negatives that arise as a result of ice loss, I feel that glaciers, ice sheets and the like all hold an intrinsic value that cannot be overestimated.
Source: Expedition Gallery
How strange would it be to think that there's no ice in the Alps or at the North Pole?
No comments:
Post a Comment