SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Permafrost in some areas of the Canadian Arctic is thawing so fast that it's gulping up the equipment left there to study it.
"The ground thaws and swallows it," said Merritt Turetsky, a University of Guelph biologist whose new research warns the rapid thaw could dramatically increase the amounts of greenhouse gases released from ancient plants and animals frozen within the tundra.
"We've put cameras in the ground, we've put temperature equipment in the ground, and it gets flooded. It often happens so fast we can't get out there and rescue it.
"We've lost dozens of field sites. We were collecting data on a forest and all of a sudden it's a lake."
Turetsky's research, published this week in the journal Nature, looks at the rate of permafrost thaw across the Arctic and what its impact could be on attempts to limit greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:34AM (16 children)
The bullshit is worse than that. No forest grows on permafrost.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by krishnoid on Sunday May 05 2019, @02:54AM
One thing's for sure. "Perma"frost needs a new name.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @03:32AM (1 child)
Oh It does, just depends on your definition of forest. Alaska has a lot of "forest" made up of trees that are maybe 30 feet at their highest but mostly spindly diseased looking 20ft twigs. Inland has some bigger trees, But it also gets to 80+ in the summer.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @04:41AM
I suppose there is a map somewhere on the internet, showing how the tree line starts out very high at the equator. As you go north or south, the tree line comes down toward sea level. At some point, the tree line reaches sea level, and there are no more trees, at all. With global warming, that sea level tree line will move north and south, allowing seeds to germinate, and seedlings to push roots into unfrozen soil. Closer to the equator, the elevation of the tree line will go up as well. The elevation probably won't move up as fast as it will move north and south, but it will surely go up. The increase in carbon dioxide will probably help the tree line to move upward, but there has to be a limit to that.
Unless we geoengineer a tree that will germinate on ice, there will never be a forest sprouting on permafrost.
Adak Island, in the Aleutian Islands has a little bitty "National Forest" that was planted around WW2 time. Can't remember for sure, I guess there were like 30 trees in it. When I stood in the middle of that forest in 1976, there were like two or three trees taller than I was. My view of the landscape around me was not obstructed, that's for certain. Temperatures on Adak varied little from summer to winter - and that wasn't even permafrost.
More recent photos here suggest that tallest tree might be 9 feet high now - https://maps.roadtrippers.com/stories/the-sad-tale-of-americas-smallest-national-forest [roadtrippers.com] Of course, the angle of the camera shot may contribute to that appearance.
Climate on Adak here: https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/adak/alaska/united-states/usak0001 [usclimatedata.com] There aren't a lot of arctic blasts bringing the temperature down to -40 and lower.
(Score: 5, Informative) by PinkyGigglebrain on Sunday May 05 2019, @04:27AM (9 children)
Wrong on that one Runaway. The term permafrost refers to the layer of soil that never thaws out. That layer is not always on the surface, sometime it can be surprisingly deep. All that has to be true is that the layer of soil never gets warm enough to thaw. So the forest has it's roots in the top layer of soil that is not permanently frozen, the roots don't go into the layer that is. A layer that is now melting thanks to warmer temperatures.
Your probably thinking of the Arctic Tundra, with no trees just sparse grass and the permafrost starts only inches below the surface even in summer
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @04:47AM (8 children)
You are probably right on that. I guess there is no law that says the permafrost has to be at the surface. But, back to these researchers - if they set up instruments on solid frozen ground, only to come back a couple months later to find a marsh, they can't be the sharpest tools in the shed. That frozen to marshy thing probably happens every year, and has repeated itself for hundreds, if not thousands of years.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Whoever on Sunday May 05 2019, @05:31AM (7 children)
You can't be bothered to read the article, can you? Instead, you would prefer to substitute your ignorance for actual facts. Let me give you a little help:
See that? "days or weeks". This is a change from an annual cycle.
What level of arrogance does it take to substitute your own ignorance for actual reporting?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @05:52AM (5 children)
Maybe it's the word "forest". Some scrub pine and spruce with roots spread out through the top 1 foot of surface soil, just doesn't sound like "forest" to me. I looked at the Denali link posted above. I don't see a lot of "trees" in that wash on the hillside. I see what look like saplings. I gave a link to Adak National forest. 33 trees, after 50+ years, none of them large enough to harvest for a 2x4.
About that supposed arrogance: Do you, or do you not, attempt to reconcile reporting with your knowledge and experience? And, have you never once found proof that a "reporter" was full of crap? Or, is there some kind of magic about a reporter who reports stuff in the name of science? Even given some magic associated with the word science, have you never, ever, even once, found a study in which the researcher did something stupid?
What we know from the story is, some researchers lost some equipment. Something they didn't expect happened, and they lost equipment. What I don't see is corroboration from the natives that ten, or a hundred, or thousands of square miles of permafrost just collapsed in the last year or ten.
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Sunday May 05 2019, @09:17AM (4 children)
Drunken trees - Siberia - 2007 [nasa.gov]
A crater formed in Siberia's permafrost is growing at an alarming rate - 2017 [bbc.com] - has photos, the trees aren't that tundra-small as you imply.
Drunken forest - Alaska 2018 [vice.com] In parts of Alaska, the ground is sinking so much that trees are growing almost horizontally. It's an area scientists refer to as a "drunken forest."
Ummm... do you? 'Cause it seems that you are so full of... answers that you didn't do the most basic google query [google.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 05 2019, @09:35AM (3 children)
So, residents of Russia's Siberia, or residents of the US' Alaska can verify that a thousand square miles of Canadian permafrost has thawed out, overnight. Got it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @09:42AM
Shows that's not impossible as you suggest.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday May 06 2019, @10:17AM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 06 2019, @10:36AM
Please note, FatPhil, I don't recall saying that it couldn't happen, or didn't happen - I'm QUESTIONING exactly what happened. I have a suspicion that it didn't just suddenly happen overnight.
Note the title of this thread: Idiot researchers. Then ask all the questions a sceptical reader might ask. Were there no signs at all that the area might be subsiding? How experienced were these researchers in the north? Was this actually "permafrost", or might it have been thermokarst? Note that thermokarst is a kind of permafrost, which is already undergoing a thawing cycle. And, what do the locals have to say about it?
Do you suggest that I should read every paper, and believe what it says? Thanks, but no thanks. There have been articles submitted on this site, which community consensus rejects out of hand. Examples? Any environmental study paid for by any of the players in Big Oil.
Just let it go, man. I'm skeptical that knowledgable researchers, experienced in far-north research lost tons of equipment just overnight. It sounds like someone screwed up, and threw excuses into the echo chamber of man-made global climate change.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05 2019, @04:21PM
We've known for awhile that beavers ("Nature's ecologist") have been trying to melt the permafrost to form lakes, etc (homes for themselves and their children):
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/climate/arctic-beavers-alaska.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 2) by dry on Sunday May 05 2019, @06:01AM
Hey, when drunk... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunken_trees [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday May 05 2019, @11:39AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 11 2019, @10:19AM
Moron, you've never heard of taiga and are too stupid to ddg before airing your stupidity.
Even my dumbass 13yo self had played MTG and knew that Taiga land is rare, special, $25/card stuff.
IRL it's also kinda cool. But you know, more real than dragons.
"No forest grows on permafrost" - I just, I don't even... it's... do you... but... yeah I'm at a loss. It's like someone with myopia telling you there's nothing closer to Earth than the Sun. Um... just because all you can make out is... but... that's... um.