Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday August 01 2019, @08:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-goes-around-comes-around dept.

The new research in AGU's Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres finds chemicals used in pesticides that have been accumulating in glaciers and ice sheets around the world since the 1940s are being released as Himalayan glaciers melt as a result of climate change.

These pollutants are winding up in Himalayan lakes, potentially impacting aquatic life and bioaccumulating in fish at levels that may be toxic for human consumption.

The new study shows that even the most remote areas of the planet can be repositories for pollutants and sheds light on how pollutants travel around the globe, according to the study's authors.

The Himalayan glaciers contain even higher levels of atmospheric pollutants than glaciers in other parts of the world "because of their proximity to south Asian countries that are some of the most polluted regions of the world," said Xiaoping Wang, a geochemist at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing and an author on the new study.

[...] The study adds important data to the bigger picture of how pollutants cycle around the globe, Miner said. Similar studies have been conducted at the poles and in Europe, but not as much is known about pollutants in the Himalaya. Each mountain range has its own characteristics that influence how chemicals move through the environment, she added.

"The Earth is a closed system. Everything released on the Earth, stays somewhere on the Earth," Miner said.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 02 2019, @05:49PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 02 2019, @05:49PM (#874735)

    I could answer your question about sunspots, just like I responded to "fraction of a fraction of a percent" and then you'll just go on to some other thing and call me a retard instead of recognizing that you have been wrong in every single post in this thread. I mean, you are mentally ill.

  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday August 02 2019, @05:54PM (1 child)

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 02 2019, @05:54PM (#874740) Journal

    The effect on insolation, is indeed, less than a tenth of percent.

    You're retarded. Like utterly brainless. Devoid of conscious goddamn thought.

    • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday August 02 2019, @06:14PM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 02 2019, @06:14PM (#874758) Journal

      Let's get a little more specific for

      Here's the pseudo-academic who first proposed your dumbass theory [john-daly.com], with a 1998 update containing a whole section on "my bad, my original prediction is we'd get rapid cooling by 1990 towards an ice age in 2030 and I was just wrong about which sunspot cycle would do it"

      On this basis, I forecasted, in 1982, that we should expect declining temperatures after 1990 and probably a new Little Ice Age around 2030. In further papers I specified this prediction [58, 59, 63]. I also expected considerably weaker sunspot activity after 1990. The slowly ascending new sunspot cycle, which started in May 1996, seems to follow the predicted trend.

      Proceeding from there into a lengthy bullshit about the butterfly effect and lambasting the IPCC for being unreasonably certain that CO2 would massively outpower solar variation in climate forcing, because who can possibly know how things work*. He then makes the prediction that cooling should begin in 2007(NOPE) towards a global minimum in 2111. Strange that on being shown to be totally and completely wrong, he completely revises the core pattern of his theory from being 30 year cycles to 200 year cycles.

      And yet here you are, spouting the same bullshit. No brain.

      *Just as an aside most likely scenario predictions from the IPCC 2001 report are about a tenth of a degree off from actual values in 2018, since we're doing the whole testing our predictions thing.