Comments on: German ships navigate Northeast Passage – but is it a good thing? Global environmental challenges Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:14:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: oes tsetnoc Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:56:01 +0000 A perfect platform for people to present their thoughts,
Hi, thanks for sharing,
Great post…
great article ..
like you site..continue doing it..

Thanks for the tips

This is really helpful.

By: Mike de Sosa Mon, 21 Sep 2009 23:34:58 +0000 Climate warming has not peaked. The 2000s are the warmest decade ever recorded. 2008, allegedly a “cold year” was still the 10th hottest year ever recorded, despite seeing La Nina conditions for most of the year and being in the deepest solar minimum in a century. Only two years in the 90s were hotter than 2008 — 1997 and 1998, when the planet was in the grips of the strongest El Nino ever recorded. Meanwhile, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 are ALL in the top 10, and 2009 will be as well.

The argument isn’t that natural cycles don’t affect the climate, it’s that our actions (spewing out greenhouse gases and cutting down forests that absorb them) are beginning to override them. You still see year-to-year variation in temperature, but the unmistakable trend is upwards, with no natural cause evident. At some point, it will become warm enough to start positive feedback cycles like methane release from the permafrost, and the warming will continue no matter what we do. So the idea is not to get to that point, but that requires a whole heck of a lot of action in a short period of time.

By: Keith Newell Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:12:24 +0000 Yes, it’s a good thing. Waste and pollution are bad. Using the Northeast passage reduces both. That’s good.

Climate change is not inherently bad. It’s happened on a large scale before (Ice Age I, warm-up I, Ice Age II, warm-up II), mostly without significant input from humans. It’s reasonable (and humble?) to suppose that this variability is normal and outside our control, rather than something to waste resources trying to control. Waste is bad.

We need to stay focussed on fighting pollution. It’s been a mistake to link cleaning up the environment with our fond hopes of controlling the climate. What if climate warming has peaked, as some scientists now argue? Are we off the hook regarding protecting the environment?

We should protect the environment because it’s good to do so. And our celebration of any gains in that direction should be wholehearted, rather than half-hearted.

By: Emmanuel Gonot Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:43:27 +0000 I think the Mr Kirschbaum is correct in saying that the Northeast Passage (Northern Sea Route) has been opened by global warming. Certainly, this is the first time Western commercial vessels navigated the passage non-stop and without having their paths cleared for them by icebreakers.

As to the question of whether or not this is a good thing, no it isn’t – if you singularly consider this as a clear indicator of climate change. On the other hand, if the tonnage of commercial shipping passing through the route every summer increases considerably, that would mean a huge reduction in the consumption (burning) of fossil fuel, which in turn will help slow down warming. But why squeeze in dozens of ships to make the journey within a two-month window, when they can still use rail to move goods from east to west and vice-versa, all year round?

By: R Flynn Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:58:50 +0000 The Northeast was first navigated in the late 1800’s and has been continually used since then. The term “Global Warming” has nothing with navigatable conditions as the passage is and has been used annually during summer months. Lets get the facts straight.

By: Sanoran Triamesh Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:08:15 +0000 The question is actually irrelevant in the long run. These ships burn diesel (or maybe the cheaper bunker fuel), which is, like all other petroleum products, in a finite supply. As the Chinese/Asian economies revive, we will again see the increase in petroleum consumption, which will hasten global warming but will also hasten the end of petroleum supply. And once its gone, the shipping lanes will be quiet. 25 years. And the real fornication for the human race will not come from global warming but from a lack of oil and natural gas. Global warming, therefore, is irrelevant.

By: dr wilth Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:02:28 +0000 The reduced ammount of co2 that is released by using this route is positive, although it is a realatively small reduction in the grand scheme. I think this story raises questions about bigger things than the actual ammount of co2 reduced from using this route, although any reduction is good. The big push now is co2 reduction, which we must do; but it is already too late for reduction to stop some of the things occurring now and soon to occur. So I think it would be prudent to not only look at the benefits of the change occuring (like better shipping routes), but also consider the damaging results from these changes. We need to prepare to adapt to various changes in our world. This story highlights one of the impacts of these changes, there will be more. Looking ahead and planning can save lives from some of these, unfortunatley not all. So with our co2 reduction efforts we should also look at adaptation to the change accurring and that will occur.