Earth

Climate change may be sparking more lightning in the Arctic.

Data from a worldwide network of lightning sensors suggest that the frequency of lightning strikes in the region has shot up over the last decade, researchers report online March 22 in Geophysical Research Letters. That may be because the Arctic, historically too cold to fuel many thunderstorms, is heating up twice as fast as the rest of the world (SN: 8/2/19).

The new analysis used observations from the World Wide Lightning Location Network, which has sensors across the globe that detect radio waves emitted by lightning bolts. Researchers tallied lightning strikes in the Arctic during the stormiest months of June, July and August from 2010 to 2020. The team counted everywhere above 65° N latitude, which cuts through the middle of Alaska, as the Arctic.

The number of lightning strikes that the detection network precisely located in the Arctic spiked from about 35,000 in 2010 to about 240,000 in 2020. Part of that uptick in detections may have resulted from the sensor network expanding from about 40 stations to more than 60 stations over the decade.

Sign Up For the Latest from Science News

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

And just looking at the 2010 and 2020 values alone may overstate the increase in lightning, because “there’s such variability, year to year,” and 2020 was a particularly stormy year, says Robert Holzworth, an atmospheric and space scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle. In estimating the increase in average annual lightning strikes, “I would argue that we have really good evidence that the number of strokes in the Arctic has increased by, say, 300 percent,” Holzworth says.

That increase happened while global summertime temperatures rose from about 0.7 degrees Celsius above the 20th century average to about 0.9 degrees C above — hinting that global warming may create more favorable conditions for lightning in the Arctic.

It makes sense that a warmer climate could generate more lightning in historically colder climes, says Sander Veraverbeke, an earth systems scientist at VU University Amsterdam who was not involved in the work. If it does, that could potentially ignite more wildfires (SN: 4/11/19). But the apparent trend in Arctic lightning strikes should be taken with a grain of salt because it covers such a short period of time and the detection network includes few observing stations at high latitudes, Veraverbeke says. “We need more stations in the high north to really accurately monitor the lightning there.” More

Good news for the ozone layer: After a recent spike in CFC-11 pollution, emissions of this ozone-destroying chemical are on the decline.
Emissions of trichlorofluoromethane, or CFC-11, were supposed to taper off after the Montreal Protocol banned CFC-11 production in 2010 (SN: 7/7/90). But 2014 to 2017 saw an unexpected bump. About half of that illegal pollution was pegged to eastern China (SN: 5/22/19). Now, atmospheric data show that global CFC-11 emissions in 2019 were back down to the average levels seen from 2008 to 2012, and about 60 percent of that decline was due to reduced emissions in eastern China, two teams report online February 10 in Nature. 
These findings suggest that the hole in Earth’s ozone layer is still on track to close up within the next 50 years — rather than being delayed, as it would have been if CFC-11 emissions had remained at the levels seen from 2014 to 2017 (SN: 12/14/16).
One group analyzed the concentration of CFC-11, used to make insulating foams for buildings and household appliances, in the air above atmospheric monitoring stations around the globe. The team found that the world emitted about 52,000 metric tons of CFC-11 in 2019 — a major drop from the annual average of 69,000 metric tons from 2014 to 2018. The 2019 emissions were comparable to the average annual emissions from 2008 to 2012, Stephen Montzka, an atmospheric chemist at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder, Colo., and colleagues report.

The new measurements imply that there has been a significant decrease in illicit CFC-11 production within the last couple of years, the researchers say, probably thanks to more rigorous regulation enforcement in China and elsewhere.
Another group confirmed that emissions from eastern China have diminished since 2018 by analyzing air samples from Hateruma, Japan and Gosan, South Korea. The region emitted about 5,000 metric tons of CFC-11 in 2019, which was about 10,000 metric tons less than its average annual emissions from 2014 to 2017 and was similar to the 2008 to 2012 average. That analysis was led by Sunyoung Park, a geochemist at Kyungpook National University in Daegu, South Korea.

Sign Up For the Latest from Science News

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

The recent downturn in CFC-11 pollution shows that “the Montreal Protocol is working,” says A.R. “Ravi” Ravishankara, an atmospheric scientist at Colorado State University in Fort Collins not involved in either study. When someone violates the treaty, “atmospheric sleuthing” can uncover the culprits and spur countries to take action, he says. “China clearly took action, because you can see the result of that action in the atmosphere.” 
Montzka cautions that it might not always be so easy to point the finger at rogue emitters. “I think we got lucky this time,” he says, because atmospheric monitoring sites in Asia were able to trace the bulk of illegal emissions to eastern China and monitor the situation over several years. Many places around the world, such as in Africa and South America, lack atmospheric monitoring stations — so it’s still a mystery which countries besides China were responsible for the recent rise and fall of CFC-11 emissions. More

A flash flood surged down a river in India’s Himalayan Uttarakhand state on February 7, killing at least 30 people and washing away two hydroelectric power stations.
As rescue workers search for more than 100 people who are still missing, officials and scientists are trying to unravel the causes of the sudden flood. Did a glacier high up in the mountains collapse, releasing a huge plug of frigid meltwater that spilled into the river? Or was the culprit a landslide that then triggered an avalanche? And what, if any, link might these events have to a changing climate?
Here are three things to know about what might have caused the disaster in Uttarakhand.
1. One possible culprit was the sudden break of a glacier high in the mountains.
News reports in the immediate wake of the disaster suggested that the floodwaters were caused by the sudden overflow of a glacial lake high up in the mountain, an event called a glacial lake outburst flood.
“It’s likely too early to know what exactly happened,” says Anjal Prakash, the research director of the Bharti Institute of Public Policy at the Indian School of Business in Hyderabad. Satellite images show that a section of a glacier broke off, but how that break relates to the subsequent floods is still unknown. One possibility is that the glacier was holding back a lake of meltwater, and that heavy snowfall in the region two days earlier added enough volume to the lake that the water forced its way out, breaking the glacier and surging into nearby rivers.
This scenario is certainly in line with known hazards for the region. “These mountains are very fragile,” says Prakash, who was also a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2019 special report on oceans and the cryosphere, Earth’s icy places. But, he notes, there isn’t yet much on-the-ground data to help clarify events. “The efforts are still focused on relief at the moment.”
2. A landslide may be to blame instead.
Other researchers contend that the disaster wasn’t caused by a glacial lake outburst flood at all. Instead, says Daniel Shugar, a geomorphologist at the University of Calgary in Canada, satellite images snapped during the disaster show the telltale marks of a landslide: a dark scar snaking through the white snow and clouds of dust clogging the air above. “You could see this train of dust in the valley, and that’s common for a very large landslide,” Shugar says.
“WOW,” he wrote on Twitter the morning of February 7, posting side-by-side satellite shots of a dark area of possible “massive dust deposition,” contrasted against the same snowy, pristine region just the day before.

Landslides — the sudden failure of a slope, sending a rush of rocks and sediment downhill — can be triggered by anything from an earthquake to an intense deluge of rain. In high, snowy mountains, cycles of freezing and thawing and refreezing again can also begin to break the ground apart; the ice-filled cracks can slowly widen over time, setting the stage for sudden failure, and then, disaster.
The satellite images seem to point clearly to such a landslide, rather than a typical glacial lake overflow, Shugar says. The force of the landslide may have actually broken off that piece of hanging glacier, he says. Another line of evidence against a sudden lake burst is that “there were no lakes of any size visible” in the satellite images taken over the region.
However, an outlying question for this hypothesis is where the floodwaters came from. It might be that one of the rivers draining down the mountain was briefly dammed by the rockfall; a sudden release of that dam could send a large plug of water from the river swiftly and disastrously downhill. “But that’s a pure guess at the moment,” Shugar says.
3. It’s not yet clear whether climate change played a role in the disaster.
The risk of both glacial lake outburst floods and freeze-thaw-related landslides in Asia’s high mountains has increased due to climate change. At first glance, “it was a climate event,” Prakash says. “But the data are still coming.”
The region, which includes the Hindu Kush Himalayan mountains and the Tibetan Plateau, “has been a climate change hot spot for a pretty long time,” Prakash says. The region is often called Earth’s third pole, because the stores of ice and snow in the Himalayan watershed amount to the largest reserves of freshwater outside of the polar regions. The region is the source of 10 major river systems that provide water to almost 2 billion people.
Climate change reports have warned that warming is not only threatening this water supply, but also increasing the likelihood of natural hazards (SN: 5/29/19). In the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2019 special report on oceans and the cryosphere, scientists noted that glacier retreat, melting snow and thawing permafrost are making mountain slopes more unstable and also increasing the number of glacial lakes, upping the likelihood of a sudden, catastrophic failure (SN: 9/25/19).
A 2019 comprehensive assessment focusing on climate change’s impacts in Asia’s high mountains found that the glaciers in the region have retreated much more quickly in the last decade than was anticipated, Prakash says, “and that is alarming for us.” Here’s another way to look at it: Glaciers are retreating twice as fast as they were at the end of the 20th century (SN: 6/19/19).
Glacier-related landslides in the region have also become increasingly common in the last decade, as the region warms and destabilizing freeze-thaw cycles within the ground occur higher and higher up on the slopes.
But in the case of this particular disaster, Shugar says, it’s just hard to say conclusively at this point what role climate change might have played, or even what specific event might have triggered a landslide. “Sometimes there is no trigger; sometimes it’s just time,” he says. “Or it’s that we just don’t understand the trigger.”

Sign Up For the Latest from Science News

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox More

Pandemic-related shutdowns may have spared Earth’s atmosphere some greenhouse gas emissions last year, but the world continued to warm.
Water temperature measurements from around the globe indicate that the total amount of heat stored in the upper oceans in 2020 was higher than any other year on record dating back to 1955, researchers report online January 13 in Advances in Atmospheric Sciences. Tracking ocean temperature is important because warmer water melts more ice off the edges of Greenland and Antarctica, which raises sea levels (SN: 4/30/20) and supercharges tropical storms (SN: 11/11/20).
Researchers estimated the total heat energy stored in the upper 2,000 meters of Earth’s oceans using temperature data from moored sensors, drifting probes called Argo floats, underwater robots and other instruments (SN: 5/19/10). The team found that upper ocean waters contained 234 sextillion, or 1021, joules more heat energy in 2020 than the annual average from 1981 to 2010. Heat energy storage was up about 20 sextillion joules from 2019 — suggesting that in 2020, Earth’s oceans absorbed about enough heat to boil 1.3 billion kettles of water.
This analysis may overestimate how much the oceans warmed last year, says study coauthor Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist with the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research who is currently based in Auckland, New Zealand. So the researchers also crunched ocean temperature data using a second, more conservative method for estimating total annual ocean heat and found that the jump from 2019 to 2020 could be as low as 1 sextillion joules. That’s still 65 million kettles brought to boil.
The three other warmest years on record for the world’s oceans were 2017, 2018 and 2019. “What we’re seeing here is a variant on the movie Groundhog Day,” says study coauthor Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State. “Groundhog Day has a happy ending. This won’t if we don’t act now to dramatically reduce carbon emissions.” More

In August, a massive wildfire tore through the San Lorenzo Valley north of Santa Cruz, Calif., destroying almost 1,500 structures and exposing many others to extreme heat. Before the fire was even out, lab tests revealed benzene levels as high as 9.1 parts per billion in residential water samples — nine times higher than the state’s maximum safety level.
This isn’t the first time the carcinogen has followed wildfires: California water managers found unsafe levels of benzene and other volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, in Santa Rosa after the Tubbs Fire in 2017, and in Paradise after the Camp Fire in 2018.
Scientists suspected that, among other possibilities, plastic drinking water pipes exposed to extreme heat released the chemicals (SN: 11/13/20). Now, lab experiments show that’s possible.  
Andrew Whelton, an environmental engineer at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind., and colleagues subjected commonly available pipes to temperatures from 200° Celsius to 400° C. Those temperatures, hot enough to damage but not destroy pipes, can occur as heat radiates from nearby flames, Whelton says.
A plastic water pipe (left) and meter box (right) recovered from homes in Paradise, Calif., after the Camp Fire scorched the community in 2018 reveal the degree to which plastics can melt when exposed to high temperatures.Andrew Whelton/Purdue University (CC-BY-ND)
When the researchers then submerged the pipes in water and cooled them, varying amounts of benzene and VOCs — more than 100 chemicals in some tests — leached from 10 of the 11 types of pipe into the water, the team reports December 14 in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology.
“Some contamination for the past fires likely originated from thermally damaged plastics,” says Whelton. It’s impossible to do experiments in the midst of a raging fire to pinpoint the exact source of the contamination, he says, but inspecting damaged pipes after the fact can suggest what temperatures they may have experienced.
Benzene exposure can cause immediate health problems, including skin and throat irritation, dizziness, and longer-term effects such as leukemia. The team suggests testing drinking water if fire comes anywhere near your property and, if possible, replacing any plastic in a home’s water system with heat-resistant metal. More

A massive plume of smoke lofted into the stratosphere during Australia’s fires may represent a new class of “volcanic-scale” pyrocumulonimbus clouds. More

Fifteen years of grading warming’s impact on the Arctic has made one thing abundantly clear: Climate change has drastically altered the Arctic in that short time period.
Breaking unfortunate records is “like whack-a-mole,” says Jackie Richter-Menge, a climate scientist at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and an editor of the 2020 Arctic Report Card, released December 8 at the virtual meeting of the American Geophysical Union. From sea ice lows to temperature highs, records keep popping up all over the place. For instance, in June, a record-high 38° Celsius (100.4° Fahrenheit) temperature was recorded in the Arctic Circle (SN:6/23/20). And in 2018, winter ice on the Bering Sea shrank to a 5,500 year low (SN:9/3/20).
“But quite honestly, the biggest headline is the persistence and robustness of the warming,” Richter-Menge says. In 2007, only a year after the first Arctic Report Card, summer sea ice reached a record low, shrinking to an area 1.6 million square kilometers smaller than the previous year. Then, only five years later, the report card noted a new low, 18 percent below 2007. In 2020, sea ice didn’t set a record but not for lack of trying: It still was the second lowest on record in the last 42 years.  
“The transformation of the Arctic to a warmer, less frozen and biologically changed region is well under way,” the report concludes. And it’s changing faster than expected when researchers launched the report card in 2006. The annual average air temperature in the Arctic is rising two to three times faster than the rest of the globe, Richter-Menge says. Over the last 20 years, it’s warmed at a rate of 0.77 degrees C per decade, compared with the global average of 0.29 degrees C per decade.

Sign Up For the Latest from Science News

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

Improvements in research techniques over the last 15 years have helped researchers more thoroughly observe warming’s impact and how different aspects of Arctic climate change are linked to one another, she says. These improvements include the ability to measure ice mass via gravity measurements taken by the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite. Other satellites have provided additional observations from above while on-the-ground measurements, such as by the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC), have provided up-close sea ice measurements (SN:4/8/20). The report has also begun to include on-the-ground observations of the Arctic’s Indigenous people, who experiences these changes directly (SN:12/11/19).
The changes have revealed few bright spots but one is the rebound of bowhead whales, which were hunted almost to extinction around the turn of the 20th century. While researchers are careful to note that the whales are still vulnerable, the four populations of the whales (Balaena mysticetus) now range from 218 in the Okhotsk Sea to around 16,800 in the Bering, Chukchi and Beaufort seas. Researchers suggest that the whales’ rebound is due, at least in part, to the warming that has occurred over the last 30 years. Earlier sea ice melting and warmer surface water means more krill and other food for these baleen feeders.
In a rare bit of good news from the Arctic, researchers report that bowhead whales are on the rebound. Unfortunately, the same warming that has aided the whales has melted ice sheets and increased hardships for Indigenous hunters.Nature Picture Library/Alamy Stock Photo
But don’t be fooled. The potential good news is overshadowed by the bad news. There’s been “this accumulation of knowledge and insights that we’ve gained over 15 years,” says Mark Serreze, a climate scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., who wasn’t involved in this year’s report. The 2020 research is “an exclamation point on the changes that have been unfolding,” he says. “The bowhead whales are doing OK, but that’s about it.” More