Category: Climate

Stories about climate change, science, policy, and adaptation

What’s at Stake: Adapting to Climate Change

What’s at Stake: Adapting to Climate Change

A view of Ray Lake, on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. Like other parts of the Great Plains, the region is prone to extreme dryness. (Photo by Natalie Umphlett/ via NOAA)

Potential budget cuts are alarming because much of the country is already behind in adapting to climate change, including the Great Plains. Dennis Ojima, director of the North Central Climate Science Center, projects that the region will face a “dramatic increase” in the number of extremely hot days (95°F and higher) and warm nights by mid-century, regardless of any action to curb carbon emissions. The increased heat will affect patterns of rainfall and drought, forcing farmers and ranchers to experiment with growing practices and eventually plant different crops. It will stress existing infrastructure, challenging the reliability of water supplies and electric grids. The sooner managers can get ahead of these changes and begin adapting, the better.

“What’s at Stake: Adapting to Climate Change”

Audubon, November 2017

A tax on carbon pollution faces surprising opposition

A tax on carbon pollution faces surprising opposition

Initiative 732 supporters get ready to canvass in Seattle (Photo courtesy of CarbonWA campaign)

Soon, Washingtonians will vote on Initiative 732. It would be the first statewide carbon tax in the U.S., and a major step toward reducing climate-changing pollution. For Court Olson, a civil engineer and long-time Sierra Club member, voting ‘yes’ on the measure is a no-brainer. “We desperately need to get off fossil fuels and incentivize clean energy,” he says. “And the most effective first step is to put a price on fossil fuels and carbon emissions.” Initiative 732, in his view, is “the right thing to do.”

And yet the proposal has run into some surprising opposition — from environmentalists, social-justice groups and the state Democratic Party. The Sierra Club and Washington Environmental Council have taken formal positions opposing the measure, while the climate activist group 350 Seattle endorsed and then unendorsed it this summer. Meanwhile, many of these groups’ members, including Olson, are campaigning for I-732. 

“A tax on carbon pollution faces surprising opposition”

High Country News, October 25, 2016

‘Keep It in the Ground’ prompts online oil and gas leasing auctions

‘Keep It in the Ground’ prompts online oil and gas leasing auctions

Climate activists protest a BLM oil and gas lease sale in Denver in May 2016 (JZ)

Lease sales, where energy companies bid for the right to drill for oil and gas on federal land, used to be mundane events. But lately they’ve become raucous, with climate activists in Salt Lake City, Denver and Reno urging the government to leave fossil fuels in the ground. Eventually, they hope to end public-lands drilling altogether.

In response, some industry leaders want auctions to move online — eBay style. The Bureau of Land Management agrees, and will host its first online sale this September. Explaining the move to Congress this March, BLM Director Neil Kornze said online sales are cheaper to host and will speed up transactions. He added that the agency is on “heightened alert” and concerned about safety as a result of incidents like the militia occupation at Oregon’s Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. “And so a situation that we are not used to — separating out who is a bidder and who is not — gives us pause,” Kornze said.

So far, environmentalists are uncertain whether an online system will help or hurt their cause. “If this is part of a broader effort to make BLM processes more efficient and transparent, it’s a great idea,” says Nada Culver, director of The Wilderness Society’s BLM Action Center. But if it simply allows energy companies to escape growing scrutiny, “it’s not progress.”

“‘Keep It in the Ground’ prompts online oil and gas leasing auctions”

High Country News, July 20, 2016

How some Western cities are leading on climate action

How some Western cities are leading on climate action

This community solar farm in Fort Collins will reduce CO2 emissions by 39,500 tons over its 50-year lifetime (Photo courtesy: Poudre Valley REA)

A college town of 155,000 people known for its beers and bike lanes, Fort Collins, Colorado, adopted an ambitious climate action plan this past spring to cut its carbon emissions 80 percent by 2030 and be carbon-neutral by 2050. The initiative lacks worldwide reach, but it outpaces the goals of the Paris pact, with an aggressive timeline matched by only a few other cities, including Seattle, Copenhagen and Sydney. Even as world leaders have dragged their feet, taking 21 frustrating years and annual conferences to finally set some climate goals,  cities like Fort Collins have charged ahead, determined to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avoid ecological catastrophe. 

The city passed its first action plan and started measuring its emissions in 1999. With its purple political background and acknowledged need to wean itself from coal power, Fort Collins could serve as a blueprint for other, similarly sized communities.

Even though the city’s last four mayors have all leaned to the right politically, they have all generally supported climate action. Current Mayor Wade Troxell, a Republican, was among 27 mayors who penned a letter to President Obama this June, asking him to “fight for the strongest possible climate agreement” in Paris and “for federal action to establish binding national greenhouse gas emissions reductions here at home.” While other politically fraught issues, from a city fracking moratorium to relaxed public-nudity laws, have recently split the council, it unanimously approved the aggressive new climate-action plan this spring.

“How some Western cities are leading on climate action”

High Country News, January 13, 2016

Tar Sands Mining Hits the American West

Tar Sands Mining Hits the American West

Protestors with Peaceful Uprising at the test pit of the planned Utah tar sands mine (via Peaceful Uprising)
Protestors with Peaceful Uprising at the test pit of the planned Utah tar sands mine (via Peaceful Uprising)

Tar sands, also known as oil sands, require intensive processing to produce usable crude—it can take two tons of sand to produce just one barrel of oil. The expense of extracting and refining that oil (and the pollution the process entails) has historically kept most of it in the ground. However, beginning in 2000, rising oil prices and calls for North American energy independence set off a tar sands boom in Alberta (not to mention an endless debate in this country about the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry Alberta’s tar sands oil to the States). Fifteen years later the industry has cleared or degraded nearly two million acres of boreal forest, created toxic tailings ponds and other waste, and become Canada’s fastest-growing greenhouse gas emitter. And now it’s looking south. 

In July 2015, Utah’s Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining issued a permit clearing the way for the opening of this country’s first commercial tar sands mine amid eastern Utah’s Tavaputs Plateau, which sits atop an estimated 20 billion to 32 billion barrels of recoverable oil. 

At a moment of growing public consensus that it’s time to move away from dirty energy, the decision to open up Utah canyon country to the development of what many consider the dirtiest energy source of all sends a decidedly contradictory—if not perverse—message. “If the fuels are made available,” says Dan Mayhew, the chair of the Sierra Club’s Utah chapter, “the amount of carbon that could be emitted is staggering”—as much as 48 billion metric tons just from the oil shale, according to a Sierra Club estimate. 

“Tar Sands Mining Hits the American West”

Audubon Magazine, September/October 2015

Red States Are Getting a New Shade of Redder

Red States Are Getting a New Shade of Redder

A tractor works the fields in the Great Plains (U.S. Agricultural Research Service)
A tractor works the fields in the Great Plains (U.S. Agricultural Research Service)

Climate models project that Rep. Cory Gardner’s current House district—along with much of the food-producing Great Plains and Corn Belt—will experience the country’s most drastic temperature and precipitation changes in the coming years. Gardner’s home turf, one of the 10 largest congressional districts in terms of agricultural area, will likely face a temperature increase of more than 8 degrees Fahrenheit and a more than 9 percent drop-off in precipitation by 2100—among the most extreme projections for the country.

That’s according to analysis from a forthcoming peer-reviewed study by Brady Allred of the University of Montana and colleagues. Allred’s study looked at political representation, agricultural and natural-resources land cover, and projected climate disruptions across the nation’s 435 U.S. House districts. The researchers discovered that the districts with the most agriculture and natural resources are predominantly represented by Republicans who generally deny the science of global warming. Those districts also likely face the most severe climate changes.

Allred says the findings highlight a “disconnect between vulnerability [to climate change] and the current political rhetoric.”

The disconnect isn’t just depressing news for climate-conscious voters in other parts of the country. The failure to act on climate issues could devastate the nation’s breadbasket. Climate change could harm corn, soy, wheat, and cattle production, affecting U.S. and global food supplies. In other words, the effects of political polarization and Republican aversion to climate action could harm everyone.

“Red States Are Getting a New Shade of Redder”

Slate, December 11, 2014

Mission: Climate Change

Mission: Climate Change

An Air Force sergeant refuels a transport plane (via Pew Environment Group)

Climate policy may be a minefield in U.S. politics, but the Pentagon sees liabilities of a different kind and is forging ahead with plans to reduce the military’s carbon footprint and prepare for climate impacts.

In my April feature for the Daily Climate, “Military sees threats, worry in climate change,” I cover how the Armed Forces are running on solar power and biofuels, aiming for net-zero energy use, and otherwise planning for energy security and climate change.

Read More Read More

Share
After the Aftermath

After the Aftermath

MMc JanFeb10 coverFive years ago this week, the Indian Ocean tsunami killed more than 150 million people across nearly a dozen countries in southeast Asia. The natural event also displaced millions, leaving them without homes, jobs or schools. Researchers and aid groups that have worked toward recovery understand that rebuilding is only part of the answer, but addressing the social and emotional needs of affected people is a complex mission.

Growing populations and the altering climate and weather patterns are placing more people in risky situations, and making more individuals vulnerable to natural disasters. After attending a talk by Lori Peek, a sociology professor at Colorado State University, about the lag in research on how traumatic events affect families, I started pursuing this story to understand what we know — and what we have dispelled — when it comes to protecting and meeting the long-term needs of disaster victims and refugees.

My article, “After the Aftermath,” appears in the Jan/Feb 2010 issue of Miller-McCune magazine.

Read More Read More

Share
Altered State

Altered State

In a quest to understand and explain how climate change is affecting Colorado, I rummaged research journals and contacted scientists to delve into the impacts that are already happening and what a carbon-loaded future may look like in the state.

***

Altered State

Nine signs that Colorado’s environment is heating up.

By Joshua Zaffos

Arapaho Glacier, in the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area, 1898 (top) and 2003 (bottom)
Arapaho Glacier, in the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area, 1898 (top) and 2003 (bottom)

Rocky Mountain Chronicle, February 14, 2008

A high-country freezer-box of a former Colorado mining village, Gothic in winter doesn’t inspire thoughts of global warming. For eight decades, the busted-town site has been the home of the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL, pronounced “rumble”), an independent, outdoor-research campus. Bustling with scientists and students from around the world during summers, the lab has served as the backdrop for scores of ecological and biological breakthroughs because of its pristine setting — surrounded by public land and eight miles from Crested Butte, up a windy highway and dirt road. But, in the winter, beneath heavy snows and bone-shivering low temperatures, RMBL shuts down.

Billy Barr, the lab’s business manager, has endured winter in Gothic since 1972, a lone cold-season resident who maintains his office and helps with caretaker duties. At night, he watches movies and then posts quirky reviews online.

This winter, Barr says, Gothic has felt particularly cold. It’s one of the snowiest in over three decades, with the ground buried by more than six feet. During the first full week of February, the temperature never rose above freezing, and the average high was just nineteen degrees Fahrenheit. Warming probably sounds like a cozy idea. But only one day this winter has set a new record-low temperature, while six new record highs have occurred on warmer days — hints of climate change and its complexities.

Barr has maintained his own records, observing early signs of spring and the first stirrings of wildlife each year. Yellow-bellied marmots emerge from hibernation with the onset of spring — or at least they used to. The fat and furry critters, sometimes known as whistlepigs or rockchucks, now appear 38 days earlier than they did a quarter-century ago. Scientists believe the earlier emergence is tied to warmer spring temperatures, even though the ground is often still covered with snow, leaving the marmots scrambling for food and perilously vulnerable to coyotes.

Places set aside for ecological preservation, including RMBL and Rocky Mountain National Park, offer opportunities to key into such changes, some of which are occurring on a scale that the region and the planet haven’t experienced in thousands of years.

“This state is enormously complicated climatically,” says Brad Udall, who runs the Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “It probably has more microclimates than any other state” because of the range of our topography and the convergence of the Great Plains, the Rocky Mountains and the high desert of the Colorado Plateau.

This climatic complication means that Colorado has actually had it comparatively easy so far in terms of warming. According to data from the U.S. Historical Climate Network, compiled by the Colorado College State of the Rockies project, the state has warmed an average of 0.39 degrees Celsius in the last half-century, while most other Western states have heated by more than half a degree.

“On the Front Range, the really dramatic changes that we’re seeing around
the West are muted,” says Jill Baron, of the Natural Resource Ecology Lab at Colorado State University, who has studied climate change trends within Rocky Mountain National Park.

But we’re not getting away with anything. Models predict Colorado in 2085 will be seven to nine degrees (Celsius) hotter in summer and five to six degrees warmer in winter. Snowpack, our main source of water, is predicted to drop to half of the current average. Warming will have advantages around Colorado, causing longer growing seasons, wider stretches of some wildlife habitat, and possibly more precipitation in some regions. But signs of stress are already all over the state, and unless we rapidly alter our carbon-dioxide emissions — and encourage China and India to do the same — climate change will trigger even greater chaos on our landscapes and in our lives.

Ice, Ice Maybe

Located in the south end of the Indian Peaks Wilderness, Arapaho Glacier is protected as a drinking-water source for the city of Boulder. Arapaho is the largest glacier in Colorado, and it’s shrinking fast.

The glacier has thinned by roughly 120 feet since scientists started taking measurements in 1960. Archival images from 1898 show Arapaho had retreated significantly between then and 1960. Glacial melt in Colorado — as in Glacier National Park in Montana, on the flanks of Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa, and along the Greenland Ice Sheet — is directly tied to global warming. But Arapaho’s transformation is something of an anomaly in the state.

Inside and around Rocky Mountain National Park, Andrew Fountain, of Portland State University, and his colleagues have cataloged smaller glaciers — “glacierets.”

“These little teeny glaciers are not that climatically sensitive,” Fountain says. “This is one of the hidden stories that makes climate change difficult.”

Glaciers around the park are fed by drifts, winds and avalanches that pack them with ice and snow, and Fountain figures that climate conditions haven’t changed enough to affect them yet. Still, his team, taking the first measurements of the park’s ice fields since the 1970s, has concluded that the glacierets began retreating over the last decade, and there are additional signs that significant transformations are afoot. A melting Front Range glacier revealed bison remains that researchers dated at two thousand years old. The preserved state of the remains suggests they haven’t been exposed much since their burial, an indicator that warming is occurring on a scale not seen in millennia.

What to Expect in the Future? The retreat of the little glaciers could be a harbinger of warming temperatures affecting our landscape on a more local scale.

“It looks like we’ve reached a tipping point,” Fountain says of the changes, “but it’s one of those things that we don’t know until we’re past it.” In other words, until it’s too late.

The loss of glaciers probably won’t cause the state’s water fountains to run dry, since most of our water comes from mountain snowpack, not ice fields. But glacial melt
will impact sensitive alpine environments, Fountain says. The ice fields and buried
snow persist as banks of moisture for plants and wildlife during the hottest and driest times — when life needs water the most. The decline of our glaciers could leave rare, alpine critters and vegetation high and dry.

Flipping the Birds – Out

As far as state birds go, Colorado’s specimen isn’t all that flashy. The lark
bunting is a stocky bird with a streaked, grayish-brown body and a short tail that
makes, what birders consider, a distinctive, soft “hoo-ee” call. Generally found among grassland areas, the good news is that Colorado probably won’t need to look for a new state bird anytime soon.

Because of Colorado’s range of elevations, bird species that reside in or migrate through the state should be able to endure climate change by taking wing northward through the state or upward in elevation to find cooler or wetter habitats that suit them.

The geography and birds’ mobility have prevented noticeable changes in migrations, breeding patterns or populations in the state, says Jeff Price, author of a national report on global warming and songbirds for the American Bird Conservancy and the National Wildlife Federation.

One possible indicator of change comes from Billy Barr’s observations at RMBL. American robins now arrive in the high country 
of Gothic two weeks earlier than they did in 1981 and then spend roughly eighteen days scrounging for food until the ground is bare.

Price, formerly of Boulder and now at California State University, Chico, says the example isn’t ideal, because robins are resident birds, not migrating into the state.

Still, the data implies that the birds are following temperature cues to move to higher elevations, even though there isn’t a food source. Robins may be able to improvise over time, but migratory species in need of food to complete their cross-continent journeys, or species with more specialized habitat requirements, are more susceptible. In other cases, some birds that typically head south for the winter are now more likely to stay in the warming climes of Colorado.

What to Expect in the Future? Price’s report projects that nearly half of the bird species observed in Colorado could
 face reduced or disappearing suitable habitat if temperatures warm as predicted. “Birds that live on tundra, mostly ptarmigans and American pippets, have nowhere to go,” Price says. “So as we start losing krummholz” — the high-altitude, timberline zone of stunted trees and tundra — “we’re going to lose the birds.”

Warmer winters have triggered white- tailed ptarmigan populations in Rocky Mountain National Park to hatch earlier and suffer slowed growth rates, according to modeling by researchers from CSU’s Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory and the state Division of Wildlife. Future projections suggest the birds will experience “accelerated declines.”

Snow More Fun?

Colorado’s premier ski resorts — Wolf Creek, Vail and Steamboat Springs — receive nearly 350 inches of snowfall a year on average, earning the state its world-class reputation. Resort managers can’t control when that snow falls, which is why they spend lots of money artificially augmenting the snowpack, creating powder from hoses. It’s obvious what’s at stake for the resorts, and the state, if climate change tweaks the winter weather.

David Clow, of the U.S. Geological Survey, looks at data from 72 remote weather stations, monitored by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, that measure the air temperature, depth of snow and its water content throughout the state’s high country. Using radio telemetry, the network of gauges report those values each hour. With nearly thirty years of data, Clow has observed decreases in the total amount of winter precipitation in Colorado. And there are other signs of trouble.

“The main trend we’ve seen is a shift in the time of snowmelt toward earlier in the year,” Clow says.

Overall, snow in Colorado melts two weeks earlier than it did three decades ago, and there are corresponding shifts in the timing of spring runoff. The trends fit with regional patterns observed throughout the West. Another alarming region-wide shift with links to climate change: More winter precipitation now falls as rain instead of snow, particularly at lower elevations, which means less water flows into rivers in the spring to fill reservoirs.

What to Expect in the Future? The earlier onset of spring means a more abrupt end to the ski season, but Colorado resorts could make out in the short term. So far, our state’s slopes have experienced milder changes than the mountains of the Pacific Northwest, the Northern Rockies and the Sierra Nevadas.

It’s even possible that our mountains could end up with more total snowfall for 
a while, Brad Udall says, because longer and colder springs could get a few extra snowstorms in place of rain showers. The catch
is that the snow will melt more quickly than it does now. And the long-term prognosis is bleak: Models commissioned by the Colorado College State of the Rockies project predict snowpack in Summit County, home
to Breckenridge and
three other major ski
resorts, will be cut in
 half later this century.

Where Have All the Flowers Gone?

Among the first mountain wildflowers
to open in spring are purple larkspur, which start a colorful parade of meadow and hillside blooms that lasts through the summer. David Inouye, a University of Maryland professor, has worked at RMBL since 1971, studying plots of wildflowers and accounting for the mix and abundance of different species. (He also helped Billy Barr recognize and publish the changing trends among marmots and robins at the lab.)

With 37 summers’ worth of data, Inouye has recognized that many wildflowers are opening sooner in spring — another result of earlier snowmelt — when they are more susceptible to frosts. In his plots, Inouye has seen frost damage snuff out the flower buds of tall larkspur, a favorite of hummingbirds; fleabane daisy, the preferred nectar source of the Mormon Fritillary butterfly; and Aspen sunflowers, an important food for bumblebees.

The consequences extend to other organisms, Inouye adds. Fly larvae feast on the sunflower seedheads, and parasite wasps eat the flies. So, a crash in wildflowers will have consequences for all of the high country’s biological diversity.

“What’s happening with these plants are indicators that climate change is happening and happening quite rapidly,” Inouye says.

What to Expect in the Future? If the trends continue, Inouye half jokes that Crested Butte might need to replace its title as the Wildflower Capital of Colorado. And while he is careful to note that climate fluctuations, like El Niño and the North Pacific Oscillation, play a role in the changes on the ground, he believes global warming is at work in the high country, and the long-term impacts are visible at RMBL.

John Harte of the University of California at Berkeley has spent the last eighteen summers at the lab, conducting an experiment into the future. Using heat lamps, Harte melts the snow from a meadow three weeks earlier than nature does and then keeps the soil warmed an extra two degrees Celsius (four degrees Fahrenheit) — “conditions that Colorado will resemble in about thirty years,” Harte says.

The meadows have not turned to barren deserts,
but they contain much
more sagebrush and fewer wildflowers. Warming beckons the uphill creep of sagebrush, drying out meadows and eliminating the cooler and wetter conditions for flowers and their pollinators.

“The even more important result — but it’s not 
visible — is the loss of soil 
carbon,” Harte says, which creates a “positive feedback.” The shift of vegetation causes the ground to store less carbon, which is then released into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases, causing more warming.

Perhaps Crested Butte will become the Sagebrush Capital.

Wet and Mild

Blue Mesa Dam, near the small Western Slope town of Sapinero, creates Colorado’s largest body of water, along the Gunnison River. Blue Mesa and two other upstream dams inundate part of a deep canyon system; the lower reach is now protected as a national park. Before the dams altered the flows
and temperatures of the river, trout cruised through the canyon’s cold waters and fed on flurries of insect hatches. Downstream from the canyon, native warm-water fish — Jurassic Park-looking beasts like the Colorado pikeminnow, the razorback sucker and the humpback chub — used to swim in the river’s warmer waters. Today, introduced trout proliferate below the dams, and the warm-water fish are listed as endangered species, facing extinction throughout the Colorado River system.

The effects of dams and diversions on streams can provide us with a glimpse of the consequences of climate change, says David Merritt, a riparian ecologist with the Forest Service and the Natural Resource Ecology Lab at CSU, who studies stream flows and riparian (streamside) ecosystems in the West. By altering river flows and natural sediment movement along streams, dams affect not just fish but also cottonwood trees, willows and other riparian vegetation, which rely on flooding for regeneration and dependable low flows for maintenance. Instead, drought-tolerant vegetation, including invasive species like Russian olive and tamarisk, can thrive.

Ironically, dams and diversions along the Front Range serve as a natural experiment, Merritt says, where we can look at scenarios of future climate change — like lower or earlier runoff and peak flows — to understand how river systems will respond to warming and decreased flows.

What to Expect in the Future? The transformation of rivers from warming could lead to “terrestrialization,” Merritt says, meaning the encroachment of junipers, ponderosa pines and other flood-intolerant, upland vegetation into former wetlands and riparian areas. Considering that sixty percent of the state’s flora occurs within these areas and eighty percent of wildlife uses them at some stage in their life cycle, reduced stream flows could have noticeable negative effects — not to mention for people who siphon off those flows for cities and farms.

“I don’t think climate change in and of itself will cause the drastic collapse of riparian areas in Colorado over the next century,” Merritt says, sharing his personal assessment. “But the distribution and characteristics of riparian areas will change in predictable ways. Habitat specialists [ranging from neo-tropical migrant songbirds to native cutthroat trout] will be the most immediately affected. These species will either respond by moving to a suitable habitat, or, if they are not well dispersed or if suitable habitat becomes fragmented or scarce, they will become locally or regionally extinct. That’s not an opinion or a sappy, moral statement. That’s a scientific fact.”

As far as actual water in our rivers, the forecasts range widely. Some models show precipitation totals increasing in parts of the state, including the extension of monsoon conditions from the Southwest. On the other hand, there’s a chance that the desert of Arizona will spread north into Colorado as temperatures climb.

Udall says projections for the Colorado River predict its flows will dry up between 5 and 50 percent over the next century. Even in the best-case scenario, Colorado — and the six other Western states that share water rights to the river — will have to get creative and cooperative with their water use, considering the astronomical population-growth trends for the region. Some water managers say the forecast supports storing more water behind new dams, like the proposed Glade Reservoir for the Cache la Poudre River outside Fort Collins. Other researchers say higher evaporation rates and the changes in flows should make the case to not build more dams.

The Butterfly Effect

During her research at RMBL in summer 2002, Carol Boggs noticed a Gillette’s Checkerspot, an orange, black, and white butterfly, far from where the insects usually fluttered about. The butterfly species, although common in the West, had been introduced to the lab decades earlier by another scientist and maintained a small range with no more than 125 individuals. In the midst of a drought, Boggs, a Stanford University biology professor, realized the Checkerspot population had exploded, “by an order of magnitude,” to 3,000 individuals and expanded its range by half a mile. After statistical analysis, Boggs and colleagues believe warmer temperatures are most likely the critical factor triggering the Checkerspot boom.

Boggs has also tracked the lab’s population of the Mormon Fritillary, another common Western meadow butterfly, for 10 years. She realized the species’ success relied on its nectar supply, which is closely tied to the timing of snowmelt. The earlier melt means that flowers bloom earlier, making them more susceptible to late-season frosts that kill the flowers. That leads to decreases in the Mormon Fritillaries, because they have less fuel to survive and reproduce.

What to Expect in the Future? Boggs says butterflies are “the canary in the coalmine” when talking about climate change: “It’s an indicator the whole ecosystem is changing, because butterflies are intimately connected with a number of plant species.”

And since they help pollinate plants and crops, which then pump oxygen into the air for people to live on Earth, they’re pretty essential. The changes at RMBL — one minor and introduced species thrives, another native one declines — are an example of how climate change can shuffle the biological diversity of ecosystems and trigger other changes among the plants the insects pollinate or the birds that eat them.

Bugging Out

Among the perfect storms of the natural world, Colorado’s pine-beetle epidemic is pretty damn perfect.

The combination of drought and reduced precipitation with dense forests of same-aged trees has created prime conditions for pine beetles to conquer lodgepole pine trees. The devastation of Summit and Grand counties is visible, and the beetles have crossed the Continental Divide to Front Range forests.

Early symptoms of climate change favor the pine beetles in two ways. First, milder winters enable the beetle larvae to survive, says Jeff Hicke of the University of Idaho, who has modeled climate-change impacts on pine beetles. Second, warmer summers have likely sped up beetle lifecycles, from two years to one year, facilitating more outbreaks.

What to Expect in the Future? Mountain pine beetles usually only attack lodgepole pines, but, as warming continues, the insects could jump to other species in Colorado forests.

“Now we’re seeing lodgepole pine at very high elevations being attacked, which is unusual, if not unprecedented,” Hicke says.

Like whitebark-pine trees in the northern Rockies, which are currently being attacked by the insects, limber pines and bristlecone pines could both host beetles, but neither may be adapted to them, like lodgepoles, Hicke adds, so they could suffer even more severe declines. Bristlecone pines, widespread around South Park, are the oldest trees in the state — thousands of years old — and some are as tall as 40 feet.

Despite the possible devastation, increased carbon dioxide levels should boost tree growth for some species in some regions. We could see more stands of aspen trees emerge as pines die off and other changes in forest diversity that will create “new” ecosystems, distinct from the wooded landscapes we see now.

Fired Up

Love forlorn, not global warming, could properly be blamed for the ignition of Colorado’s largest recorded wildfire. On June 8, 2002, Forest Service ranger Terry Barton burned a letter from her estranged husband inside a fire ring in the Pike National Forest, southwest of Denver. Arson may have been the cause, but extremely hot temperatures played a key role in the wildfire’s growth.

The Hayman Fire, as it was named, was preceded by four days of 90-plus-degree (Fahrenheit) heat. On June 9, the blaze blew up and spread 60,000 acres, fed by wind gusts and a peak temperature of 95 degrees. It was the hottest June 9 in Colorado in 80 years. On the same day, another wildfire in the Durango area doubled in size in just 40 minutes and then expanded its area six-fold in only three hours. Before Hayman was finally contained, weeks later, it scorched 137,000 acres and destroyed 133 homes.

In 2006, four scientists published the results of a survey of every large Western wildfire dating back to 1970. The conditions for big burns are often tied to a century of fire suppression. The researchers found another correlation.

Starting in the mid-’80s, the number of wildfires spiked in the West. Through statistical analysis, the researchers recognized a strong association between fires and earlier snowmelt and higher spring and summer temperatures. Like other warming trends, the increase is strongest in the northern Rockies and Sierra Nevadas, but Colorado fires, including Hayman, have also responded to the elements.

What to Expect in the Future? Hotter temperatures will mean drier and more fire-prone forests that burn hotter and wider than they would under past conditions. Climate change could also increase storms and their lightning strikes. And fires emit a lot of greenhouse gases, another positive feedback.

Growing “exurban” communities of homes mixed among forests will add to the risks to life and property from more frequent and intense fires, too. Considering the federal fire-prevention budget already exceeds $1 billion a year, wildfires could also burn lots of money.

Prairie-Home Combustion

Just as most residents and tourists shower their love and money on the Rockies, the plains of Eastern Colorado receive less attention from researchers. But the farms and ranches, and the surrounding grasslands, could experience some of the greatest changes from warming.

For five years, Jack Morgan, of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and his colleagues maintained chambers over grassland areas in Weld County, one of the driest parts of the state, and pumped them full of carbon dioxide, equivalent to levels projected for 2100.

Fringed sage, a small woody shrub, thrived in the experimental plots. Already common among slightly deteriorated, or overgrazed, ranchlands, the plant isn’t very palatable for cattle.

“It signals that native grasslands are moving toward becoming more woody grasslands in the future,” Morgan says, “and most people in ranching would view that as a negative.”

Morgan is now undertaking a similar experiment on the grasslands of southern Wyoming that will test how invasive weeds might do in a warmer and carbon-dioxide-enriched environment.

What to Expect in the Future? The prairies of Eastern Colorado are expected to heat up more than any other region of the West, according to the Colorado College State of the Rockies project. Models are less clear on changes to regional rainfall: “For predictions of precipitation, you might as well flip a coin,” says CSU researcher Bill Parton, who has worked with Morgan.

Parton says precipitation will likely be less consistent from year to year, meaning plants and crops that can handle variability will fare best. One study, by a CSU graduate student, showed that more rainfall variability increases plant productivity on Colorado’s dry plains (although the wetter grasslands of Kansas responded to the same experiment with decreased growth).

Ranchers could gain some benefits, if winters are warm enough to allow cattle to forage on the range for longer periods. Extended growing seasons would be good news for farmers — and higher carbon-dioxide levels could increase plant production and reduce water loss. Parton says winter wheat crops could grow just fine under forecasted climatic shifts, but corn and other summer crops become less viable in hotter times.

Farmers are already fending off growing Front Range cities that want their water. James Pritchett of CSU’s agricultural economics department says climate change could trigger a loss of groundwater if irrigation flows decrease or become less consistent, which could lead to more erosion on the plains.

The U.S. National Assessment on Climate Change, completed in 2000, forecasts that Western farmers may have to increase crop diversity to roll with the changes. Orchards, like those on the Western Slope, will likely require expensive and difficult relocations as crop zones shift northward.

“The climate-change picture in Colorado isn’t as negative as it could be in other places,” Parton says. “There will be winners, and there will be losers.”

Conclusion: Our Stamp on the Environment

Last year, the U.S. Postal Service released a “commemorative” collection of stamps in its “Nature in America” series, detailing the flora and fauna of the Colorado Rockies. The sheet of stamps features yellow-bellied marmots, white-tailed ptarmigans and several butterflies, as well as elk, bighorn sheep and golden eagles. With climate change in motion, the stamps are almost like an early eulogy for the natural environment of our state.

In most cases, it’s nearly impossible to separate the effects of global warming from other climate variations and drought conditions. But the signs of change, on an unprecedented scale, are evident. Each of the cases highlighted above comes from peer-reviewed research, published in accredited journals of science. There are more, and there are also anecdotal observations that hint at the miniscule and massive changes occurring in our state and on our planet.

Clearly, our greatest concern in Colorado and out West will be water resources, but global warming threatens to transform every aspect of our environment. Plants and wildlife respond to different cues to survive and reproduce. Wildflowers now bloom, only to be killed by frost. Birds migrate but find diminished food supplies and habitat. Marmots emerge and get picked off by coyotes. Each of these changes is called a “disjunction,” and they are signs of how climate change is jamming the circuits of our natural world in Colorado.

In a few centuries, our progeny may only have stamps to remind them of the state we now know.

Share
The Why of the Storm

The Why of the Storm

whyofstorm coverMany researchers have concluded that climate change is feeding extreme hurricanes, and amplified concerns could bring about the second coming for weather modification. A computer simulation from a Colorado State University professor could be the future of the field — and the federal government’s contingency plan for looming hurricane disasters.

The feature got a mention on a climate-change blog of the journal Nature, and also earned a third-place award for science reporting from the Colorado chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

***

The Why of the Storm

Could polluted hurricanes save the world?

By Joshua Zaffos

Rocky Mountain Chronicle, June 14, 2007

The year is 2025, and a Category-5 hurricane is barreling toward the Atlantic coast. If the storm continues on its present course, forecasters predict a 15-foot storm surge, flooding houses along the coast from Charleston, South Carolina to Washington, D.C. With just 72 hours until landfall, FEMA doesn’t call for an evacuation: Instead, a fleet of C-130 cargo planes takes off from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland and flies into the storm, loaded with a megaton payload of Saharan Desert dust.

Cue Wagner’s “Flight of the Valkyries” as the pilots open the payload doors over the hurricane. As if sprinkling pixie dust, the maneuver tames the weather system: Within a day, the rains diminish, the winds let up, and the storm is downgraded. Tragedy is averted.

“If you could reduce the intensity by 40 knots, you could save billions in reduced damages,” says Bill Cotton, a Colorado State University professor of atmospheric science, who collaborated with University of Illinois researchers to simulate the dirt-dumping scheme using
the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System, or RAMS, a program Cotton developed with CSU professor emeritus Roger Pielke Sr.

Cotton is seeking federal funds to pursue his theory. With strong financial backing, he estimates that field studies of his dust-busting hurricane treatment could start within 10 years.

Almost 60 years after government scientists first began discussing the idea of toying with the weather, the field of weather modification is again in vogue. Western states are considering cloud seeding — loading clouds with silver iodide — to amp up regional precipitation in order to keep shrinking reservoirs full. And Colorado U.S. Rep. Mark Udall plans to reintroduce legislation that would create a federal weather modification bureau.

Many researchers have concluded that climate change is feeding extreme hurricanes, and an amplified fear of more Katrinas could bring about the second coming for weather modification. Cotton’s simulation could be the future of the field — and the federal government’s contingency plan for looming hurricane disasters.

But, then, just because something can be done doesn’t mean it should.

Slowing the Skater

Inside the CSU Atmospheric Sciences Building, Stephen Saleeby is at a loss to describe the workings of Cotton’s atmospheric modeling program. RAMS simulates the formations of clouds and storms based on a variety of conditions, such as regional wind speed, relative humidity and temperature. Saleeby, a research associate of Cotton’s, says programming isn’t quite as simple as plugging in a few numbers and then clicking the mouse to see how the simulated weather plays out.

The model consists of tens of thousands of lines of code. Saleeby can run some basic simulations on his desktop computer, but the larger analyses of hurricane pathways or cloud-seeding operations are handled through a cluster of up to 20 processors. One of Saleeby’s projects, studying the development of the Southwest monsoon season, takes the clustered computers three days to process.

RAMS allows Cotton, Saleeby and others to forecast how altering weather systems might affect snowfall, the duration of a drought, or a hurricane’s response to plane-loads of fine dust.

Such modeling has become highly sophisticated since the field of weather modification was born 60 years ago, when General Electric scientists discovered that silver iodide could increase precipitation in clouds. Researchers thought they could boost rain and snowfall and suppress hail and tornadoes.

The federal government began spending millions of dollars on a national weather modification program in 1959, partly motivated by the Cold War and the Soviet Union’s successful space launch of Sputnik two years earlier. The U.S.S.R. might have first dibson outer space, but the U.S. government wanted control of the atmosphere and the weather. From 1967 through 1981, the federal government never spent less than $9.9 million a year on weather modification. The bill topped out at $18.7 million in 1972.

Researchers conducted hurricane reduction experiments under Project Stormfury starting in 1962. Stormfury scientists seeded three hurricanes
in the 1960s but weren’t able to consistently affect the storms. A treatment of Hurricane Debbie in 1969 coincided with a 30 percent drop in the storm’s wind speed, but scientists couldn’t conclude that natural factors didn’t account for the results.

In the case of hurricanes, researchers assumed that dropping silver iodide onto specific storm clouds would cause “supercooled” water droplets to freeze. That process would create latent heat on the storm’s edge and, according to the theory, slow its speed.

“We use the analogy of the spinning skater,” says William Woodley, a federal researcher in Miami during the ’60s and ’70s, who flew into hurricanes to conduct experiments for Project Stormfury.

Whirling ’round and ’round, a figure skater pulls her arms into her body, turning faster and faster. That might help a performer score a few extra tenths of
a point from the judges, but out in the ocean, it’s the type of development that turns a tropical storm into
a hurricane — and then a major hurricane. Weather modification, as attempted through Stormfury and now modeled by Cotton, coaxes the hurricane to stick out her arms and slow down.

“The instrumentation wasn’t all that [in the 1960s]. The modeling was crude,” says Woodley, now a Littleton-based weather modification consultant. Another significant part of the problem was that Stormfury’s theoretical assumptions didn’t pan out.

Cloud-seeding experiments to augment precipitation for farming proved similarly disappointing. When adverse events, like floods or blizzards, coincided with modification projects, citizens blamed the government. People also faulted drought in one region on cloud seeding in an adjacent area. Federal research dollars began to taper in the late ’70s, and the cash flow stopped completely after 1985.

Today, weather modification is strictly a private and/or academic affair, but even without government cash, the improvements in computer modeling have advanced the field.

“What I can do today, I couldn’t even have dreamed of in graduate school,” Cotton says.

In Dust We Trust

Researchers are still trying to slow down the whirling skater, but the simulation, put forth by Cotton and his University of Illinois colleagues, uses a new technique, different from Stormfury’s.

In the simulation, tiny dust particles are dropped onto the storm. Very small raindrops form, which are less likely to collide in the clouds and more likely to evaporate before they fall, cooling the air. The upshot is a tamer storm: Wind speeds decrease 50 knots after the dust particles are introduced in the simulation. In the case of Katrina, a dust drop could have mellowed the storm at its fiercest point from Category-5 to Category-2 on the Saffir-Simpson scale.

“[This] is much more powerful than anything that was considered back in the Stormfury days,” Cotton says, sitting in his office, photos of heavy and ominous clouds hanging on the walls.

The theory has natural inspiration: African dust, which can impede the formation of tropical storms before they move across the Atlantic.

“We’ve observed that if a big dust storm comes along [in Africa], that tends to weaken a storm,” Cotton says.

A similar simulation by professor Daniel Rosenfeld and Woodley, also just published this year, produced the same results through the release of “submicron hygroscopic” — extremely minuscule and moisture-attracting — particles. Rosenfeld now has a provisional patent on the process, Woodley says.

Airlifting a desert dust storm sounds like a massive operation. The million-dollar question is, How much dirt are we talking about, and what’s that going to do to a coastal city?

Cotton can’t give a specific amount of dirt. That’s
one of the next steps after
he receives more funding.
But the delivery of the dust specks — each so small that 100 million of them could fit on a penny, Cotton estimates — would be a logistical issue and would require a convoy of cargo aircraft, like the C-130s.

Not to worry, Cotton says. A storm “would rain out the crud before it hits shore.”

In terms of clouding the
sky, the amount of dust is
roughly equivalent to the pollution levels of a major urban city, Cotton adds. It would be
as if a hurricane were to rev through the Atlantic and then pass through downtown St. Louis.

Pollution is the Solution

African dust pollution isn’t the same as the haze that hangs over a city, but the particles in the air act the
same. Cotton and his associates have titled their peer- reviewed article, soon to appear in The Journal of Weather Modification, “Should we consider polluting hurricanes to reduce their intensity?” The title is purposely provocative: According to most climate scientists, manmade pollution is already tinkering with the weather.

Auto exhaust and coal-fired power plant emissions
are already poking and prodding at the figure skater. (In another study, Cotton and graduate students observed that increased urban pollution from vehicles and coal-fired power plants have coincided with — and seemingly caused — decreased precipitation along the Front Range.) The collective impact of this pollution, contributing to melting glaciers and warming oceans, unfortunately, doesn’t deter the hurricanes. In fact, it makes them more persistent.

Scientists have found that warming sea-surface temperatures are causing more ferocious hurricanes, like Katrina and Rita, although that particular correlation isn’t quite as definitive as other impacts of human-caused climate change.

Recent studies by researchers at MIT, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, and the National Center
for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder have concluded that warming oceans will cause fiercer hurricanes, though not necessarily more storms.

“We think global climate change will cause more intense hurricanes and, in particular, much heavier rainfall,” says Kevin Trenberth, head of NCAR’s Climate Analysis Section and a lead author on several reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that affirm global warming is occurring.

“The debate, if any, is the cause [of more intense hurricanes],” Trenberth says, although “the IPCC has very clearly stated that global warming is occurring and anyone who disagrees has their head in the sand.”

Still, there are other researchers who say historical hurricane records can’t be compared with modern monitoring. Also, factors like wind shear — the difference in wind speed at varying heights — and massive deviations of the ocean-atmosphere system, like El Niño, play key roles in hurricane development and intensity. Therefore, we shouldn’t presume that recent hurricane seasons are abnormal or unprecedented, or that climate change is the cause.

Cotton downplays the link between more intense hurricanes and climate change as “a lot of arm waving.”

It’s almost shocking to find that someone who has
dedicated his life to figuring out how to modify the weather, including methods that simulate urban pollution, is unconvinced that we’re unintentionally changing the climate.

Cotton says he is, indeed, a “climate skeptic,” and even calls the projections of the IPCC, put forth by 600 scientists, “back of the envelope numbers.” The skepticism lands him in the company of a more notorious
and outspoken skeptic, CSU’s hurricane- forecasting guru William Gray, whose office is around the corner from Cotton’s.

“I don’t think we can say with scientific confidence that current trends are due to human activity,” Cotton says. “I’m not buying into the warming trend being influenced by humans.”

After years of studying clouds and the atmosphere, and trying to change the weather, Cotton says he hasn’t seen enough evidence that rising global temperatures are anything more than “natural variability” of the planet.

“My involvement with weather modification, I take that skeptical view,” Cotton says. “I’m a modeler by trade, so that makes me very skeptical of models, including my own.”

But Cotton qualifies his uncertainty: On a scale from negative ten (being a staunch climate- change doubter) to ten (being a firm believer), Cotton rates himself as a negative one or a negative two, and Gray as a negative seven.

“I just think the jury’s still out, but I’m trying to find out the other side,” Cotton explains. “But I try to stay away from the personality issues.”

The irony here is that any renewed interest in weather modification, including the possibility of federal funding for the practice, is clearly tied to fears of how climate change might lead to longer droughts, bigger floods and wilder hurricanes. Colorado Congressman Mark Udall has twice introduced legislation
to establish a federal weather modification program that could draw millions of research dollars and put the government back in the cloud-seeding and hurricane-taming business. Udall plans to reintroduce the bill again
this congressional session (Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas has sponsored the same bill in the Senate during past sessions, as well).

The Ethical Storm

We can no longer claim that everyone is talking about the weather, but that no one is doing anything about it. We are doing something, whether we mean to or approve of it.

“Weather modification is a reality,” says Woodley, the former Stormfury scientist in Littleton. “Forget about anything I might do deliberately. We humans are changing the weather [with pollution]. My question is, If we’re doing this inadvertently, why can’t we do this — if we have our wits about it — advertently?”

That’s one of the questions Connie Uliasz has considered carefully over the past few years. Uliasz is completing her master’s thesis, “Ethical Issues in the Use of Weather Modification Technologies,” through CSU’s philosophy department.

“You’re probably talking to the world’s expert on the ethics of weather modification,” she says, half-jokingly.

Uliasz is properly schooled for that title. Her undergraduate background is
in philosophy, and she has studied with well-known CSU bioethicist Bernie Rollin and, to a lesser extent, Colorado State professor Holmes Rolston, “the Father
of Environmental Ethics.” She also has experience in atmospheric sciences, and at CSU, she has worked with Bill Cotton and helped manage professor Scott Denning’s “BioCycle” climate
change research group.

“I spent a long time
trying to understand the
science, years of that,
before I could even start
with the ethics,” Uliasz
 says. Few researchers ever attempt a cross over. “They” — scientists — “don’t even think about ethics,” she charges.

Weather modification is at an ethical disadvantage on several counts, Uliasz says: “There’s some good evidence it actually works, but it’s difficult to prove, and you don’t know what you’re going to get [in terms of experiment results]. And you’re not going to solve questions in the long run.”

Weather modification, Uliasz continues, can “sidetrack people from really making the hard decisions. It’s almost a red herring of a technological fix. And Americans, especially, love their technological fixes.”

Americans also have a Category-5 fear
of hurricanes in the haunting aftermath of Katrina. Our broken-levee blues may be out of proportion compared to our concerns over other risks, like coastal flooding.

A March 2007 Gallup survey shows 49 percent of Americans fear more intense hurricanes from global warming, and we’re more worried about another climate- change-fueled hurricane than drought, flood, an increased prevalence of disease, or a loss of coastal areas.

This year’s hurricane season started before its usual June 1 date, when Subtropical Storm Andrea formed in May. Hurricane forecasters, like CSU’s Gray,
 are projecting that this year could turn
out a lot like 2005, and if another Katrina, or even an Andrew or a Hugo, rocks the Atlantic coast, Congress will only be more inclined to consider a quick fix. But instead of slowing down the skater, maybe we should concentrate on encouraging her not to spin faster.

“It seems like it could be better to spend [federal] money when hurricanes come, instead of trying to disperse them,” Uliasz says, the ethical coin flipping inside her head. “But, then, if Katrina were a Category-2 instead of a 5, we’d still have New Orleans. I don’t know how many more really awful hurricanes we could have before we say, ‘Let’s try anything.’”

Share