Arctic and Antarctic Research
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Antarctic Treaty System And
The Antarctic Treaty System and Law During the first half of the 20th century a series of territorial claims were made to parts of Antarctica, including New Zealand's claim to the Ross Dependency in 1923. These claims created significant international political tension over Antarctica which was compounded by military activities in the region by several nations during the Second World War. These tensions were eased by the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957-58, the first substantial multi-national programme of scientific research in Antarctica. The IGY was pivotal not only in recognising the scientific value of Antarctica, but also in promoting co- operation among nations active in the region. The outstanding success of the IGY led to a series of negotiations to find a solution to the political disputes surrounding the continent. The outcome to these negotiations was the Antarctic Treaty. The Antarctic Treaty The Antarctic Treaty was signed in Washington on 1 December 1959 by the twelve nations that had been active during the IGY (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, United Kingdom, United States and USSR). It entered into force on 23 June 1961. The Treaty, which applies to all land and ice-shelves south of 60° South latitude, is remarkably short for an international agreement – just 14 articles long. The twelve nations that adopted the Treaty in 1959 recognised that "it is in the interests of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord". -
2. Disc Resources
An early map of the world Resource D1 A map of the world drawn in 1570 shows ‘Terra Australis Nondum Cognita’ (the unknown south land). National Library of Australia Expeditions to Antarctica 1770 –1830 and 1910 –1913 Resource D2 Voyages to Antarctica 1770–1830 1772–75 1819–20 1820–21 Cook (Britain) Bransfield (Britain) Palmer (United States) ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ Resolution and Adventure Williams Hero 1819 1819–21 1820–21 Smith (Britain) ▼ Bellingshausen (Russia) Davis (United States) ▼ ▼ ▼ Williams Vostok and Mirnyi Cecilia 1822–24 Weddell (Britain) ▼ Jane and Beaufoy 1830–32 Biscoe (Britain) ★ ▼ Tula and Lively South Pole expeditions 1910–13 1910–12 1910–13 Amundsen (Norway) Scott (Britain) sledge ▼ ▼ ship ▼ Source: Both maps American Geographical Society Source: Major voyages to Antarctica during the 19th century Resource D3 Voyage leader Date Nationality Ships Most southerly Achievements latitude reached Bellingshausen 1819–21 Russian Vostok and Mirnyi 69˚53’S Circumnavigated Antarctica. Discovered Peter Iøy and Alexander Island. Charted the coast round South Georgia, the South Shetland Islands and the South Sandwich Islands. Made the earliest sighting of the Antarctic continent. Dumont d’Urville 1837–40 French Astrolabe and Zeelée 66°S Discovered Terre Adélie in 1840. The expedition made extensive natural history collections. Wilkes 1838–42 United States Vincennes and Followed the edge of the East Antarctic pack ice for 2400 km, 6 other vessels confirming the existence of the Antarctic continent. Ross 1839–43 British Erebus and Terror 78°17’S Discovered the Transantarctic Mountains, Ross Ice Shelf, Ross Island and the volcanoes Erebus and Terror. The expedition made comprehensive magnetic measurements and natural history collections. -
Polartrec Teacher Joins Hunt for Old Ice in Antarctica
NEWSLETTER OF THE NATIONAL ICE CORE LABORATORY — SCIENCE MANAGEMENT OFFICE Vol. 5 Issue 1 • SPRING 2010 PolarTREC Teacher Joins Hunt for Old Eric Cravens: Ice in Antarctica Farewell & By Jacquelyn (Jackie) Hams, PolarTREC Teacher Thanks! Courtesy: PolarTREC ... page 2 WAIS Divide Ice Core Images Now Available from AGDC ... page 3 WAIS Divide Ice Dave Marchant and Jackie Hams Core Update Photo: PolarTREC ... page 3 WHEN I APPLIED to the PolarTREC I actually left for Antarctica. I was originally program (http://www.polartrec.com/), I was selected by the CReSIS (Center for Remote asked where I would prefer to go given the Sensing of Ice Sheets) project, which has options of the Arctic, Antarctica, or either. I headquarters at the University of Kansas. I checked the Antarctica box only, despite the met and spent a few days visiting the team at Drilling for Old Ice fact that I may have decreased my chances of the University of Kansas and had dinner at the being selected. Antarctica was my preference Principal Investigator’s home with other team ... page 5 for many reasons. As a teacher I felt that members. We were all pleased with the match Antarctica represented the last frontier to study and looked forward to working together. the geologic history of the planet because the continent is uninhabited, not polluted, and In the late summer of 2008, I was informed that NEEM Reaches restricted to pure research. Over the last few the project was cancelled and that I would be Eemian and years I have noticed that my students were assigned to another research team. -
Removing the Gray Wolf (Canis Lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
Billing Code 4333-15 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2018–0097; FF09E22000 FXES1113090FEDR 212] RIN 1018–BD60 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTIONS: Final rule and notice of petition finding. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), have evaluated the classification status of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) entities currently listed in the lower 48 United States and Mexico under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our evaluation, we are removing the gray wolf entities in the lower 48 United States and Mexico, except for the Mexican wolf (C. l. baileyi), that are currently on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. We are taking this action because the best available scientific and 1 commercial data available establish that the gray wolf entities in the lower 48 United States do not meet the definitions of a threatened species or an endangered species under the Act. The effect of this rulemaking action is that C. lupus is not classified as a threatened or endangered species under the Act. This rule does not have any effect on the separate listing of the Mexican wolf subspecies (Canis lupus baileyi) as endangered under the Act. In addition, we announce a 90-day finding on a petition to maintain protections for the gray wolf in the lower 48 United States as endangered or threatened distinct population segments. -
A Spatial Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice and Regional Limitations in CMIP6 Historical Simulations
1AUGUST 2021 W A T T S E T A L . 6399 A Spatial Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice and Regional Limitations in CMIP6 Historical Simulations a a a a MATTHEW WATTS, WIESLAW MASLOWSKI, YOUNJOO J. LEE, JACLYN CLEMENT KINNEY, AND b ROBERT OSINSKI a Department of Oceanography, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California b Institute of Oceanology of Polish Academy of Sciences, Sopot, Poland (Manuscript received 29 June 2020, in final form 28 April 2021) ABSTRACT: The Arctic sea ice response to a warming climate is assessed in a subset of models participating in phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), using several metrics in comparison with satellite observations and results from the Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System and the Regional Arctic System Model. Our study examines the historical representation of sea ice extent, volume, and thickness using spatial analysis metrics, such as the integrated ice edge error, Brier score, and spatial probability score. We find that the CMIP6 multimodel mean captures the mean annual cycle and 1979–2014 sea ice trends remarkably well. However, individual models experience a wide range of uncertainty in the spatial distribution of sea ice when compared against satellite measurements and reanalysis data. Our metrics expose common and individual regional model biases, which sea ice temporal analyses alone do not capture. We identify large ice edge and ice thickness errors in Arctic subregions, implying possible model specific limitations in or lack of representation of some key physical processes. We postulate that many of them could be related to the oceanic forcing, especially in the marginal and shelf seas, where seasonal sea ice changes are not adequately simulated. -
Thinking About the Arctic's Future
By Lawson W. Brigham ThinkingThinking aboutabout thethe Arctic’sArctic’s Future:Future: ScenariosScenarios forfor 20402040 MIKE DUNN / NOAA CLIMATE PROGRAM OFFICE, NABOS 2006 EXPEDITION The warming of the Arctic could These changes have profound con- ing in each of the four scenarios. mean more circumpolar sequences for the indigenous people, • Transportation systems, espe- for all Arctic species and ecosystems, cially increases in marine and air transportation and access for and for any anticipated economic access. the rest of the world—but also development. The Arctic is also un- • Resource development—for ex- an increased likelihood of derstood to be a large storehouse of ample, oil and gas, minerals, fish- yet-untapped natural resources, a eries, freshwater, and forestry. overexploited natural situation that is changing rapidly as • Indigenous Arctic peoples— resources and surges of exploration and development accel- their economic status and the im- environmental refugees. erate in places like the Russian pacts of change on their well-being. Arctic. • Regional environmental degra- The combination of these two ma- dation and environmental protection The Arctic is undergoing an jor forces—intense climate change schemes. extraordinary transformation early and increasing natural-resource de- • The Arctic Council and other co- in the twenty-first century—a trans- velopment—can transform this once- operative arrangements of the Arctic formation that will have global im- remote area into a new region of im- states and those of the regional and pacts. Temperatures in the Arctic are portance to the global economy. To local governments. rising at unprecedented rates and evaluate the potential impacts of • Overall geopolitical issues fac- are likely to continue increasing such rapid changes, we turn to the ing the region, such as the Law of throughout the century. -
Companion Q&A Fact Sheet: What Mars Reveals About Life in Our
What Mars Reveals about Life in Our Universe Companion Q&A Fact Sheet Educators from the Smithsonian’s Air and Space and Natural History Museums assembled this collection of commonly asked questions about Mars to complement the Smithsonian Science How webinar broadcast on March 3, 2021, “What Mars Reveals about Life in our Universe.” Continue to explore Mars and your own curiosities with these facts and additional resources: • NASA: Mars Overview • NASA: Mars Robotic Missions • National Air and Space Museum on the Smithsonian Learning Lab: “Wondering About Astronomy Together” Guide • National Museum of Natural History: A collection of resources for teaching about Antarctic Meteorites and Mars 1 • Smithsonian Science How: “What Mars Reveals about Life in our Universe” with experts Cari Corrigan, L. Miché Aaron, and Mariah Baker (aired March 3, 2021) Mars Overview How long is Mars’ day? Mars takes 24 hours and 38 minutes to spin around once, so its day is very similar to Earth’s. How long is Mars’ year? Mars takes 687 days, almost two Earth years, to complete one orbit around the Sun. How far is Mars from Earth? The distance between Earth and Mars changes as both planets move around the Sun in their orbits. At its closest, Mars is just 34 million miles from the Earth; that’s about one third of Earth’s distance from the Sun. On the day of this program, March 3, 2021, Mars was about 135 million miles away, or four times its closest distance. How far is Mars from the Sun? Mars orbits an average of 141 million miles from the Sun, which is about one-and-a-half times as far as the Earth is from the Sun. -
Paper Number: 2897 a History of Early Antarctic Fossil Discoveries in Support of the Supercontinent Gondwana Clary, R.M.1, and Sharpe, T.2
Paper Number: 2897 A History of Early Antarctic Fossil Discoveries in Support of the Supercontinent Gondwana Clary, R.M.1, and Sharpe, T.2 1Mississippi State University, Box 5448, Mississippi State, MS 39762 USA; [email protected] 2Centre for Lifelong Learning, Cardiff University, UK ___________________________________________________________________________ First proposed by Eduard Suess (1831-1914), the supercontinent Gondwana included the present-day continents of South America, Africa, Australia, India, and Antarctica. Alexander Du Toit (1878-1948) expanded Suess’ work in his 1937 book, Our Wandering Continents; An Hypothesis of Continental Drifting. Correlating evidence to support the inclusion of Antarctica in the Gondwana supercontinent would result from the stratigraphic and paleontological data collected within early polar expeditions. Early rock and fossil specimens of Antarctica were recovered by the 1829-1831 Antarctic Expedition sponsored by the United States of America. The expedition included a scientific program, supported by the Lyceum for Natural History of the City of New York. James Eights (1798-1882) produced quality scientific work, including a geological description of the Shetland Islands, and the first fossil of the Antarctic—carbonized wood [1, 2]. The Norwegian expedition of 1893-1894, under Carl Anton Larsen (1860-1924), also found petrified wood fossils on Seymour Island. The wood hinted of a warmer climate in Antarctica’s past, and sparked scientific interest [3]. Within the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration (1897-1922), additional fossils were uncovered. Cretaceous ammonites, molluscs, echinoderms and leaves were collected on Seymour Island, and additional plant fossils at Hope Bay, by geologist Nils Otto Gustaf Nordenskjöld (1869-1928) during the Swedish South Polar Expedition of 1901-1904. -
Some Aspects of the Thermal Energy Exchange on the South Polar Snow Field and Arctic Ice Pack'
MAY 1961 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW 173 SOME ASPECTS OF THE THERMAL ENERGY EXCHANGE ON THE SOUTH POLAR SNOW FIELD AND ARCTIC ICE PACK' KIRBY J. HANSON Po!ar Meteorology Research Project, US. Weather Bureau, Washington, D.C. [Manuscript received September 13, 1960; revised February 21, 1961 ] ABSTRACT Solar and terrestrial radiation measurements that were obtained at Amundsen-Scot>t (South Pole) Station and on Ice lsland (Bravo) T-3 are presented for representative summer and winter months. Of the South Polar net radiation loss during April 1958, approximately20 percent of the energy came from the snow and80 percent from the air. The actual atmospheric cooling rate during that period was only about lj6 of the suggested radiative cooling rate. The annual net radiation at various places in Antarctica is presented. During 1058, the South Polar atmos- phere transmitted about 73 percent of the annual extraterrestrial radiation, while at T-3 the Arctic atmosphere transmitted about 56 percent. The albedo of melting sea ice is discussed. Measurements on T-3 during July 1958 indicate that the net radiation is positive on both clear and overcast days but greatest on overcast days. Refreezing of the surface with clear skies, as observed by Untersteiner and Badglep, is discussed. 1. INTRODUCTION Ocean.ThisIsland wasabout by 5 11 miles in size and The elliptical orbit of the earthbrings it about 3 million about 52 meters thick (Crary et al. [2]) in 1953 when it miles farther from the sun at aphelion than at perihelion; drifted near 88' N., looo W. In the years that followed, consequently,during midsummer, about 7 percent less this it drifted southward and in July 1958 was located solar radiation impinges on the top of the Arctic atrnos- 79.5' N., 118' W. -
Joint Conference of the History EG and Humanities and Social Sciences
Joint conference of the History EG and Humanities and Social Sciences EG "Antarctic Wilderness: Perspectives from History, the Humanities and the Social Sciences" Colorado State University, Fort Collins (USA), 20 - 23 May 2015 A joint conference of the History Expert Group and the Humanities and Social Sciences Expert Group on "Antarctic Wilderness: Perspectives from History, the Humanities and the Social Sciences" was held at Colorado State University in Fort Collins (USA) on 20-23 May 2015. On Wednesday (20 May) we started with an excursion to the Rocky Mountain National Park close to Estes. A hike of two hours took us along a former golf course that had been remodelled as a natural plain, and served as a fitting site for a discussion with park staff on “comparative wilderness” given the different connotations of that term in isolated Antarctica and comparatively accessible Colorado. After our return to Fort Collins we met a group of members of APECS (Association of Polar Early Career Scientists), with whom we had a tour through the New Belgium Brewery. The evening concluded with a screening of the film “Nightfall on Gaia” by the anthropologist Juan Francisco Salazar (Australia), which provides an insight into current social interactions on King George Island and connections to the natural and political complexities of the sixth continent. The conference itself was opened by on Thursday (21 May) by Diana Wall, head of the School of Global Environmental Sustainability at the Colorado State University (CSU). Andres Zarankin (Brazil) opened the first session on narratives and counter narratives from Antarctica with his talk on sealers, marginality, and official narratives in Antarctic history. -
The Visser Chronicles
1 Animorphs Chronicles 3 Visser K.A. Applegate *Converted to EBook by asmodeus *edited by Dace k 2 Prologue “Honey?” No answer. My husband was watching a game on television. He was preoccupied. “Honey?” I repeated, adding more urgency to my tone of voice. He looked over. Smiled sheepishly. “What’s up?” “Marco’s fever is down. I think he’s basically over this thing. He’s asleep. Anyway, I was thinking of getting some fresh air.” He muted the television. “Good idea. It’s tough when they’re sick, huh? Kids. He’s okay, though, huh?” “It’s just a virus.” “Yeah, well, take some time, you’ve been carrying the load. And if you’re going to the store- “ “Actually, I think I’ll go down to the marina.” He laughed and shook his head. “Ever since you bought that boat… I think Marco has some competition as the favorite child in this household.” He frowned. “You’re not taking it out, are you? Looks kind of gloomy out.” I made a smile. “Just want to make sure it’s well secured, check the ropes and all.” He was back with the game. He winced at some error made by his preferred team. “Uh-huh. Okay.” I stepped back, turned, and walked down the hall. The door to Marco’s room was ajar. I paused to look inside. I almost couldn’t do otherwise because the other voice in my head, the beaten-down, repressed human voice, was alive and screaming and screaming at me, begging me, pleading <No! No! No!> Marco was still asleep. -
Downloaded 10/01/21 10:31 PM UTC 874 JOURNAL of CLIMATE VOLUME 12
MARCH 1999 VAVRUS 873 The Response of the Coupled Arctic Sea Ice±Atmosphere System to Orbital Forcing and Ice Motion at 6 kyr and 115 kyr BP STEPHEN J. VAVRUS Center for Climatic Research, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of WisconsinÐMadison, Madison, Wisconsin (Manuscript received 2 February 1998, in ®nal form 11 May 1998) ABSTRACT A coupled atmosphere±mixed layer ocean GCM (GENESIS2) is forced with altered orbital boundary conditions for paleoclimates warmer than modern (6 kyr BP) and colder than modern (115 kyr BP) in the high-latitude Northern Hemisphere. A pair of experiments is run for each paleoclimate, one with sea-ice dynamics and one without, to determine the climatic effect of ice motion and to estimate the climatic changes at these times. At 6 kyr BP the central Arctic ice pack thins by about 0.5 m and the atmosphere warms by 0.7 K in the experiment with dynamic ice. At 115 kyr BP the central Arctic sea ice in the dynamical version thickens by 2±3 m, accompanied bya2Kcooling. The magnitude of these mean-annual simulated changes is smaller than that implied by paleoenvironmental evidence, suggesting that changes in other earth system components are needed to produce realistic simulations. Contrary to previous simulations without atmospheric feedbacks, the sign of the dynamic sea-ice feedback is complicated and depends on the region, the climatic variable, and the sign of the forcing perturbation. Within the central Arctic, sea-ice motion signi®cantly reduces the amount of ice thickening at 115 kyr BP and thinning at 6 kyr BP, thus serving as a strong negative feedback in both pairs of simulations.