Scientists mapped what happens if a crucial system of ocean currents collapses. The weather impact would be extreme
Climate changeFacebookTweetLink
Follow
The collapse of a crucial network of Atlantic Ocean currents could push parts of the world into a deep freeze, with winter temperatures plunging to around minus 55 degrees Fahrenheit in some cities, bringing 'profound climate and societal impacts,' according to a new study.
There is increasing concern about the future of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation — known as the AMOC — a system of currents that works like a giant conveyor belt, pulling warm water from the Southern Hemisphere and tropics to the Northern Hemisphere, where it cools, sinks and flows back south.
Multiple studies suggest the AMOC is weakening with some projecting it could even collapse this century as global warming disrupts the balance of heat and salinity that keeps it moving. This would usher in huge global weather and climate shifts — including plunging temperatures in Europe, which relies on the AMOC for its mild climate.
What's less clear, however, is how these impacts will unfold in a world heated up by humans burning fossil fuels.
'What if the AMOC collapses and we have climate change? Does the cooling win or does the warming win?' asked René van Westen, a marine and atmospheric researcher at Utrecht University in the Netherlands and co-author of the paper published Wednesday in the Geophysical Research Letters journal.
This new study is the first to use a modern, complex climate model to answer the question, he told CNN.
The researchers looked at a scenario where the AMOC weakens by 80% and the Earth is around 2 degrees Celsius warmer than the period before humans began burning large amounts of fossil fuels. The planet is currently at 1.2 degrees of warming.
They focused on what would happen as the climate stabilized post-collapse, multiple decades into the future.
Even in this hotter world, they found 'substantial cooling' over Europe with sharp drops in average winter temperatures and more intense cold extremes — a very different picture than the United States, where the study found temperatures would continue to increase even with an AMOC collapse.
Sea ice would spread southward as far as Scandinavia, parts of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, the research found. This would have a huge impact on cold extremes as the white surface of the ice reflects the sun's energy back into space, amplifying cooling.
The scientists have created an interactive map to visualize the impacts of an AMOC collapse across the globe.
London, for example, could see winter cold extremes of minus 2.2 Fahrenheit , while Oslo could see temperatures as low as minus 55 Fahrenheit and endure maximum temperatures below 32 Fahrenheit for 46% of the year.
Parts of Europe will also become stormier, the study found. The increased temperature difference between northern and southern Europe will strengthen the jet stream and increase storm intensity over northwestern Europe.
It 'completely shifts the narrative, right?' van Westen said. 'Because now policy is planning for a warmer future, but maybe instead, we need to also prepare for a colder future.'
While cooling on an ever-hotter planet may sound like good news, van Westen warns it's anything but.
Society in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere 'is not built for these kind of cold extremes,' he said. Crops would die, threatening food security, and infrastructure could buckle.
What's more, the impacts of an AMOC collapse would mostly be felt in Europe's winter; it would still endure increasingly deadly heat waves in the summer as the climate crisis intensifies.
The Southern Hemisphere, meanwhile, is projected to experience increased warming.
The scientists also looked at the impacts of an AMOC collapse in an even hotter world. If global temperatures reach around 4 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the heat outweighs the cooling impact of an AMOC collapse in Europe, van Westen said. 'The warming signal actually wins.'
But, he added, an AMOC collapse won't only affect temperatures. Other impacts include increased sea level rise, which will particularly affect the US, where a weaker AMOC is already driving significantly increased flooding on the northeastern coast, according to recent research.
Stefan Rahmstorf, a physical oceanographer at Potsdam University in Germany who was not involved in the latest research, said the study confirms 'an AMOC collapse would have massive impacts on European climate.'
The research uses only one climate model; others will rely on different models and will likely come up with a variety of scenarios, he told CNN. What ultimately happens will depend on the how the two opposing trends play out: AMOC-induced cooling and climate change-induced heating. A 'large uncertainty' remains, he said.
The study is 'by no means the last word' especially as huge questions remain over whether the AMOC could be on course to collapse, said Richard Allen, a climate science professor at the University of Reading, also not involved in the research. 'But even the mere possibility of this dire storyline unfolding over coming centuries underscores the need to forensically monitor what is happening in our oceans,' he said.
What is crystal clear is that an AMOC collapse would be very bad for society, van Westen said. 'We want to avoid it at all costs.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Weight loss in your 40s and 50s can help slash your chronic disease risk, researchers say
Working to lose weight in your 40s and 50s may help to reduce your risk of developing a chronic disease, a new study reveals. Researchers based in the U.K. and Finland say they found health benefits in people who lost an average of 6.5 percent of their body weight in early middle age and maintained that weight loss throughout a period of 12 to 35 years. Those benefits especially include a lessened risk for cardiovascular disease and diabetes as well as an overall lower risk of death from chronic disease. 'The benefits of lifestyle-based weight management are widely discussed even though studies have found it surprisingly difficult to demonstrate health benefits beyond the prevention of diabetes,' University of Helsinki professor Dr. Timo Strandberg said in a statement. Strandberg was the lead author of the study which was published recently in the journal JAMA Network Open, the open-access journal of the American Medical Association. To reach these conclusions, the study tracked and analyzed the health of 23,000 white Europeans who were between the ages of 30 and 50 years old using data from three studies, conducted from 1985 to 1988, from 1964 to 1973, and between 2000 and 2013. They sorted the participants into four groups: people with persistent healthy weight, people who were overweight but became a healthy weight, people who were healthy and became overweight, and people who were overweight the entire time. 'Measurement of weight and height was conducted at a time when surgical and pharmacological weight-loss interventions were nearly nonexistent,' the authors noted. The cause of weight loss was not assessed, but given the age of the participants and lack of diagnosed disease, it was more likely intentional than caused by severe chronic conditions or frailty.' In one study, a reduction in body mass from overweight to normal weight over six years in mid-life was tied to a lower risk of developing chronic diseases. There was also a 48 percent lower risk for chronic illness compared to those who remained overweight, which largely held even after excluding participants who developed diabetes during follow-up. Another study showed a 57 percent risk for chronic illness. A third study, with the longest follow-up period, showed that weight loss in mid-life was associated with a 19 percent reduction in overall mortality. 'I'm certain that overall prevention of overweight and obesity starting in early life is absolutely the best thing to do,' Stranberg told The Independent. 'Our study indirectly proves this by showing that persistent healthy weight over the life-course is best.' He said that he hopes the findings will inspire people to see that lifestyle changes can lead to a longer life. 'This is particularly important today as more people are overweight than when the collection of our research data began 35 years ago,' he said in the statement.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Which animals can hold their breath underwater the longest?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Getting enough oxygen in the water can be hard work. While fish and many other aquatic animals take air directly from the water through gills, other animals find ingenious ways to drag air bubbles down from the surface or trap air around their bodies. But others do it the hard way and hold their breath to dive, before coming up to the surface for air — and then repeat this process again and again. Some of these animals can stay submerged for staggering lengths of time. But which animal can hold its breath the longest? And what characteristics enable it to do this? Although diving times can reveal how long species typically stay underwater, the duration can vary depending on why they are staying submerged. "There is a difference between surviving under water (how long before they die) and breath holding (how long do they voluntarily stay submerged)," Wilco Verberk, an associate professor of ecology at Radboud University in the Netherlands, told Live Science in an email. For example, some animals could find themselves trapped below water. Some ants were seen to survive for multiple hours when forcibly submerged, but even specialized diving ants would not voluntarily dive for more than a minute, Philip Matthews, an associate professor at the University of British Columbia who studies insect respiration, told Live Science. Secondly, for animals to hold their breath, they need lungs, said John Spicer, a marine zoologist at the University of Plymouth in the U.K. "Holding breath only applies to animals with lungs and even then lunged animals that don't have gills as well (like lungfish) and/or breathe through their skin (like frogs)," Spicer told Live Science in an email. Related: How do marine mammals sleep underwater? The absolute champions for lunged animals staying submerged are certain freshwater turtles, such as the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). These reptiles practice brumation — a form of hibernation for reptiles — at the bottom of rivers and lakes during winter and can stay underwater for months at a time, which helps them survive when they are trapped beneath a layer of ice. Turtles are ectothermic, or cold-blooded, so during cold periods, their metabolism slows down, enabling them to conserve more energy and use less oxygen. "Many freshwater turtle species as the environmental temperature decreases switch everything off, and can stay submerged literally for months," Spicer said. "If brumation counts as holding your breath, then the freshwater turtles wipe the (river/lake) floor with everything else." However, these turtles cheat by taking in small amounts of oxygen in the water through their butts — or technically, their cloacae, which are multipurpose openings that are also used for sexual reproduction and egg-laying, as well as expelling waste. Size plays a crucial part in how long an animal can hold its breath, Verberk said. "Body size is a key trait, with larger animals being able to hold their breath for longer," Verberk said. "This is because oxygen stores tend to be larger in larger animals, also in relation to the rate at which they deplete them (larger animals tend to have lower mass specific demands for oxygen)." This means the competition for breath holding is between large mammals and large ectotherms such as crocodiles and sea turtles, he noted. The record dive by a mammal was completed by a Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), which stayed submerged for 222 minutes, or 3.7 hours. Other whales have also put in impressive dives: The record Arnoux's beaked whale dive (Berardius arnuxii) lasted 153 minutes, and a sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) managed 138 minutes, according to Verberk, Spicer and team's 2020 study. Whales accomplish this feat thanks to a number of key adaptations. These include slowing down their heart rate and or metabolism; redirecting blood flow away from parts of the body, temporarily shutting down organs such as the liver and kidneys; "and good oxygen storage capacity and release, from and in the large amounts of respiratory proteins in the muscles (myoglobin) and the blood (haemoglobin)," Spicer explained. In addition, these animals can switch to anaerobic metabolism and generate energy without using oxygen, Spicer added. "It is very inefficient in its conversion of food stuffs to energy, it is slow in doing so, and it produces a 'poison' lactic acid — so it's an emergency response for us," Spicer explained. "Diving mammals also resort to anaerobic metabolism and generate lactate but seem to be [a] bit better at putting up with it — and buffering the effect of the acid build up." Elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris and Mirounga leonina) have also recorded impressive dives lasting two hours. However, this is not typical; it happens only when they are near predators, Spicer said. While whales triumph as the longest-diving mammals and endotherms, or warm-blooded animals, big ectotherms have registered the longest-lasting dives of any species. The freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus johnstoni) clocked up 402 minutes, or 6.7 hours, underwater when it perceived a threat near the water's surface. But the record holder is the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), with a winning dive of about 610 minutes, or 10.2 hours, according to a 2007 study, while other studies have recorded maximum dive durations of 480 minutes, or eight hours. RELATED MYSTERIES —Can fish and other marine animals drown? —How do animals breathe underwater? —Do fish get thirsty? These ectotherms have many of the same oxygen-saving adaptations as mammals, but they can also save energy by not needing to warm themselves. "Their running costs can be half of a similar sized marine mammal just because they don't use physiological means to keep themselves warm," Spicer said. "It is the effect of temperature on metabolism that makes the main difference. Leatherback turtles [Dermochelys coriacea] I know can dive deeper than most whale species. And in cold waters they can turn down their metabolism pretty dramatically … enough that they can lie on the sea bottom for hours, or rest in underwater caves," he added.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Using the Ocean to Suck Up CO2 Could Come With the Small, Unintended Side Effect of Wiping Out Marine Life
As global temperatures soar and emissions remain higher than ever, scientists are exploring the dramatic, planet-wide interventions we could take to stave off the climate crisis. One of the most intriguing possibilities involves using the ocean, already the world's largest carbon sink, to suck up even more of the greenhouse gas by removing some of the carbon that it already stores. Dozens of startups are already experimenting with this form of climate intervention, which is sometimes referred to as marine carbon dioxide removal. What makes it so appealing is that the ocean, in theory, would essentially do the work for us: all we'd have to do is set it into motion and store — or even repurpose — the extracted gases so they doesn't reenter the atmosphere. But it may be too good to be true. In a new study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, a team of international researchers warn that this could have dire unintended consequences — like accelerating the decline of the ocean's already plunging oxygen levels. "What helps the climate is not automatically good for the ocean," lead author Andreas Oschlies, from the GEOMAR Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research Kiel in Germany, said in a statement about the work. The warmer that water becomes, the less oxygen it can dissolve. In the past fifty years, as global temperatures steadily climbed, the ocean has lost nearly 2 percent of its total dissolved oxygen, a proportion roughly equal to a staggering 77 billion metric tons, according to a 2018 study. At its worst, this phenomenon, known as ocean deoxygenation, creates entire "dead zones" where there's so little oxygen available that the waters become virtually uninhabitable. Sometimes stretching across thousands of square miles, whatever marine life was once living in the afflicted area either flees or, more grimly, suffocates to death. Climate change has accelerated the eerie aquatic trend, increasing both the size and number of these dead zones. Clearly, halting global warming would help stymy this — but not if the solution we employ requires putting additional strain on the ocean. In particular, it appears that biotic forms of marine carbon removal could precipitate devastating losses of dissolved oxygen, the researchers caution. One leading method, called ocean fertilization, proposes seeding the seas with nutrients to boost the growth of oxygen-producing algae. The problem is that when the phytoplanktons perish, their tiny corpses sink to the ocean floor, where the bacteria that feed on them end up consuming even more oxygen. "Methods that increase biomass production in the ocean, and subsequently lead to oxygen-consuming decomposition, cannot be considered harmless climate solutions," Oschlies said in the statement. "Our model simulations show that such approaches could cause a decrease in dissolved oxygen that is 4 to 40 times greater than the oxygen gain expected from reduced global warming." But the researchers aren't advocating against using the ocean as a carbon sink entirely. Encouragingly, they found that abiotic methods, including one that involves flushing the waters with minerals like limestone to convert CO2 into a molecule that stays trapped underwater, has minimal effects on oxygen levels. Instead, the researchers want to stress that going forward, anyone pursuing this research should put assessing the potential oxygen toll of their technique front and center. "The ocean is a complex system which is already heavily under pressure," Oschlies said. "If we intervene with large-scale measures, we must ensure that, no matter how good our intentions are, we are not further threatening marine environmental conditions that marine life depends on." More on the ocean: A Strange Darkness Is Spreading Throughout the Oceans
