Nature News: When nations made plans to save the ozone layer, they didn't factor in global warming. Nature's Quirin Schiermeier reports on how two environmental problems complicate each other.
The ozone layer and global warming
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blogs.physicstoday.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3878
Search
Categories
- Acoustics (20)
- Arms control and military physics (167)
- Astronomy and cosmology (890)
- Atomic physics (12)
- Biography and personalities (34)
- Biological physics (155)
- Business and industry (298)
- Careers and employment (5)
- Chemical physics and molecular physics (85)
- Classical mechanics and electromagnetism (2)
- Commentary and opinion (101)
- Computational physics (92)
- Condensed matter (119)
- Crystallography (1)
- Culture and entertainment (8)
- Earth sciences (25)
- Education (287)
- Energy policy and R&D (456)
- Engineering and technology (705)
- Environment and climate change (720)
- Everyday Physics (414)
- Facilities and laboratories (210)
- Fluids and rheology (4)
- Government agencies (289)
- History, sociology, and philosophy (52)
- Instrumentation (4)
- Materials science (78)
- Medical physics (98)
- Metrology and fundamental constants (1)
- Microscopy
- Nanoscale science and technology (106)
- Nonlinear science and emergent phenomena
- Nuclear and particle physics (21)
- Optics and photonics (12)
- Planetary and space science (529)
- Plasma physics (2)
- Publishing (4)
- Quantum physics and information (102)
- Science and society (715)
- Science policy and politics (803)
- Scientific societies and awards (4)
- Semiconductors and electronics
- Statistical physics and thermodynamics
- Theoretical physics (1)
Monthly Archives
- November 2011 (13)
- October 2011 (63)
- September 2011 (66)
- August 2011 (70)
- July 2011 (56)
- June 2011 (69)
- May 2011 (84)
- April 2011 (84)
- March 2011 (93)
- February 2011 (76)
- January 2011 (78)
- December 2010 (72)
- November 2010 (77)
- October 2010 (82)
- September 2010 (72)
- August 2010 (88)
- July 2010 (83)
- June 2010 (89)
- May 2010 (81)
- April 2010 (87)
- March 2010 (89)
- February 2010 (74)
- January 2010 (74)
- December 2009 (83)
- November 2009 (81)
- October 2009 (79)
- September 2009 (82)
- August 2009 (88)
- July 2009 (86)
- June 2009 (91)
- May 2009 (81)
- April 2009 (98)
- March 2009 (97)
- February 2009 (80)
- January 2009 (64)
- December 2008 (68)
- November 2008 (65)
- October 2008 (93)
- September 2008 (98)
- August 2008 (110)
- July 2008 (97)
- June 2008 (117)
- May 2008 (122)
- April 2008 (103)
- March 2008 (106)
- February 2008 (87)
- January 2008 (94)
- December 2007 (82)
- November 2007 (96)
- October 2007 (98)
- September 2007 (93)
- August 2007 (98)
- July 2007 (91)
- June 2007 (83)
- May 2007 (89)
- April 2007 (87)
- March 2007 (88)
- February 2007 (81)
- January 2007 (89)
- December 2006 (80)
- November 2006 (80)
- October 2006 (89)
- September 2006 (80)
- August 2006 (92)
- July 2006 (76)
- June 2006 (91)
- May 2006 (83)
- April 2006 (60)
Having just returned from a tour of British Columbia that was disrupted by massive wildfire forest fires, one of our stops was the Columbian Ice Field.
They indicate the glacier is shrinking at a rate of 30 feet per year. In a very graphic demonstration, the flags at their visitor center represents the farthest reach of the glacier.
The current toe of the glacier is now almost a mile shorter and receding.
SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS?