Emperor penguin populations declining faster than expected
Scientists monitoring the world's largest penguin species used satellites to assess sixteen colonies in the Antarctic Peninsula, Weddell Sea and Bellingshausen Sea, representing nearly a third of the global emperor penguin population.
What they found was "probably about 50-percent worse" than even the most pessimistic estimate of current populations using computer modelling, said Peter Fretwell, who tracks wildlife from space at the British Antarctic Survey (BAS).
Researchers know that climate change is driving the losses but the speed of the declines is a particular cause for alarm.
The study, published in the journal Nature Communications: Earth & Environment, found that numbers declined 22 percent in the 15 years to 2024 for the colonies monitored.
This compares with an earlier estimate of a 9.5-percent reduction across Antarctica as a whole between 2009 and 2018.
Warming is thinning and destabilising the ice under the penguins' feet in their breeding grounds.
In recent years some colonies have lost all their chicks because the ice has given way beneath them, plunging hatchlings into the sea before they were old enough to cope with the freezing ocean.
Fretwell said the new research suggests penguin numbers have been declining since the monitoring began in 2009.
That is even before global warming was having a major impact on the sea ice, which forms over open water adjacent to land in the region.
But he said the culprit is still likely to be climate change, with warming driving other challenges for the penguins, such as higher rainfall or increasing encroachment from predators.
"Emperor penguins are probably the most clear-cut example of where climate change is really showing its effect," Fretwell told AFP.
"There's no fishing. There's no habitat destruction. There's no pollution which is causing their populations to decline.
"It's just the temperatures in the ice on which they breed and live, and that's really climate change."
- 'Worrying result" -
Emperor penguins, aka Aptenodytes forsteri, number about a quarter of a million breeding pairs, all in Antarctica, according to a 2020 study.
A baby emperor penguin emerges from an egg kept warm in winter by a male, while the female in a breeding pair embarks on a two-month fishing expedition.
When she returns to the colony, she feeds the hatchling by regurgitating and then both parents take turns to forage.
To survive on their own, chicks must develop waterproof feathers, a process that typically starts in mid-December.
The new research uses high resolution satellite imagery during the months of October and November, before the region is plunged into winter darkness.
Fretwell said future research could use other types of satellite monitoring, like radar or thermal imaging, to capture populations in the darker months, as well as expand to the other colonies.
"We really do need to look at the rest of the population to see if this worrying result transfers around the continent," he said, adding however that the colonies studied were considered representative.
He said there is hope that the penguins may go further south to colder regions in the future but added that it is not clear "how long they're going to last out there".
Computer models have projected that the species will be near extinction by the end of the century if humans do not slash their planet-heating emissions.
The latest study suggests the picture could be even worse.
"We may have to rethink those models now with this new data," said Fretwell.
But he stressed there was still time to reduce the threat to the penguins.
"We've got this really depressing picture of climate change and falling populations even faster than we thought but it's not too late," he said.
"We're probably going to lose a lot of emperor penguins along the way but if people do change, and if we do reduce or turn around our climate emissions, then then we will save the emperor penguin."
klm/gil
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Video shuts down common ozone myth with simple explanation: 'It wasn't just a fluke'
Video shuts down common ozone myth with simple explanation: 'It wasn't just a fluke' When TikToker Emma (@simpleenvironmentalist) received a comment filled with misinformation, she knew she had to do something about it. The commenter doubted the planet's warming. "'It's here' but ice is growing?" the commenter questioned. "It's like in the 80s — they said the ozone would be gone in…5-7 years. Guess what — it's still there." This comment misses some crucial information, which Emma quickly pointed out. "You wanna know why the ozone is fixed? Because we fixed it," she said, noting how many people who deny the changing climate cite the (mostly) intact ozone layer as evidence. In 1985, a hole in the ozone layer was confirmed above Antarctica, per the United Nations Environment Programme. According to the European Environment Agency, the ozone layer sits in the stratosphere about 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) above the planet. Without it, life on Earth would be routinely exposed to the sun's harmful radiation, putting millions of people at risk of skin cancer and other issues. Four years later, the Montreal Protocol — the only UN environmental agreement to be ratified by every country in the world — came into effect. Its goal was to phase out ozone-depleting substances. While the Antarctic hole isn't completely mended, it's healing up nicely, and it is expected to close by 2066. That's because governments acted swiftly, reducing usage of these harmful substances by 99%. "It wasn't just a fluke," Emma said, "It wasn't just random. It was because we quit doing stuff to harm the ozone." The Montreal Protocol teaches a powerful lesson — people can come together to heal the planet. While many people unfortunately believe that concern over the ozone layer was a myth, climate experts are thankfully able to separate fact from fiction. Commenters appreciated Emily's efforts. Do you think America does a good job of protecting its natural beauty? Definitely Only in some areas No way I'm not sure Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "We don't have to be literal experts in everything, but we can absolutely believe scientists' opinions in their expert fields!" one commenter said. "It's proof we have power to fix things," another added. Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
Forbes
13 hours ago
- Forbes
Why Noise Pollution Is Slowly Killing Us All
Given the growing cacophony of noise pollution here on planet Earth, maybe it's a good thing that in space no one can hear you scream, as the 'Alien' film franchise so aptly points out. It's not just undersea noise negatively affecting our planet's marine life. Noise is also affecting terrestrial wildlife reserves and natural parks. And on a day-to-day basis, human-generated noise is literally endangering both the mental and physical health of a large swath of the global population. It's a point repeatedly made clear in 'Clamor: How Noise Took Over The World And How We Can Take It Back,' by science journalist Chris Berdik. The author provides us with a comprehensive and well-crafted narrative of the history of noise pollution as well as what hope we have in countering this threat. As anyone who's experienced the din of a busy airport, freeway or even Manhattan at rush hour can attest, noise linked to transportation can be overwhelming. In fact, a 2020 report by the European Environment Agency linked noise from transportation and other sources to some 48,000 new cases of heart disease and 12,000 premature deaths across the European continent every year, Berdik writes. As For The U.S.? According to the American Public Health Association, noise could be putting the health of more than 100 million Americans at risk, Berdik writes. And there's little escape at the office. Open concept office designs have only made the problem worse. By 2017, at least 70 percent of American offices were open plan in design despite mounting evidence that the racket it produced drove employees crazy and hampered their job performance, writes Berdik. But regardless of office type, thousands of workers have found links between self-reported workplace noise and more days spent sick at home, Berdik notes. Noise pollution also negatively affects wildlife. As Berdik points out, biologists at California Polytechnic State University spent several years studying the effects of noise on the flora and fauna of Rattlesnake Canyon in northwest New Mexico which hosts a plethora of natural gas wells, Berdik writes. The researchers found that the natural gas wells that also had noisy compression stations drove away two bird species, the Woodhouse Scrub Jay and Mountain Bluebirds, Berdik notes. Both species are key seed distributors for the canyon's primary tree species — the Pinyon Pine and the Utah Juniper, Berdik notes. Unnecessary Noise And all too often, we generate insane amounts of noise for no good reason. As I can personally attest, in the mid-1980s Manhattan restauranteurs started thinking diners would prefer to eat in restaurants that offered all the acoustics of a busy industrial warehouse. Open kitchens, high ceilings and cement floors wreaked havoc on decibel levels. But it was a pattern that was repeated nationwide and still pervades most urban restaurants. Urban cafes are also some of the worst offenders. In addition to the noise their machines make while whipping up lattes and frappuccinos, their usual floor design is such that the acoustics are horrific. In addition, there's the constant drone of music at ridiculously high levels. That's strange, since most people are usually there to work on their laptops or check their phones in relative tranquility. Sadly, public libraries are no longer refuges of quiet as they are now functioning as de facto community centers. In the U.S., at least, people who want to work in peace and relative quiet must pay for that privilege at woefully overpriced co-working establishments. Soundscape Design Despite Berdik's plea for soundscapes designed for public spaces, I say why introduce more sound when less sound would do? Let me remind you of the healing powers of silence. There's nothing like pulling a vehicle over to the side of a two-lane blacktop and stepping out into the complete silence of a desert landscape. And anyone who's had the privilege of skiing in an empty high mountain pass can also attest to the peaceful crunch of snow beneath one's feet. Can natural sounds counter noise pollution? It's a point that Berdik makes repeatedly in his book. As he notes, a 2022 study by environmental neuroscientists at Berlin's Max Planck Institute found that only six minutes of recorded birdsong reduced measures of depression and anxiety in listeners. In contrast, people subjected to recorded traffic noise came to feel more depressed, writes Berdik. There has been a myriad of noise mitigation strategies put forth over the last few decades. But I'm not as sanguine as Berdik about ways to win the war on noise pollution. It's both insidious and a blatant threat to our collective sanity. But what's perhaps most distressing about this problem is that it's woefully underappreciated and in comparison to other pressing environmental issues rarely gets much attention. Yet in his book, Berdkik reminds us of what's at stake. The Bottom Line? 'Clamor' is an important work that deserves to be read and used as a springboard for serious discourse about this burgeoning problem that cuts across almost every aspect of global society. Quiet is indeed vital, and it's disappearing; sonic tranquility is fast becoming a luxury product for those who can afford it, Berdik writes.
The Verge
4 days ago
- The Verge
Microplastics are everywhere — including in the air around plastic treaty negotiations
Thousands of delegates have descended upon Geneva this week for what's supposed to be the culmination of years of negotiations that, if successful, are supposed to end in a groundbreaking global plastics treaty. They might be breathing in the very thing they're trying to clean up as they negotiate. Greenpeace tested the air around the city just before the talks began this month and found a small amount of microplastics. It wasn't so much a rigorous study as it was a way to prove a point. Microplastics are turning up all over the place, including in the air we breathe. That's why health and environmental advocates, as well as a coalition of governments, are pushing for an ambitious plastics treaty in Geneva. Recycling isn't enough — only limiting production can stem the tide of plastic pollution, they contend. Recycling isn't enough 'That you can find microplastics in urban air, that's not really shocking because it's been reported before in other cities. I think this is just a way of illustrating that nowhere is free from this pollution,' says David Santillo, a senior scientist with Greenpeace Research Laboratories. Greenpeace strapped an air-monitoring device to a person while they went about their day in Geneva, spending about eight hours in and out of shops, cafes, office spaces, and a railway station. The samples they collected on July 17th were meant to show what a typical visitor to the city might be exposed to; they weren't able to take any samples within the negotiation rooms that delegates would actually use. The device had a replaceable silver filter that Greenpeace researchers were then able to analyze to see what particles they caught, which amounted to at least 165 fibers and fragments. The filters picked up a range of different materials like bits of skin, plant-based fibers, and what was likely soot. Greenpeace was interested in synthetic materials, however, and was ultimately able to identify 12 pieces of microplastics, including polyester, nylon, polyethylene used to make bottles and bags, and other types of plastics. That might not sound like much, but the organization only had the equipment to be able to detect larger particles that were at least 10 microns in size. (For comparison, the average human hair is about 70 microns in diameter.) 'If they found the big ones, it's a pretty fair bet that the smaller ones were there, as well,' says Philip Landrigan, director of the Global Public Health and the Common Good Program at Boston College, who was not involved in the Greenpeace study. Generally, the smaller the particle, the more problems it can potentially pose by being able to penetrate deeper into organs and tissues in the human body. A human brain might contain as much as a spoon's worth of microplastics, research published in the journal Nature Medicine earlier this year suggests. 'Unfortunately, microplastics are pretty much everywhere in today's world,' Landrigan says. He's the lead author of an August report, published in the journal The Lancet, on the links between plastic pollution and health outcomes. 'Plastics cause disease and death from infancy to old age,' the report says, adding that plastics are responsible for $1.5 trillion in health-related economic losses each year. The report accounts for all the risks along the lifecycle of plastic, including chemicals that workers and communities near manufacturing facilities are exposed to, and waste that breaks down into nanoplastic particles that have been found in human bodies and breastmilk. 'Plastics cause disease and death from infancy to old age' Scientists are still working to understand the health impacts of inhaling microplastics in the air. Landrigan points out that we at least know that all plastics are made of two main components, a carbon-based backbone derived from fossil fuels and chemical additives. 'When the microplastic comes into the human body, whether you inhale it or drink it with your water or eat it with your food, when it it gets into you and the plastics move from your gastrointestinal tract into the bloodstream, the microplastic particles are carrying all those chemicals with them,' Landrigan says. The more than 16,000 different chemicals used in plastics production — including the carcinogen vinyl chloride, for example — are primarily responsible for the known health risks associated with plastics. But the toxicity of more than 75 percent of the chemicals in plastics have yet to be studied. Greenpeace doesn't claim to be assessing air quality in Geneva or the health impacts of what they found in their air samples. All they can show is the presence of microplastics in the air, adding to previous research that has done the same. What's notable now is that Greenpeace has documented this at a time when leaders from around the world have the opportunity to actually do something about it. Negotiations on a plastics treaty in Geneva are scheduled to end on August 14th. In 2022, United Nations member states agreed to develop a legally binding pact on plastic pollution. It's been an uphill battle to agree on terms ever since. Major fossil fuel producing nations blocked a deal in December, pushing negotiations past their initial 2024 deadline. So far this year, there's still a fight over whether focusing on recycling and reducing plastic waste is enough. The fossil fuel industry and countries including the US that produce a lot of plastics and its ingredients are fighting efforts to exclude limits to plastic production from the treaty. A 'high ambition coalition' launched by Rwanda and Norway, on the other hand, wants to address the full lifecycle of plastic, starting with production. It's also open to using the treaty to phase out or restrict the use of problematic chemicals in plastics. It doesn't make sense to simply mop up the mess plastic leaves behind without also turning off the faucet, says Angel Pago, Greenpeace global plastics campaign media lead. 'We're brimming with plastic because of overproduction. And we cannot solve this crisis with just, you know, cleanups,' Pago tells The Verge from Geneva. The Lancet article similarly says 'the principal driver of this [health] crisis is accelerating growth in plastic production.' Production has ballooned from 2 metric megatons in 1950 to 475 in 2022. Less than 10 percent of plastic waste has ever been recycled, in part because the many chemicals used to manufacture different types plastics make it difficult or uneconomical to rehash the material. 'If we're going to do something about plastics, we need to cap plastic production,' Landrigan says. 'I hope and I pray that the treaty negotiators are actually going to produce a treaty that protects human health.' Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All by Justine Calma Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Climate Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Environment Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Health Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Policy Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Report Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Science
