Glacier meltdown risks food and water supply of 2bn people, says UN
Retreating glaciers threaten the food and water supply of 2 billion people around the world, the UN has warned, as current 'unprecedented' rates of melting will have unpredictable consequences.
Two-thirds of all irrigated agriculture in the world is likely to be affected in some way by receding glaciers and dwindling snowfall in mountain regions, driven by the climate crisis, according to a Unesco report.
More than 1 billion people live in mountainous regions and, of those in developing countries, up to half are already experiencing food insecurity. That is likely to worsen, as food production in such regions is dependent on mountain waters, melting snow and glaciers, according to the World Water Development Report 2025.
Developed countries are also at risk: in the US, for example, the Colorado River basin has been in drought since 2000, and higher temperatures mean more of the precipitation is falling as rain, which runs off more quickly than mountain snow, exacerbating drought conditions.
Audrey Azoulay, the director general of Unesco, said: 'Regardless of where we live, we all depend in some way on mountains and glaciers. But these natural water towers are facing imminent peril. This report demonstrates the urgent need for action.'
The rate of change of glaciers is the worst on record, according to separate research from the World Meteorological Organisation, which published its annual State of the Climate report this week. The largest three-year loss of glacier mass on record occurred in the past three years, the study found, with Norway, Sweden, Svalbard and the tropical Andes among the worst-affected areas.
Eastern Africa has lost 80% of its glaciers in places and, in the Andes, between a third and a half of glaciers have melted since 1998. Glaciers in the Alps and the Pyrenees, the worst affected in Europe, have shrunk by about 40% over roughly the same period.
The decline of glaciers has had a further impact, added Abou Amani, director of water sciences at Unesco, in that the loss of ice replaces a reflective surface with dark soil that absorbs heat. 'Glaciers melting have an impact on the reflectivity of [solar] radiation and that will impact the whole climate system,' he warned.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
More avalanches will also result, as rain falling on snow is a major factor behind avalanche formation. Pooling water from melting glaciers can also be released, causing sudden floods in valleys or to people living further down the slopes. Permafrost is also melting, releasing methane from the mountain soils that melting glaciers are uncovering.
A previous study, published last month in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, found that half of global glacier mass would be lost by the end of the century, if global heating was not halted. Alex Brisbourne, a glacier geophysicist at the British Antarctic Survey, said: 'Mountain glaciers contain some of the largest freshwater reservoirs on Earth. Meltwater released in the summer provides the water supply to a billion people and sustains an enormous amount of industry and agriculture. The impact [of such melting] will be felt way beyond those immediately downstream of the glaciers.'
These impacts are coming at a time when many food sources are already under strain. Alvaro Lario, president of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (Ifad) and chair of UN-Water, called for more support for people who live in afflicted mountain regions. 'Water flows downhill, but food insecurity rises uphill. Mountains provide 60% of our freshwater, but the communities that safeguard these vital resources are among the most food insecure,' he said.
'We must invest in their resilience to protect glaciers, rivers, and a shared future for all of us.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
19 hours ago
- ITV News
Constructing in the cold: Inside the bold build at the bottom of the world
If the producers of Grand Designs were looking for the most extreme building project ever, I think I've found it. 67 degrees south, deep in the Antarctic Circle. On Ryder Bay, 1,000 miles from the nearest city, is the British Antarctic Survey's Rothera Research Station. For 50 years, scientists, engineers, and adventurers have been based here, braving conditions as cold as -20°C and permanent darkness during the polar winter. For the past six years, builders have been here too, constructing the Discovery Building. It's a 90-meter-long, 4,500 m² facility that serves as an office, storeroom, power plant, hospital, control tower, and nerve centre of Britain's Antarctic operations. There isn't a Screwfix or B&Q nearby, so every single tool, tile, and tin of paint has had to be shipped in – 400 containers in total. Surprisingly, fire is a huge risk here. Antarctica is so dry that it's technically a desert. With no prospect of a quick rescue during the winter, they can't take any risks. A massive 40,000-litre tank of water can be emptied onto flames in just 30 minutes. All water is desalinated from the sea. 'Why don't you just melt the snow?', I asked plumber Tobias. 'Back in the day, about 30 or 40 years ago, they did, but they only had one shower per week. Today, with these systems, we can produce 10,000 litres of water a day.' The colour scheme has raised a few eyebrows. Stairwells and offices are painted in bold floor-to-ceiling blue, green, red, or yellow. It's the architect's attempt to counteract the dull, dark winter nights, but I get the sense that some of the scientists might prefer a more muted magnolia. The project has cost £100 million of taxpayers' money. It's a symbol of the UK's commitment to polar science—not to mention the geopolitical importance of maintaining a physical presence on the continent. There's plenty of snagging to do over winter. Then the not insignificant challenge of dismantling the old buildings it has replaced. Strict environmental rules in Antarctica mean every scrap of rubbish and rubble must be shipped back home. At least they have a use for those 400 empty shipping containers!
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
Oceans have absorbed heat of 1.7 billion atomic bombs, scientists warn as UN summit opens in Nice
Oceans have absorbed enough heat since the Paris Agreement was signed to match the energy of 1.7 billion atomic bomb explosions, scientists warned just as the UN Ocean Conference got underway in Nice. The figures were shared by researchers on the sidelines of the summit where delegations from countries were working to create a global treaty for ocean conservation. Scientists said warming was accelerating changes in marine systems, driving sea level rise, sea ice loss, and increasing marine heatwaves. 'Global warming over the last 10 years equates to about 1.7 billion atomic bomb explosions,' said Alex Sen Gupta, associate professor at the University of New South Wales. 'If we divide this by the number of seconds in 10 years, it's equivalent to about five atomic explosions worth of energy every single second. Clearly this is having an effect on the ocean – it is causing the sea level to rise, our ice systems to melt, and our atmosphere and oceans to warm.' As the conference opened on Monday, UN secretary general António Guterres said the world 'must move from plunder to protection to save the oceans'. Among the most serious warnings are new records set for sea surface temperatures this year, an all-time low for global sea ice, and what scientists say is the largest coral bleaching event ever recorded, affecting 84 per cent of monitored reef areas. 'My recent research has shown that marine heatwaves have caused severe impacts globally over the past few years,' said Dr Kathryn E Smith of the Marine Biological Association of the UK. 'We've seen more fisheries collapses, mass mortality events, and damage to ecosystems. The warming oceans have also fuelled storms on land causing billions of dollars in damages and resulting in thousands of deaths. These impacts have all occurred before we have reached the 1.5 C benchmark. A decade on from the Paris Agreement it is clear that it's even more important than ever that we make every effort not to exceed the warming limits agreed in 2015.' The UN Ocean Conference is co-hosted this year by France and Costa Rica, with participation from over 100 countries. It aims to accelerate action to meet global ocean protection targets and finalise voluntary commitments on issues including pollution, overfishing, deep-sea mining and marine biodiversity. France's president Emmanuel Macron said the High Seas Treaty could come into force as early as January 2026. Eighteen countries ratified the treaty during the opening sessions, bringing the total to 49 – just 11 short of the number needed for adoption. Mr Macron also reiterated France's call for a moratorium on deep-sea mining, declaring the "oceans are not for sale". Several experts at the Nice conference said ocean protection must now move from pledges to policies. The conference is expected to issue the 'Nice Ocean Action Plan' and press for the legally binding entry into force of the High Seas Treaty. The UK, which had faced criticism for delays, said it would introduce legislation by the end of the year to ratify the High Seas Treaty. 'Our oceans are dying. Without urgent action, they will be irreversibly destroyed,' marine minister Emma Hardy said. ' Climate change is pushing our ocean into unknown territory, causing collapse and irreparable damage to many valuable ecosystems and marine species,' Dr Karen Filbee-Dexter from the University of Western Australia noted. 'What is most concerning is our emissions have already locked us into impacts that will be felt for generations.' Dr Jennifer Francis, senior scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Centre, said sea ice loss in the Arctic was one of the clearest indicators of climate disruption. 'During summer, the real estate it covers has diminished by nearly half and its volume by nearly three-quarters in less than a human's lifespan,' she said. 'The loss of ice means ships can now travel more freely along polar routes, with economic benefits but higher risks of fuel spills. Larger areas of open water allow marine algae to proliferate in abnormal ways.' A final political declaration and the Nice Ocean Action Plan are expected at the end of the summit on Friday. Scientists, small island leaders and civil society groups are calling for stronger integration between climate policy and marine conservation efforts. 'Ultimately, the vast majority of ocean impacts that we have seen in the last decade are a result of human induced climate change,' Dr Smith said. 'The escalation of impacts we are seeing is, quite frankly, shocking and without reducing emissions and use of fossil fuels globally, the impacts we see are only going to increase further in coming years.'
Metro
3 days ago
- Metro
How long humanity would take to go extinct if we stopped having children
'Overpopulation' is a scary word, bringing to mind a dystopian Earth where people live in grimy cities and fight over what little food is left. But the reverse of this is just as terrifying – depopulation – if humans suddenly began having fewer and fewer babies. And if that were to happen, it wouldn't take long for humanity to go completely extinct. While some people live beyond the age of 100, the human race would only be around for a few decades at a push, Professor Michael Little, an anthropologist at Birmingham University, Writing in The Conversation, Professor Little said this is because society needs young people to care for elders and drive economic growth. He wrote: 'Eventually, civilisation would crumble. It's likely that there would not be many people left within 70 or 80 years, rather than 100, due to shortages of food, clean water, prescription drugs and everything else that you can easily buy today and need to survive.' After the final human is born, a countdown would begin as everyone simply grows older until everyone dies from old age. Professor Little said: 'Eventually, there would not be enough young people coming of age to do essential work, causing societies throughout the world to quickly fall apart. 'Some of these breakdowns would be in humanity's ability to produce food, provide health care and do everything else we all rely on. 'Food would become scarce even though there would be fewer people to feed.' There are many reasons why people could stop having children, Professor Little said, such as a disease making people infertile or a nuclear war. While a few viruses, like HIV, the Zika virus and a few STIs such as HPV, can lead to infertility, they very rarely do so or only have very mild effects. So a virus wiping out the world's ability to have children is, for now, just science fiction, though male fertility rates are a worry among scientists. But a rapidly ageing population and declining birth rate are very much real. Earth is home to 8,200,000,000 human beings, with the global population increasing since the end of the Black Death around 1350. And the number of humans will keep rising until about 2080, when the UN expects the size of humanity to peak at 10.3billion, before it drops slightly. One reason for this inevitable slowdown is that people are already having fewer babies in some parts of the world, such as Japan and South Korea. These countries are now facing a new issue, an ageing population, as they're under the 2.1 children per woman rate with their population stable. In China, for example, the fertility rate is just 1.18. This is also happening in the UK, where the fertility rate fell to just 1.44 children per woman last year, down from 2.47 in 1946. Ageing population is a problem, Professor Little said, because young people are the 'engines of society' who keep new ideas flowing and work jobs that elderly people would struggle to do. He likened it to how humans, otherwise called Homo sapiens, became the dominant species on Earth over the Neanderthal. Neanderthals were humans like us, but were a distinct species that were around for about 350,000 years. Dr Little said: 'Some scientists have found evidence that modern humans were more successful at reproducing our numbers than the Neanderthal people. 'This occurred when Homo sapiens became more successful at providing food for their families and also having more babies than the Neanderthals.' There would be, however, some perks to humanity going extinct, as some campaign groups have long dreamt of. Amid climate change, caused by humans pumping out planet-warming gases, wildlife populations have fallen by 70%. Professor Little said: 'If humans were to go extinct, it could open up opportunities for other animals to flourish on Earth. 'On the other hand, it would be sad for humans to go away because we would lose all of the great achievements people have made, including in the arts and science.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page.
