Italy's Ventina glacier has melted so much geologists now can only monitor it remotely
After this year's hot summer, geologists discovered that the simple stakes used as benchmarks to measure the glacier's retraction each year are now buried under rockslides and debris that have made the terrain too unsteady for future in-person visits.
The Lombardy Glaciological Service said Monday that it will now use drone imagery and remote sensing to keep track of the ongoing shrinkage.
Geologists say that the Ventina glacier has already lost 1.7 kilometers (1 mile) in length since the first measuring benchmarks were positioned at the front of the glacier in 1895.
The melting has accelerated in recent years, with the glacier losing 431 meters (471 yards) in the last 10 years, nearly half of that since 2021, the service said. It's another example of how accelerating global warming is melting and shrinking Europe's glaciers, causing a host of environmental and other impacts.
'While we could still hope until the 1980s that there would be normal cycles (of retraction) or at least a contained retraction, in the last 40 years something truly striking has occurred,' said Andrea Toffaletti, a member of the Lombardy Glaciological Service.
Italy's mountain glaciers, which are found throughout the Alps and Dolomites in the north and along the central Apennines, have been receding for years, thanks to inadequate snowfall in the winter and record-setting hot summers. Glaciers always melt some in summer, with the runoff fueling mountain streams and rivers.
But the hot summers are 'no longer able to guarantee the survival of the winter snowpack,' that keeps the glacier intact, Toffaletti said.
'In order to regenerate and remain in balance, a certain amount of residual snow from the winter must remain on the glacier's surface at the end of the summer. And this is happening less and less frequently,' said Toffaletti.
According to the Lombardy service, the Alps represent a climate hotspot, recording double the global average of temperature increases since pre-industrial times, resulting in the loss of over 64% of the volume of Alpine glaciers.
In February, the journal Nature reported on a study showing the world's glaciers lost ice at the rate of about 255 billion tons (231 billion metric tons) annually from 2000 to 2011, but that quickened to about 346 billion tons (314 billion metric tons) annually over about the next decade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
11 hours ago
- Gizmodo
Can AI Predict Powerball Numbers?
With the Powerball ballooning to $650 million after Wednesday's drawing, hopeful players have been asking, is winning the lottery a matter of luck or something that science and artificial intelligence can predict? Three students at the University of Salento in southern Italy say that science wins out. They say they used AI to analyze patterns from past draws to predict future winning numbers. Their experimental approach resulted in a €43,000 jackpot in April, which now has people wondering if you can use science to win games of chance. So did AI actually predict that outcome? The students say using two years' worth of lottery data and focusing on recurring number patterns rather than attempting to forecast random draws lead to a successful lottery win. 'Our model didn't seek to predict the impossible but rather to identify the most frequently drawn numbers,' Marco Rossi told MSN. This a big departure from traditional gambling strategies that often bank on 'rare' numbers, hypothesizing that there will be a statistical balance over time. Helpfully, they got a tip from Diego Manca, a local betting shop owner, SiGMA World reports. 'The three of them came to me just under a month ago asking for information about 'late' numbers. They wanted to know whether, in my experience, it was better to bet on numbers that hadn't been drawn for a long time,' Manca reportedly said. 'I suggested that, based on my experience, it might be more profitable to bet on numbers that are drawn most frequently on a given wheel,' he said. 'They took my advice into account and developed a mathematical system based on it.' Naturally, the idea of predicting lottery numbers ahead of time and with scientific accuracy would shake all accepted theories of randomness 'Like rolling dice, each draw is supposed to be independent,' Frédéric Giroire, a mathematician with the French National Centre for Scientific Research, said. 'Past results shouldn't influence future outcomes.' That has long meant that the probability of any number repeating is unlikely to appear predictably no matter how many times is has come up before. But there could be very real differences in the actual lottery process, such as in the equipment used, which could help predictions. Something as simple as lottery balls that may be physically different or arranged differently could change the outcome. That might be a way for AI to very quickly find differences that a human might not, and give one theory more likelihood to succeed than another. 'Subtle irregularities—such as a heavier ball or imperfect mixing—might exist,' Giroire said. 'If AI detects flaws in the draw mechanism, that could be more significant than claiming it can predict numbers.' While AI can analyze patterns and make predictions in many areas, accurately predicting Powerball numbers likely remains impossible. Here's why: Still, despite all the hullabaloo, experts have been quick to caution that this so far has been a one-off win. 'No detailed methodology has been disclosed,' Laura Wozniak, a statistician at MIT, told MSN. 'The results could merely be luck—favorable coincidences that don't hold up over time.' For a breakthrough to be credible, a theory would have to be tested repeatedly under controlled conditions, with transparent protocols and consistent results. That means that the best approach to the lottery is to treat it as a game of complete and total chance. No model or algorithm can reliably predict the random outcome of a Powerball draw—yet.
Washington Post
11 hours ago
- Washington Post
Arctic melting slowed in the past two decades. Is that a good sign?
The melting of Arctic ice has been one of the most profound ripple effects from climate change, an impact often depicted with images of a lone polar bear stranded on a dwindling piece of sea ice. Now, a new study has found that ice has been melting slower over the past two decades across all seasons — even under a record hot atmosphere. From 2005 to 2024, scientists say Arctic sea ice has been declining at its slowest rate for any 20-year period since satellite measurements began in 1979. Using two different datasets, the team found that the melt rate over the past 20 years has been at least twice as slow as the longer-term rate. The slowdown is temporary, models show. It may continue for another 5 to 10 years, and afterward, sea ice may melt faster than the long-term average — offsetting any short reprieve that we may have had. 'Even though there is increased emissions [and] increased global temperatures, you can still get periods where you have very minimal loss of Arctic sea ice for sustained periods,' said Mark England, lead author of the study published Wednesday in Geophysical Research Letters. Here's what to know about variations in how ice declines in the Arctic. Let's boil the factors influencing Earth's climate down to a simple equation: humans and the planet's natural cycles. The most common driver in Earth's natural cycles is the difference in how much energy is exchanged between the ocean and atmosphere, said Alex Crawford, an assistant professor of environment and geography at University of Manitoba in Canada who was not involved in the study. 'There's always energy going back and forth between the atmosphere and ocean,' Crawford said. 'For various reasons, the oceans can store much, much more energy than the atmosphere.' In some years, he said the world's oceans take in a little more energy than normal, which will make the global atmosphere cooler than normal. If the oceans take in a little less energy than normal, then the global atmosphere will be warmer than normal. 'The most famous example of this is El Niño and La Niña, but there's also longer-term variability that can take place over several decades and either amplify (e.g., the 2010s) or weaken (e.g., the 2000s) the global warming trend,' Crawford said. 'This is all normal.' Over the past two decades, England said the planet's natural cycles perhaps helped create cooler waters around the Arctic that favored sea ice growth. Still, added heat from human activities has counteracted this growth and led to an overall deficit. For perspective, without climate change, these natural variations may have even caused the sea ice to grow in these past two decades, England said. Even under high greenhouse gas emissions, scientists have found that periodic slowdowns do occur. In the study, the team analyzed past climate models that showed these slower ice losses over the past two decades. They found these slowdowns occurred about 20 percent of the time in simulations. 'This isn't some infrequent rare event. This is something which should be expected as a part of the way that the climate system evolves,' said England, who conducted the study as a senior research fellow at the University of Exeter and is now an assistant professor at UC Irvine. In addition, the team found the current slowdown has a 50 percent chance of lasting for five more years and a 25 percent chance of lasting another 10 years. Polar scientist Alexandra Jahn, who was not involved in the research, said her own work showed slower Arctic sea ice melt occurred commonly across 10-year periods — even in the presence of human-caused warming. After this slowdown episode ends, Jahn said 'eventually we'll see a decline again.' Multiple factors make clear that climate change is not slowing down. Carbon dioxide concentrations are still at their highest levels in human history, growing at its fastest rate in our observed records. Earth's hottest years have all occurred in just the past decade, with multiple record years in the Arctic. 'If you look at global temperatures, they are definitely not slowing down,' England said. 'The debate now is whether they are speeding up.' Additionally, climate models showed these slowdowns are possible even under a continued warming world. Similar to the past two decades, Earth's natural cycles may favor more ice growth and slow down melting. Think of the Arctic sea ice trend like a ball rolling down a hill, explained climate scientist Ed Hawkins. The ball may hit some bumps that slow it down, but it will be heading toward the bottom as greenhouse gas emissions continue. Even though the rate of Arctic ice melt has slowed, ice is still declining in large quantities. Using two different datasets, study authors found the melt rate over the past 20 years has been around 0.35 and 0.29 million square kilometers per decade (depending the dataset). Since 2010, the team found the volume of ice loss amounted to about 0.4 million cubic kilometers cubed each decade. Overall, sea ice conditions at the end of the summer are at least 33 percent lower now than they were 45 years ago. Although the Arctic is low, England said it's better than the area being completely ice free. But he expects an accelerated loss once this period subsides. On average, he said sea ice loss has amounted to around 0.8 million square kilometers per decade over the long term. The subsequent ice melt could be 0.6 million square kilometers per decade faster than the broader long-term decline, the study found. 'This temporary period can't go on forever,' England said. 'It's bit like a kind of sugar rush. It feels good … and at some point it will kind of crash.'
Forbes
14 hours ago
- Forbes
Updated Carbon Law Reveals: Emissions Must Drop 12% Per Year
The world is rapidly running out of time to stop catastrophic climate impacts. According to an investigation by Swedish NGO, Klimatkollen, carbon emissions must be halved by 2030 for a chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. That is equivalent to emission reductions of about 12 % t per year. This investigation, in collaboration with the Exponential Roadmap Initiative, seeks to answer what pace of emission cuts is needed to meet Paris Agreement targets starting in 2025. I A recent investigation by Swedish NGO, Klimatkollen, calculated that, starting in 2025, the world must halve emissions every five years. This is a pace equivalent to emission cuts of around 12% per year. But even if the world manages to adhere to the new 12% a year reduction pace, the future is not a safe place. The calculation implies only a 50/50 chance of limiting global warming to about 1.5°C, based on a global carbon budget of 305 billion tons of CO₂, as well as 5.5 billion tons of CO₂ in remaining residual emissions by 2050 that can be offset by carbon capture and storage. And the calculation does not take into account one of the core principles in the Paris Agreement: that those with more responsibility and capability should go faster. Frida Berry Eklund, co-founder of Klimatkollen and EU Climate Pact Ambassador, states: 'Citizens have a right to know what science-based emission cuts in line with 1.5°C means in practice, to be able to hold decision makers in business and governments to account. We need to focus on what's needed, not what's politically possible, to give our children a fighting chance of survival." Carbon Law is a scientifically based framework presented by Professor Johan Rockström, Johan Falk, and Owen Gaffney in 2017, inspired by Moore's law of computer development, which provides the rule of thumb – halving emissions every decade from 2020 onwards. However, we are now five years behind schedule as global emissions continue to rise, hence the new calculations. The updated Carbon Law calculations show what is required at the global level to limit global warming to 1.5 C: a halving of emissions every five years starting 2025. But the rule of thumb annual emission cuts of 12% , can also be a guiding light for citizens to hold countries, companies, and organizations to account. Owen Gaffney, co-founder of the Exponential Roadmap Initiative says: 'The remaining carbon dioxide budget for 1.5°C is currently being consumed at a rate of 1% every month. To avoid critical tipping points in the climate systems, emissions must be reduced as quickly as possible while also avoiding economic collapse. That we reached 1.5°C last year is a clear signal that we must intensify our efforts to protect the Earth's climate system.' It is clear that the world is rapidly running out of time to stop catastrophic climate impacts. But pushing for emission cuts of 12% annually presents a science-aligned rule of thumb for citizens everywhere to hold decision makers to account. We need deep emission reductions—now. Core Concept of the Carbon Law: 1. Halve global CO₂ emissions every decade from 2020 onward (according to the updated calculations this now means halving every five years from 2025) 2. Double carbon removal technologies and capacity every decade 3. Reach net-zero emissions by around 2050 According to Frida Berry Eklund, "The strength of the 12% emission cuts per year number is that it gives citizens, companies and countries, a clear science-aligned rule of thumb to compare climate action to. However, the rule of thumb does not take into account the core principle of the Paris Agreement, that those with high historical emissions and ability to transition need to cut emissions faster." With another recent study stating that 89 % of the global population is in favor of stronger climate policies and the Actuaries Climate Risk Index warning of global economic collapse if we abstain from reducing the emissions, the green light cannot be any greener for the politicians to act.
