Italian glacier shrinking too fast to study
After 2025'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 on Monday that it would use drone imagery and remote sensing to keep track of the ongoing shrinkage.
Geologists say that the Ventina glacier has already lost 1.7km 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 metres in the past 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 fuelling 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 per cent 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 231 billion tonnes annually from 2000 to 2011, but that quickened to about 314 billion tonnes a year over about the next decade.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
18 hours ago
- Perth Now
Italian glacier shrinking too fast to study
Italy's Ventina glacier, one of the biggest in northern Lombardy, has melted so much due to climate change that geologists can no longer measure it the way they have for the past 130 years. After 2025'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 on Monday that it would use drone imagery and remote sensing to keep track of the ongoing shrinkage. Geologists say that the Ventina glacier has already lost 1.7km 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 metres in the past 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 fuelling 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 per cent 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 231 billion tonnes annually from 2000 to 2011, but that quickened to about 314 billion tonnes a year over about the next decade.
The Advertiser
07-08-2025
- The Advertiser
Over half of US calories are from ultra-processed foods
Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new report. Nutrition research has shown for years that ultra-processed foods make up a big chunk of the US diet, especially for kids and teens. For the first time, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023. Overall, about 55 per cent of total calories consumed by Americans age one and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53 per cent of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62 per cent. The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56 per cent in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66 per cent for kids in 2017-2018. Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. Concern over ultra-processed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fibre and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods - such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables - than ultra-processed foods. Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be "hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fibre and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats," the CDC report said. US health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions "accurately capture" the range of foods that may affect health. The US Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the US food supply. Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new report. Nutrition research has shown for years that ultra-processed foods make up a big chunk of the US diet, especially for kids and teens. For the first time, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023. Overall, about 55 per cent of total calories consumed by Americans age one and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53 per cent of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62 per cent. The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56 per cent in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66 per cent for kids in 2017-2018. Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. Concern over ultra-processed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fibre and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods - such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables - than ultra-processed foods. Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be "hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fibre and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats," the CDC report said. US health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions "accurately capture" the range of foods that may affect health. The US Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the US food supply. Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new report. Nutrition research has shown for years that ultra-processed foods make up a big chunk of the US diet, especially for kids and teens. For the first time, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023. Overall, about 55 per cent of total calories consumed by Americans age one and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53 per cent of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62 per cent. The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56 per cent in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66 per cent for kids in 2017-2018. Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. Concern over ultra-processed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fibre and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods - such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables - than ultra-processed foods. Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be "hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fibre and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats," the CDC report said. US health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions "accurately capture" the range of foods that may affect health. The US Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the US food supply. Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new report. Nutrition research has shown for years that ultra-processed foods make up a big chunk of the US diet, especially for kids and teens. For the first time, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023. Overall, about 55 per cent of total calories consumed by Americans age one and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53 per cent of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62 per cent. The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56 per cent in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66 per cent for kids in 2017-2018. Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. Concern over ultra-processed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fibre and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods - such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables - than ultra-processed foods. Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be "hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fibre and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats," the CDC report said. US health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions "accurately capture" the range of foods that may affect health. The US Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the US food supply.
Sydney Morning Herald
14-07-2025
- Sydney Morning Herald
Mark Zuckerberg's $150 million job offers are spreading fear
Nothing says talent war like a $US100 million ($153 million) job offer. Mark Zuckerberg has been on a hiring blitz for AI's most revered scientists, sending them cold emails and offering them roles in his new Superintelligence Labs division whose goal is nothing less than to build artificial-intelligence software that's smarter than humans. You might wonder why the Meta chief executive officer, whose company already prints money from clever ad targeting and recommendation software, needs to build god-like AI, but you'd be underestimating the hottest prize in tech, which Alphabet's Google and OpenAI have been vying to win. Zuckerberg is now coming from behind with a viable shot at getting there first. Having attracted some of AI's top brains with huge sums and previous pledges to make AI free for all and potentially more impactful, he's now created momentum among other leading scientists who see his team as having a statistically higher chance of building 'super-intelligent' AI systems before anyone else. In just the last month, Zuckerberg has poached leading OpenAI scientist Lucas Beyer, who co-created the vision transformer; Ruoming Pang, who led Apple's efforts at building AI models; and Alexandr Wang, the former CEO of Scale AI who now co-leads Meta's Superintelligence Labs. In Wang's case, the cost to Meta was billions. But the result seems to be a halo effect as other big names in the field join, such as investor Nat Friedman and Daniel Gross, the CEO of Ilya Sutskever's startup Safe Superintelligence, and the remaining top talent starts to fear missing out on being the first to build super-intelligent AI. Of course, money is a great motivator, but many of these researchers are already wealthy, and their field is so ideologically charged and so close-knit that they're motivated by the glory of being published in Nature or having a hand in the biggest new AI model, just as much they are by the prospect of yachts and mansions. Zuckerberg's public commitment to open-source AI with his Llama model has already attracted scientists who believe such systems can have a more democratising impact if they're free for all. OpenAI made a similar bet early on, sharing much of its research freely 'for recruitment purposes,' according to its then-chief scientist Sutskever, before taking that work behind closed doors. Investors have long questioned Zuckerberg's willingness to invest in advanced AI models and then give them away, and the lacklustre performance of Llama's most recent models may put pressure on the Meta CEO to consider more commercial approaches to AI. Meta's models lag those of Google DeepMind and OpenAI — a variant is ranked at 17 in one real-time leaderboard — and they're more expensive to run. Many researchers reckon AI can eventually solve intractable human problems like ageing, climate change and cancer, and that, overwhelmingly through history, technology has been a net good for humanity. But for many, the desire to build that technology first is even more powerful, a dynamic not so different to the field of cancer research where scientists want to win the race to a cure as much as they want to find cures at all.
