Time's Up

Throughout the course of writing this blog, I was inundated with abrupt headlines such as “Did climate change cause the Haiti earthquake?” and “Does climate change mean more tsunamis?”. These reports tended to feature a battle between environmentalists who propose that the increase in natural hazards is yet another unintentional repercussion of fossil fuel consumption, and their opposition who mock them for patent fear-mongering. Ultimately, neither side is proven wrong. The outcome of my research has steered me to the conclusion that the concept of climate change affecting crustal processes should not be ridiculed, but neither should it be wholly supported.  A contradiction exists whereby the isostatic rebound theory provides rationality to the link between climate change and the geosphere, despite being highly unlikely to have been the cause of recent extreme events.

It is not surprising that many view this topic with suspicion. After all, climate change notoriously involves the increase of global average temperatures bringing about meteorological imbalances linked to droughts, storms, melting ice caps etc. What lies behind this apparent misconception is very interesting science. I have investigated recent extreme events such as the Haiti earthquake, the Japanese tsunami and the Eyjafjallojokull eruption and can collectively include that these were triggered by a force stronger than climate change. In each instance, the catastrophe has occurred in a tectonically active region where the fault rupture is purely a result of a typical return period. The broader frequency of earthquakes shows no change, which suggests that it must be our awareness. Today, technology and connectedness allow tectonic activity to be monitored and reported instantly. Additionally, the expansion of urban cities means that the destruction caused by a catastrophic event appears far more deadly, and this means you’re likely to witness more coverage of global earthquakes and eruptions on the evening news.

Moreover, in relation to the aforementioned recent catastrophes, no significant climate evidence can be effectively compared. Having said this, my post that covered fracking in the UK presents undisputable evidence of how human drilling operations can induce minor tremors. Certainly, this example has me persuaded that mankind’s interference on crustal dynamics should not be underestimated.  The human mastery of the earth’s surface using high-tech machinery (my term for this being ‘Techno-tonics”) is detrimental and is a likely to become a prominent characteristic of the anthropocene.

In summary, there is evidence that a naturally occurring climate change in the past was to blame for periods of increased tectonic activity, which coincided spatially and temporally with mass glacial melt. It therefore seems sensible not to dismiss the claim that anthropogenic climate change could be doing the same today. I set out to assemble evidence that could contradict my initially sceptical stance on the topic. After an intensive plunge into the literature, a wide review of news stories and a highly profitable chat with Bill McGuire I have found myself sympathetic to the environmentalists. It is far more absurd to deny the geospheric link to climate than to endorse it. No, we do not face an apocalyptic threat of a furious planet retaliating to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect; in fact it is probable that most of us will never experience a climate-driven natural hazard. Conclusively, whilst the science is yet to quantify the relationship between climate and hazards as well as the fact that any consequence will be minimal, I have reason to believe that in certain regions we could see more climate change-related events.

"The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were"
 - John F. Kennedy


Animals & Earthquakes

Successful earthquake prediction is often deemed impossible. At least that is what I deduced having read Susan Hough’s book ‘Predicting the Unpredictable: The Tumultuous Science ofEarthquake Prediction’, which is a truly fascinating read covering struggles faced by seismologists who endeavour to accurately forecast the next Big One. A rather unusual chapter in the book covered alternative methods of earthquake prediction; I found the theory that animal behaviour has been used to foresee upcoming earthquake events particularly fascinating. For this reason, I have attached a video that narrates geologist Jim Berkland’s unusual methods.  

False Alarm?

Having presented a plethora of cases which seem to support the notion that climate change is capable of triggering geological hazards, I would like to reiterate the facts expressed by non-believers.

1. Whilst the effects of climate change on seismic activity in the past may be more-or-less confirmed via paleo records, we are yet to quantify how much seismic activity to expect as a result of contemporary, anthropogenic climate change.

2.  No one has tried to deny that any foreseeable ramification will not impact the majority. Both Bill McGuire of UCL and Patrick We of the University of Calgary have stated that so far, the effect has been limited to small, low-level clusters of earthquakes in Alaska and Greenland. Certainly, the crustal rebound theory implies that fracturing can move along a fault to reach places further away from the polar regions, however this is purely speculation and remains untested and unproven.

3. Patrick Wu doubts that deglaciation is powerful enough to trigger a really large quake i.e. magnitude 8 or higher. Meltwater-driven earthquakes tend to be between magnitudes 5 -7.

4. Deglaciation is clearly unable to generate an earthquake in an area that has not undergone some level of seismic activity in the past. Whilst tectonics can actually cause lithospheric fracturing, deglaciation is only able to reactivate a fault and not to create one.

5. Researchers have spotted small, increases in small, localised earthquakes in the far Northern latitudes, but so far the evidence has been far from dramatic or mysterious and can be explained purely by considering the cyclical nature of seismic activity and earthquake clustering.

A Lesson From The Pleistocene

A study on Dyngjufjoll volcanic centre by Sigvaldason (2002) has investigated the relationship between crustal rebound and glacier melting at the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary. Despite being impossible to attribute geological hazards during that epoch to humans, an understanding on how climate change influences crustal dynamics is essential when looking forward into the anthropocene. In central Iceland, ice thickness amounts to 1,500-2,000 m at peak glaciation. This loading produces a 400-500 m depression on the crust. After a temperature increase and a reduction of ice load via glacial melting, rapid crustal rebound ensued as a result of low mantle viscosity at an average uplift rate of almost half a metre per year. 

Tephrachoronological dating has been effective in revealing the high volcanic production rate. For example, a pumice deposit was used as a marker that was found within a sediment horizon, which signifies the Plinian rhyolitic eruption that was dated at roughly 10 ka. At the time of this eruption, volcanic activity was successive and coincides when glaciers retreated from the coastal areas of Iceland. Additionally, rhyolitic pumice was found to be distributed amongst dated tephra layers along the north and east coasts of the country. Ultimately, the likely cause of the Plinian eruption is the pressure release that occurred in response to glacial melting which triggered volatile supersaturation. The Dyngjufjoll is a complex Pleistocene volcanic structure which provides a useful case study of how the process of glacial melt, tectonic movement and crustal rebound resulted in a volcanic productivity of almost 30 times the present rate. 

The Haiti Conspiracy

Having previously covered the Haiti quake and concluded that climate was not the trigger, I was astonished to discover recently that many speculative theorists blame neither climate nor tectonics. In fact, they point the finger directly to the US government! It has emerged that the US are in possession of technology capable of manipulating climate (you are probably familiar with the geoengineering concept of cloud seeding), earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Certain articles go as far as calling their readers 'naive' to trust that the Haiti earthquake was anything other than a technological attack. These paranoid cynics have invented ridiculous notions such as 'an act of eco-terrorism'.

The main blame is placed upon the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) which is a scheme jointly funded by US Air Force, the US Navy and the University of Alaska (where it is situated). According to the alarmists, HAARP purposely triggered the earthquake in Haiti to allow the US military to savagely pillage Haiti's resources. This was likened to the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan - only this story reliance on the launch of a magnitude 7.0 disaster and the immediate loss of over 200,000 innocent lives. Could the US government really be THAT corrupt? 

The conspiracy movement was initiated by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez who argues for the existence of a 'tectonic weapon'. He claims its use on Haiti was merely a test run for its eventual goal of wiping out Iraq. Personally, my stance in this debate is to firmly assert that it is all absurd. Considering that it has been disproved that nuclear bombs can instigate crustal reflexes, I would doubt that the US possess an even stronger weapon. There is numerous articles that do contest the existence of seismic weapons. Ultimately, the information surrounding this topic are purely speculation and I do not expect to stumble across a decisive answer. It does however probe one to reflect on the human mastery over geological hazards. If seismic weapons do exist then why is it so hard to believe that anthropogenic hazards are possible? And do these advancements in technology suggest a way to dominate crustal forces in the future?

"One defends when his strength is inadaquate, he attacks when it is abundant" - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Project Infopowerment by Scott Owen

Scott Owen hosts a radio podcast and YouTube channel called 'Believers Underground'. The primary topic he covers is the post-glacial rebound theory and he has been called upon to explain this phenomenon in several online videos. Owen often alludes to pessimistic notions of sinking landmasses however his justifications about post-glacial melt impacts is intriguing. A particularly useful broadcast to listen to features Scott Owen as a guest on another online climate channel talking about isostatic rebound in response to glacial melt. 

I have included a link to the Believers Underground blog site below. The particular podcast that I have linked is one i recommend as it covers the elaborate topic of MEGA quakes and SUPER volcanoes! Scott Owen takes a decisive controversial stance whereby he candidly blames the elite's disregard for humanity for destroying our planet.

http://believersunderground.whynotnews.eu/?p=30

All Quiet on the Blogosphere

I have come to notice that there is very meagre amount of attention on the internet to the field of climate change science surrounding its potential to increase the frequency of catastrophic events. It is somewhat surprising that despite #climatechange being amongst the top ten trending topics on twitter in 2011, I have struggled to find electronic awareness on the geological impact. Having said this, this realm of science remains in its infancy having been first pioneered only relatively recently. Out of the few mentions I found on twitter, below is an example of futurologists are beginning to introduce the concept:

Terminology such as 'isostatic rebound' are only just being incorporated into climate change discourse. Obviously, the science behind global warming causing more extreme weather conditions (hurricanes, droughts etc) is thoroughly tested and widely acknowledged. However surely when this idea was first proposed it took a while before it was understood and accepted? Whilst awareness appears to be lacking on geological impacts, already keen scientists are managing to provoke interest by means of twitter:

'Global Rumblings' is a compelling blogspot site which asks - '2012 - Will it change the world as we know it? Why so many earthquakes? Tornadoes? Disasters?' Its purpose is to provide commentary on the causes, impacts and patterns of contemporary disasters. The aptly titled blog focuses on earthquake activity however extends to all forms of worldwide disturbances ranging from supervolcano eruptions to fireballs in space. Global Rumblings appears to be the primary source for up to date hazard information in the blogosphere and one particular reason for its mention is for the post 'Earthquakes and Climate' which was posted in March 2011. This segment was written two years after the author first theorised about earthquakes and climate in an article published in 2009. Within the two years, a significant amount of work has been done (enough in fact to allow me to produce a blog solely dedicated to the research) that shows the field of science is growing. Given another two years I predict far more evidence will have been obtained and the topic's obscurity will be a thing of the past.