September 25, 2008

Tragic Results of Meat Eating



Some of the Tragic Results of Meat Eating:

Research has shown that eating meat can cause some of the following diseases:

  • High blood pressure
  • Heart disease
  • Diabetes
  • Stroke
  • Parkinson’s disease
  • Bladder cancer
  • Colon cancer
  • Prostate and ovarian cancer
  • Lung, skin and kidney cancer
  • Breast cancer.
  • Blue tongue disease
  • E coli
  • Salmonella (over 2300 types possible)
  • Bird flu
  • Mad cow disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy)
  • Pig's disease (PMWS)
  • Shellfish poisoning
  • Listeriosis
  • Pre-eclampsia
  • Campylobacter
PLUS MORE…

SOME OF THE COSTS OF MEAT EATING:

HEART DISEASE
  • Over 17 million lives lost globally each year
  • Cost of cardiovascular disease is at least US$1 trillion a year
CANCER
  • Over 1 million new colon cancer patients diagnosed each year
  • More than 600,000 colon cancer-related mortalities annually
  • In the United States alone, colon cancer treatment costs about US$6.5 billion.
  • Millions of people are newly diagnosed with other meat-related cancers every year.
DIABETES
  • 246 million people are affected worldwide
  • An estimated US$174 billion spent each year on treatment
OBESITY
  • Worldwide 1.6 billion adults are overweight with 400 million more who are obese
  • Costs US$93 billion each year for medical expenses in the United States alone
  • At least 2.6 million people die annually from problems related to being overweight or obese
ENVIRONMENTAL
  • Use up to 70% of clean water
  • Pollute most of the water bodies
  • Deforest the lungs of the Earth
  • Use up 90% of the world's cereal
  • Cause world hunger & wars
  • 80% cause of global warming
PLUS MORE…
Supreme Master Ching Hai
February 28, 2008 - Austria
MASTER: Suppose you know something is poisonous to your children; will you deliberately give it to them, to harm them? No! So now all the evidence points out that meat is also poisonous and alcohol is bad. Just ban them outright. There’s no more discussion.

Make it your mission in life, to inform people about the danger of eating meat, and show them the solution.

Some Benefits of a Vegetarian Diet:
  • Lower blood pressure
  • Lower cholesterol levels
  • Reduce Type 2 diabetes
  • Prevent stroke conditions
  • Reverse atherosclerosis
  • Reduce heart disease risk 50%
  • Reduce heart surgery risk 80%
  • Prevent many forms of cancer
  • Stronger immune system
  • Increase life expectancy up to 15 years
  • Higher IQ
Conserve up to 70% clean water
Save over 70% of the Amazonian rainforest from clearance for animal grazing
A solution for world hunger:
  • Free up 3,433 million hectares of land annually
  • Free up 760 million tons of grain every year (half the world’s grain supply)
Consume 2/3 less fossil fuels than those used for meat production
Reduce pollution from untreated animal waste
Maintain cleaner air
Save 4.5 tons of emissions per US household per year
Stop 80% of global warming
PLUS MORE…

SAVE YOUR LIFE:
GO VEG. BE GREEN.


SOURCES:

  • Supreme Master Ching Hai
  • UN Food and Agriculture Organization
  • American Dietetic Association
  • Stockholm International Water Institute
  • Smithsonian Institution
  • Carnegie Mellon University

Dr. Rajendra Pachauri,Chief of UN IPCC on a Win-Win Situation for the Planet: Go Vegetarian!



SupremeMasterTV: From Supreme Master Television, my question is for Dr. Pachauri. You once made a plea saying “Please eat less meat; meat is a very carbon intensive commodity.” Please can you explain to our global viewers, how eating less meat will help to curb global warming?

Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Well if you look at the entire commercialized meat cycle, let’s start with the killing of the animal itself. It has to be preserved, in a cool environment, and today this is a global business, we not only need refrigeration at source, we also need refrigeration at transportation. And then all the meat is stored in warehouses, from where it goes to retail outlets. And in retail outlets it’s kept again under refrigeration.

People buy meat, they buy a whole lot of it, take it home. Refrigerators have larger and larger freezers now. Why? Because you need to preserve meat. And I am not even talking about clearing of forest for pasture land! So if you were to take into account the entire chain, the entire cycle of meat production and consumption, it’s hugely intensive in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. And therefore, I always say that if you eat less meat you would be healthier and so would the planet!

VOICE: Dr. Pachauri later granted Supreme Master Television an interview, further sharing his advice.

Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: I think it would help the global community enormously, if we consume less meat. But I am only highlighting the fact that the entire meat cycle is very very intensive, in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. I would say Go Veg, Be Green and save our planet! And I'd like to say this to Supreme Master Television: Best wishes for your endeavors towards a sustainable world. Thank you.

VOICE: Thank you Dr. Rajendra Pachauri and all caring leaders of the future of our climate and our world environment. May we all rise to the task of reducing our carbon footprints by turning to healthier plant-based diets.

Introducing a Climate Friendly Diet: An Interview with Dr. Annika Carlsson-Kanyama



Welcome to Healthy Living on Supreme Master Television.

Today the urgent need to reverse climate change is widely recognized around the world, and many have come to realize that the most effective and immediate individual action is to adopt a nutritious, vegetarian, meaning animal-free, diet.

Studies on the relationship between a plant-based diet and a sustainable environment have opened up new frontiers for scientific research and presented new food choices in everyday life.
On this episode of Healthy Living, we speak with Dr. Annika Carlsson-Kanyama, a prominent scientist from Sweden’s Royal Institute of Technology.

Currently a researcher and project leader at the Energy and Environmental Security Group/FOI, in Stockholm, Dr. Carlsson-Kanyama also works an associate professor at the Department of Industrial Ecology.

She earned her PhD at Lund University and has written numerous articles about the environmental impacts of human consumption and production patterns.

Let’s now meet Dr. Carlsson-Kanyama.
SupremeMasterTV: You talked about the sources of greenhouse gases as being methane and also carbon.
Annika: Nitrous oxide; we add that too when nitrous oxide has to do with the production of nitrogen fertilizers, applying them and taking care of the manure.

So when you have cattle or pigs or whatever, you have to add the emissions of nitrous oxide as well.

Annika: They are much more potent, in a hundred-year perspective. Nitrous oxide is almost 300 times as potent as carbon dioxide, while I think methane is around 50 or 60 times as potent. So there is really a huge difference.

Annika: These two gases have caused quite a lot of the global warming already. And they are intimately related to the agricultural sector and to the livestock industry, actually.

I could refer to a study made by the Food and Agricultural Organization in late 2006, where they said that 18% of the global greenhouse-gas emissions are emitted by the animal industry.

That is more than all the cars in the world together, and a large part of that 18% is nitrous oxide and methane emissions actually.

So it is a big problem. And I think also, in the public debate about how consumers can mitigate climate change, you could drive your car less, you could have energy-efficient light bulbs, but eating less meat or eating less food that pollutes a lot in terms of emissions of greenhouse gases is hardly mentioned.

And it’s very important at least to raise awareness among consumers of this.
SupremeMasterTV: Can you walk us through the life cycle of the carbon emissions of red meat, versus a vegetable, a bean-based diet.
Annika: First of all, if you start with a bean, the bean life cycle, it starts with a growing bean somewhere on a field. A tractor is plowing the field, weeding, harvesting and so on, and there are emissions of carbon dioxide because diesel is used in the tractor.

We always calculate the inputs, the emissions from fertilizer production, if any; after that there is transportation, drying, there is packaging, there is retailing, there is transportation again.

These beans are taken home, they are cooked. Some electricity and gas are used and so on. And then you can also proceed to calculate the use for washing the
dirty pot if you want to.

So that’s a very simple life cycle, actually. If you look at the lifecycle of meat, any kind of meat, it starts in the same way; by producing beans, for example, soya beans, and producing, it could be rye, wheat or corn, anything.

And these products are then made into feed and fed to the animals in a pen or in a stable; slaughterhouse, chilling, packaging, retailing and finally being cooked.

So the lifecycle of meat is much more complicated than for any vegetarian product because it involves first producing the vegetable products that are then converted into feed. And that’s partly why it’s much more polluting to produce beef or pork or chicken than a vegetarian product.

Because sometimes there are ten kilos of feed needed to produce one kilo of beef, for example, so there are large emissions of carbon dioxide, emissions of methane from the stomachs of the animals.
And we sort of add up all these emissions and it turns out that, for example, for one kilo of beef compared to one kilo of beans there can be a difference of a factor of 40 in terms of emissions of greenhouse gases per kilo.

HOST: When Healthy Living returns, we will continue our discussion with Dr. Carlsson-Kanyama on how our diet affects the environment. You are watching Supreme Master Television, please stay tuned.

HOST: On today’s Healthy Living, Dr. Annika Carlsson-Kanyama discusses the healthy, climate-friendly diet. One of her pioneering articles entitled, Climate change and dietary choices – How can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced?,

clearly establishes that a vegetarian, meaning animal-free diet, based on domestic food sources produces the lowest level of emissions for the highest level of nutritional value.

Annika: I’m very curious to see if the issue of an environmentally-friendly diet pattern is going to surface on the policy agenda.

SupremeMasterTV: How is it changing in Europe?

Annika: It is changing, actually, because I think it’s dawning upon us more and more that climate change may eventually, if we don’t curb emissions, cause such a challenge to society that we can’t cope.

I mean the latest projections or scenarios from the IPCC show that if emissions continue to increase, we may have a global temperature rise of more than six degrees by the end of this century.

That is a bigger difference than the last ice age, minus five degrees. We can’t even imagine that kind of world. There is a risk that sea levels will rise several meters during this century if things go bad, and we don’t want that to happen, absolutely not. That would be a disaster; we can’t imagine how we would cope with that.
So we have to look into new areas for mitigating climate change and we have to do it quickly. And diet, dietary pattern is one important step.

SupremeMasterTV: So can you tell us a little bit about how you help people to put together a climate-friendly diet?

Annika: I think when you can give some fairly simple and robust advice to people and that is to, in a climate-friendly diet, avoid red meat, for example. And also if you pick vegetables, pick those that are not transported by plane;

the same goes for fruit. And avoid those grown in greenhouses, heated greenhouses during the winter. And I think the most important advice is to eat the food you bring home; don’t throw it away, because that’s a waste of resources. So I think if you stick to this simple advice I think you can do a lot.

Annika: I think nowadays it’s very difficult for consumers to make decisions. If you know the way things grow, you know that if you see a long, green cucumber

in the winter in Sweden, you know that it has been grown in a greenhouse because it has to get 25˚C of temperature and clearly can not be grown outside in the winter in Sweden, and it can not be stored. We have other vegetables that can be stored throughout the winter if they are grown in summer, and they are very climate friendly.

Like for example, carrots or potatoes or onions or leeks or whatever. These are vegetables you can eat all year round. But long transportation, even across the oceans, if carried out by boat, is very climate-friendly. There are not huge emissions for taking something by boat from New Zealand to Sweden or the UK.
So I think it’s very well, because if you eat vegetable products, you can eat imported stuff as long as you avoid those taken by plane.

That’s my opinion. It’s still very much more climate-friendly than to eat meat anyway.

SupremeMasterTV: How is it going in Sweden, with all your work?

Annika: Since 2007, there has been an enormous media interest in this kind of work.
I think the time has come where producers have to take responsibility to declare the carbon footprint or whatever on their products.

Because if you go into any store here, or anywhere, there are thousands of products, you know.
And the content changes, the origin of these products change, so it’s only the producers that can really tell us about the carbon footprint.

It’s not something a researcher or a research group can sort of carry out.
Annika: But I think the time has come. The Swedish government called the food industry to a meeting quite recently and said,

“We wish you to develop a carbon-labeling system for the products.” And so I don’t know what’s going to happen, but it’s really on the agenda now.

HOST: We thank you, Dr. Annika Carlsson-Kanyama, for your diligent research in raising the public’s awareness on the importance of a plant-based diet
to save the environment. Healthy Living airs every Monday on Supreme Master Television. Thank you for being with us today.

An Interview with Dr. Kirk Smith, Professor of Global Environmental Health at UC Berkeley


Part 1 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 36 MB )
Part 2 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 47 MB )

The effects of climate change is being felt all over the world - from increased severity and frequency of storms, rapid melting of glaciers, crop losses, and rising sea water levels, to name just a few. The golden state of California in the United States has experienced its own share of hardship from global warming such as droughts, heat waves, reduction of the snow pack in the Sierra Nevada mountain range.

Ranked as one of the top institutions of higher learning in the nation with 61 Nobel Laureates associated with the university, the University of California, Berkeley is pooling its vast resources of top scientists, researchers and professors to research and address the effects of global climate change.

Today, Supreme Master Television presents an interview with Dr. Kirk Smith, a professor of Global Environmental Health at UC Berkeley.

The university is also his alma mater where he received his bachelors, masters, and doctoral degrees.
Dr. Smith holds the Maxwell Endowed Chair in Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley.
He is also founder and coordinator of the campus-wide Masters Program in Health, Environment, and Development.
His research work focuses on environmental and health issues in developing countries, particularly those related to health-damaging and climate-changing air pollution, and includes ongoing field projects in India, China, Nepal, and Guatemala.

He serves on a number of national and international scientific advisory boards including those for the Global Action Plan for Pneumonia, the Global Energy Assessment, and the WHO Air Quality Guidelines. He is on the editorial boards of a range of international journals and has published over 250 scientific articles and 7 books.

In 1997, Dr. Smith was elected as a member of the US National Academy of Sciences, one of the highest honors awarded to US scientists by their peers.
Supreme Master TV: Hallo and thank you for joining us today on Planet Earth: Our Loving Home. Today we have the good fortune of speaking with Dr. Kirk Smith.

He's a professor at the University of California, Berkeley and his main focus is Global Environmental Health.
So welcome, Dr. Smith.

Dr. Smith: Thank you. It's very nice to be here.

Supreme Master TV: Can you explain a little bit about your background, how you got into this field, how many years you've been working in the field of climate change and how it impacts public health?

Dr. Smith: Well, actually I was trained initially as an astrophysicist and expected a career in that, but back in the 70's, I thought well, perhaps I should do something that was a bit more relevant to world issues. So I took a long trip out through Asia and the Pacific, saw the conditions in the third world of people living in poverty and terrible environmental conditions, and came back and decided to change my career, to use my scientific background,but in environmental health issues.

So I've been working on these issues now more than 30 years. In the case of climate change, of course we were aware of that during the 70's and 80's,

but I became convinced around 1990 that this was a serious problem and so devoted a portion of my research to climate change issues in the third world.

The effects of climate change are not only see in severity of weather but with continued research such as that of Dr. Smith's, it is becoming more evident the impacts global warming has on human health.

Dr. Smith: People hear about heat stress in cities, you know. Are there going to be more episodes like in Paris a few years ago, or in Chicago a couple of years ago and this kind of thing? That's one category of impact. Another is the shift in disease vectors now, not mainly mosquitoes,

but others as well. So if malaria exists because of mosquito population in a certain area of Africa, and doesn't go up the mountains of Africa because it's too cold, but if you change the temperature, the osquitoes will go further up to the mountains.And for example, some of the major cities in Africa were purposely set at places in the mountains to avoid malaria. Nairobi and Harar are a few good examples, big cities now. Well, they're starting to get malaria in Nairobi now.

And you're going to see more of that, the extension of the disease vectors. Another is increase in diarrhea because of warming of sewage [which] gets into the environment and the bugs can grow better and that's considered to be one of the impacts. Another is sea level rise, causing displacement of coastal populations with health impacts associated with that.

Another is that climate change will increase outdoor air pollution, particularly ozone, because it's currently a function of temperature and sunlight.

So even in California, it's expected that we'll have more outdoor air pollution because of climate change.

Supreme Master TV: And then what about lung-related illnesses, such as pneumonia? Number one, I'd like to ask, if there would be an increase such as this.

And also what about psychological stress? Is there an increase in psychological disorders due to the changes in the atmosphere? And do you see those increasing?

Dr. Smith: Well, of course, I was just seeing something the other day that somebody was looking at the very reporting about climate change is causing stress. Yes, you and I at this moment are causing stress for somebody. So, stress is not all negative. It can get people to act,

so maybe that's good. But obviously, there can be a negative side to it. I think the big stress is going to be in these refugee populations.

If you get displaced because there are droughts, displaced because there are floods, displaced because of sea level rise, that's a very stressful situation.

And even, if there are no dseases, there usually are with the refugee populations, there will be lots of psychological stress. And so I think that is an impact.

Through his research, Dr.Smith and other scientists have already seen the major impacts of climate change on the health of society's most vulnerable citizens - children in developing nations.
There have now been systematic studies on the health effects of climate change. They found that as of the year 2000, which is, you know,now sometime passed, there were about 150,000 premature deaths around the world from climate change already. Now that assessment is being redone as we speak. I'm on the committee;

we're sure it's going to be much larger now; but the problem is not the 150,000. It's the fact that it's growing, and we expect a lot more. It gives you an idea of the distribution around the world of this impact. And 88% of that impact is in Third World children, because they're the ones that are already vulnerable, they're the ones that are malnourished, they're the ones that don't have access to medical care, they're the ones that live in bad environments already. And so they are the ones that are going to be suffering from climate change health effects. Continue The world will be more colorless for us.

It's going to cost more because, you know, we have to protect ourselves, air conditioning and so on, sea level rise, and all of this, but we're not dying from it. But there are people who die in the world because of it. And the biggest group is Third World children. It's one of the things I haven't heard many people talk about. The fact is that the impact, in terms of health of climate change, is actually children, in particular children in Africa, India, the poor places in Latin America.

And it's because of malaria, it's because of diarrhea, it's because of malnutrition, or another effect of climate change on health is changes in the crop productivity in areas where they're already right at the level, right at the edge of malnutrition.

And that's a big impact as well. Continue Malaria, malnutrition, diarrhea and the increase in sea level rise,and the increase in hurricanes, you know, severe weather events, which have severe health effects, those things are considered real.

On the other hand, there are more subtle things. For example, if you change the precipitation, the rainfall and the temperature, you are going to change the pattern of pollens.

Supreme Master TV: So then this would lead to longer allergy seasons or…?

Dr. Smith: Yeah, longer allergy seasons, new forms of pollen coming in that people might be more allergic to [leading to] exacerbation of asthma. We already have a very high rate of asthma in this country and many countries. So those kinds of impacts, you know, are being looked at as well. Supreme Master TV: And we're already seeing evidence of this is what you're saying.

Dr. Smith: Yeah, there's some evidence of this.

Supreme Master TV: It's not out in the future. It's here now.

Dr. Smith: Yeah. It's starting now, right. And it'll just get more and more obvious.

The Vital Role of Arctic Sea Ice: An Interview with Drs. Ted Scambos & Mark Serreze




Part 1 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 37 MB )
Part 2 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 46 MB )
Part 3 Play with windows media
( 38 MB )

On February 28, the breakup of Antarctica's Wilkins ice shelf into the ocean, which measured 406 square kilometers, made headlines around the world.

This alarming discovering was made by Dr. Ted Scambos from satellite images. Dr. Scambos is the senior research scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado in the United States.

Dr. Mark Serreze is also a senior research scientist at NSIDC and a Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) fellow. He is a member of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society.

Dr. Serreze has published numerous reports on his findings of the Arctic's shrinking sea ice cover.
Currently, he is evaluating the causes for the decline in Arctic sea ice.

On today's Planet Earth: Our Loving Home, Drs. Scambos and Serreze, share their expertise in an interview with Supreme Master Television.

Let's now hear from Dr. Serreze on his research in the area of glaciology, polar science and what the implications of their discoveries of Arctic sea ice melt mean in terms of climate change.

Supreme Master TV: My first question is why the Arctic Sea ice is so important to keep the ecological balance of the earth?

Dr. Serreze: we think of the Arctic, we can think of it as the refrigerator of the Northern Hemisphere climate system. Now, of course, part of that refrigerator is just located far to the North so that the sun's rays don't strike as directly as they would in the Equatorial regions. But another big part of this is the existence of that sea ice cover itself.

It is reflective so most of the sun's energy that hits that surface is bounced right back up into space again, and keeps the Arctic cool. But now we are warming the system up, and what we are starting to do is lose that sea ice, that reflective sea ice.

We are changing the nature of that Arctic refrigerator. The thing is, is that everything in the climate system is coupled together. Eventually what happens in the Arctic influences what happens down here; I am talking say at middle latitudes like of the Unites States.

Supreme Master TV: When you think of losing ice in the Arctic, what's the biggest impact?

Dr. Serreze: When we think of losing Arctic ice, we can think of two components of the ice. One of them would be that ice which is locked up in the ice sheet, and we are talking here about Greenland.

Now when we start to melt down Greenland, that has an impact on the sea level and there's strong evidence that that is in fact happening right now.The other component of what we call the aqueous sphere in the Arctic, is the sea ice.

Supreme Master TV: I see.

Dr. Serreze: Now the melting of the sea ice, loss of the sea ice itself does not have an effect on the sea level. Because that ice was already floating, it's very different than Greenland. However, what we are talking about is loss of a very large area of a very white surface, this white surface.
Albedo is the reflectivity of a surface. Snow and ice if you could see it has high albedo, [and when] we lose that sea ice cover, we reduce that Albedo, we make that surface darker, [so it] absorbs more of the sun's energy, the Arctic heats up.

But everything is connected, so if we change the Arctic sea ice cover, we change these patterns of heating, the atmospheric circulation responds to changes in heating.

So the argument is, you lose that sea ice cover you start to impact things like patterns of weather, patterns of participation outside of the Arctic.

We think of the Arctic sometimes as this faraway place, what happens there doesn't matter, but we are starting to learn is that it indeed does matter.

Supreme Master TV: This is why they talk about feedback and that type of thing where it just goes in a circle, like a downward spiral.

Dr. Serreze: Exactly, this is the whole concept of feedback. Even our earliest climate models of circulations have been telling us that as we start to increase greenhouse gas concentrations it's in the Arctic where we are going to see the changes first and it's in the Arctic

where those changes are going to be doubly pronounced, and a large part of that sensitivity is due to these feedback processes.

The idea is that once you hit the system with something, the effect of it starts to snowball, and the most important feedback in the Arctic is associated with this change in albedo, especially associated with this ice cover.

We warm up the climate a little bit by putting atmospheric greenhouse gases in it, we melt some of this highly reflective snow and ice cover, that means more of the sun's energy is absorbed, the Arctic becomes warmer as a result, that means more of the snow and ice cover melts, the Arctic becomes even
warmer so it's a feedback that we call it, a process that feeds on itself.

HOST: Dr. Ted Scambos specializes in studying the glaciers of Antarctica. He was first to discover the collapse of the Wilkins ice shelf in Antarctica via satellite images and lead a team of international scientists to study the region.

Dr. Scambos was a contributor of the report, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis for the UN's Nobel Peace Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

He shares his knowledge on the significant role of ice in the polar regions here on Supreme Master elevision

Dr. Scambos: The only other component that's slightly different is the ozone hole in Antarctica, which is also caused by human activity, but the main event in 2002, I think, really was a turning point. It's an iconic image for saying that the Earth is changing because of warming; the blue patch of ice crumbling away, streaming across the ocean.

That's become an iconic image; it's been used hundreds of times by newspapers,books, magazine articles.
Supreme Master TV: There have been broke up of ice shelves that are much larger than that, still, in the past, in 1955 or something, I thought.

Dr. Scambos: In 1955, there was an iceberg that was sighted that was supposedly larger than the largest iceberg that's been mapped today.

I've looked at that newspaper story and I've looked at some of the ice shelves. That's normal, and Antarctica's been behaving that way for millions of years.

What's not normal is to see melt ponds on the surface, no sea ice in front of the ice shelf edge, and a sudden break-up, not just in one big piece, but crumbling down, disintegrating, absolutely blowing itself up within just a few weeks. The other thing is that the ice shelf doesn't recover from it.

There's no re-growth; there's no new shelf that starts to push out in the aftermath of one of these events.

HOST: The dramatic changes in the Arctic sea ice melts is a definite sign of the acceleration of global warming. Dr. Ted Scambos will further explain on other changes found in ice shelves of the polar regions when Planet Earth: Our Loving Home returns.Please stay tuned to Supreme Master Television.

Dr. Ted Scambos, senior research scientist at the University of Colorado's National Snow and Ice Data Center and the lead scientist who discovered the recent collapse of the Wilkins ice shelf speaks with Supreme Master Television.

Supreme Master TV: Do you see any immediate threat to the ice shelf now that you look at it?
Larsen A ice shelf fell off, right? And Larsen B already fell off recently, right? Are we watching C?


Dr. Scambos: Yes, there is a C, and there are plans to visit it as part of the International Polar Year.
There're two major efforts, one from Great Britain and a joint effort between Chile and the U.S. to visit Larsen C and set up measurements so that we know what it was like before it really began to retreat due to global warming. We thought that the only way that you would lose an ice shelf is part of global warming, but the only way you lose it is through this very slow process of calving and surface melting.

You have to wait for the warmth to reach the point where from the bottom of melting by the ocean and from the top of melting by the air, that both of those things to conspire to thin the ice shelf to zero.

But we didn't anticipate that there was this runaway process of fracturing that happens once you get the top soaked with water, the water actually acts to blow the ice shelf apart. Not by frost heat , this is something people in the north are familiar with, rocks can be split open by a film of water that gets into the crack.
It's not quite the same process. (Okay.)

If you get a tall column of water there's quite a bit of pressure at the bottom. And since ice is less dense than water or ice floats on water, the ice doesn't have the same level of pressure;

it's not as dense. So, at a bottom of a crevasse, it begins to fill with water because there's no water on the surface. At the bottom of that crevasse, you get to a point where the pressure is so high that just the weight of the heavy water inside the lighter ice is enough to crack through the ice and drive it all the way to the bottom. It was something that had been talked about for some glaciers but had never been - nobody had ever thought that it could happen on such a large scale so suddenly on an ice shelf. Right now, that's still the best model.
There were some other things;

people have talked about how the oceans are getting warmer, thinning the ice from underneath, how the ice shelf, because it was thinning, was starting to lose contact with coastline, starting to break away from the coast.

But in terms of what happened in March of 2002 and earlier in 1995 for the Larsen A, that had to do with water fracture in the ice very suddenly one hot summer. So, if we got one really hot summer between now and 2020, we could see the Larsen C do the very same thing.

Dr. Scambos: What we've seen is that ice shelves are good indicators of climate change because they respond not only to air temperature on the surface, where the rest of the ice sheet responds too, but also to warming in the ocean underneath. That starts to trim them underneath, so they respond very quickly. The bad news is that these ice shelves are all fed by these glaciers coming off of the large ice sheet.

When you break the ice shelf away, take that away, all of those glaciers accelerate very rapidly, flowing into the ocean, calving very rapidly and dumping ice that was on the continent out on the ocean.

This is another case where glaciologists were surprised beyond their wildest imagination as to how fast the system could respond. We went from four glaciers that fed the Larsen B that were flowing at about a rate of one meter per day, to feeding it at six to eight meters per day, within the space of one year, a year and a half, after the loss of the Larsen B ice shelf.

If that happens elsewhere in Antarctica where there are even larger glaciers, we'll see very sudden jumps in the rate of sea level rise.

Dr. Scambos: It's clear that ocean warming along the southern Greenland coast and also on the western side of Greenland, the part that's close to Canada, glaciers are responding very rapidly; they respond in particular to surface melting and to warmer oceans.

The trigger that appears in Greenland appears to be a warmer ocean, and then melting on the surface appears to accelerate the flow into the ocean, from things that were triggered by a warmer ocean.
In Antarctica right now, in the peninsula, it seems as though air temperature is leading the way,

but elsewhere in Antarctica, ocean temperature's creeping up at depth, because the surface water in Antarctica and the surface ice in Antarctica is still quite cold. But underneath that cold layer, warm water from elsewhere in the world, from the temperate parts of the world is seeping in, and if there's a very deep layer of ice that's

touching the ocean, it's being melted away and breaking up and accelerating, even though Antarctica is remaining quite cool so far.

So, in the poles, anybody who works in polar science, nobody questions whether or not we're in trouble, a warming world, because we see it in our field areas every year.

From CO2 to Climate Change: In-depth with Professor David Archer, PhD in Geophysics



Part 1 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 48 MB )
Part 2 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 42 MB )
Recently, more and more scientific research indicates that huge amounts of methane and other greenhouse gases stored in the ocean, permafrost and Arctic tundra are in danger of being released into the atmosphere due to global warming.

In order to learn more about this issue, Supreme Master Television recently interviewed Dr. David Archer who holds a PhD in Geophysics. For the past 15 years, he has been a professor at the University of Chicago in Illinois, USA. Professor Archer is an expert on the subject of the global carbon cycle and specializes in studying ocean sedimentary processes. He teaches classes on global warming, environmental chemistry, and global geochemical cycles.

Dr. Archer has also authored a book on climate changed entitled, Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast. He is in the process of working on another book entitled, From Here to Eternity: Global Warming in Geologic Time. On Planet Earth: Our Loving Home today, we present to you Dr. Archer’s interview with Supreme Master Television.


Supreme Master TV: I know that one area of your research was in methane hydrates. Could you tell us what methane hydrate is and how it can become methane gas?

Dr. David Archer : Methane hydrate is a peculiar form of water ice where the water freezes into a cage like a soccer ball and the methane gas is inside the soccer ball, frozen and trapped in this ice, but if it becomes too warm, then this ice will melt and it can release the methane into the environment.

Supreme Master TV: What would trigger their release?

Dr. David Archer: Warming, from global warming, from rising CO2 concentrations. So carbon dioxide, CO2, is a greenhouse gas and it causes the surface of the earth to warm. This is very well understood. And eventually the warming at the surface can also make the deep ocean get warmer also. Now this takes a long time. If the methane from the hydrates were to escape and actually make it to the atmosphere methane is actually a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is, and so this could lead to stronger warming than we would get just from the carbon dioxide.

Supreme Master TV: How much methane do you think there is stored in the earth?

Dr. David Archer: It’s a huge amount, actually. They measure amounts of carbon in units of a billion metric tons and so there are maybe one hundred or several hundred billion metric tons of carbon as oil and maybe another couple hundred of methane in traditional natural gas reservoirs: If you cook on a stove with gas that comes from a gas well. The largest fossil fuel type is coal and there are maybe five thousand gigatons, a billion metric tons of coal So coal is the largest of the fossil fuel types. But of this methane hydrate in the ocean, there may also be thousands of billion metric tons.

So there’s enough carbon there that it could double the amount of carbon that could ultimately be released into the atmosphere. It’s a huge amount. There’s so much of it that if a fraction of it, say 10%, were somehow to get out into the atmosphere all at once, it would be the same as changing the CO2 concentration by a factor of ten.

Dr. David Archer: If you could just take the earth and give it a shake, the ice that holds the hydrate that holds the methane floats in the water. It’s held at the bottom of the ocean because there’s mud sitting on top of it. But if you just shook everything up,it would float up and so much methane would be released that the climate would completely melt down.

Supreme Master TV: Where would these stores of methane hydrates be located around the earth?

Dr. David Archer: They tend to be just offshore, around the edges of the oceans, so not too deep not out in the middle of the ocean, because there’s not enough methane there to make the hydrates and not too shallow because the pressure isn’t high enough to make the hydrate either. So it’s sort of in middle depths in a ring around the ocean. The Arctic Ocean has more than its share of methane hydrate because the water is colder there so that means that hydrate can be found at shallower depths in the Arctic because the colder water can stabilize the hydrates

So shallower in the ocean means that the warming from global warming can reach that faster than it can everywhere else in the ocean. Also there is thought to be more intense warming in the high latitudes. Alaska and Siberia, it’s warming up there much more than it is here in Chicago because that’s just the way the climate of the earth works, and so the Arctic is the place to be the most interested in methane hydrates and how they might affect the climate.

Supreme Master TV: Speaking of the Arctic, are there methane hydrates in the permafrost soil?

Dr. David Archer: Yes, there are thought to be some methane hydrates in the permafrost but more important in the permafrost is peat, which is frozen organic carbon, you know grass, roots, and things like that. They’ve been frozen for many years, tens of thousands of years but now when they thaw, they decompose and they produce methane and also carbon dioxide.

One way that this happens is in lakes in the tundra in the Arctic, so a lake covering the surface melts down some of the peat underneath it and so you get these methane bubbles that come out very strongly so it’s possible that with more warming could be more lakes and then more methane released into the atmosphere.

Today on Planet Earth: Our Loving Home we have Dr. David Archer, a professor of geophysical sciences from the University of Chicago to discuss with us about climate change.During the 2007 summer ice melt season in the Arctic, the accelerated pace of ice melts greatly alarmed polar researchers in the scientific community.

From 2006 to 2007, they had never witnessed such a drastic reduction in summer ice melt. Furthermore, the disintegration of Antarctica’s Wilkins ice shelf on February 28, 2008, where a huge 406 square kilometers of ice crumbled into the ocean, drew global attention and concern to the rate of climate change exceeding worst case scenarios made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Let’s now hear from Dr. Archer, who clearly defines the importance of the Arctic ice packs in stabilizing our climate.

Dr. David Archer: The sea ice plays a strong role in the climate of reflecting sunlight back out to space and so when you melt that sea ice, the sun shines in the Arctic year round, all 24 hours of the day in the summer time so it’s a lot of sunlight, and so you start absorbing that sunlight and that could change the climate of the Arctic very strongly and that could indirectly affect the methane. And also the Greenland ice sheet and the circulation of the North Atlantic and lots of other things in the high latitudes.

Supreme Master TV: I’m going to venture into asking you what is the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air right now and what was it before we noticed that there was global warming going on

Dr. David Archer: The concentration in the year 1750, nobody could measure concentrations then but we have bubbles of ancient air trapped in ice cores so we can measure, we can know that at that time before human activity, the concentration of carbon dioxide was about 280 part per million. So out of a million molecules of air, 280 of them were carbon dioxide.

And today it is about 380 or 385, something like that. Before our period of warm climate in the last ice age, the CO2 concentration in the air was about 200, so going from 200 to 280 was enough to change the climate of the earth from the glacial world when there was two miles of ice over our heads here in Chicago to the interglacial world. So that was 200 to 280 and now we’ve gone all the way to 380. The ice core data that tells us about the value in 1750 or in the ice age now goes back 800,000 years and the CO2 concentration today is much higher than it’s ever been throughout that 800,000 year time period.

Supreme Master TV: So in the history of earth, We’ve had global warming before and we’ve recovered from it and we go into periods of glaciers and then we warm up again. Are we doing that? Do you think this is just another phase of the cycle?

Dr. David Archer: Well, in one sense you are right but in another sense you are using the word “we” and we as human beings have never endured climate changes such as the one that we are now causing before civilization and agriculture all these things happened in a time period of very, very stable climate called the Holocene of the last ten thousand years.

Before that was the glacial time, the glacial climate was much more turbulent and there were strong changes; just a few years the climate would change from one state to another and then back. But the time that civilized man has been in existence, the climate has been very stable and we’re now threatening to leave that stable climate, going into a climate such that we, as a species, have never even seen before.

Supreme Master TV: But this time rather than from volcanic eruptions emitting massive amounts of carbon dioxide, this is human induced, fossil fuel carbon dioxide accumulating.

Dr. David Archer: That’s absolutely right. We can measure the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and compare that with how much fossil fuel we’re burning and it’s very clear that the carbon dioxide concentration is going up because of human activity, it’s not because of volcanoes or anything like that.
Supreme Master TV: But the consequence would be similar to what we’ve seen in the past. The earth would warm up in a similar way and have similar results.

Dr. David Archer: Yes, there was a climate event 55 million years ago called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum event and it’s very unclear exactly what happened but there was some release of carbon dioxide from the earth into the atmosphere fairly quickly within somewhere between instantaneously and ten thousand years; they don’t really know how long it took but the amount of carbon that was released was comparable probably to the amount of coal that we have or the amount of methane hydrates.And then so the earth warmed and then it took 150,000 years for the climate to recover from that which is how long it will take actually for the earth to recover from global warming as well.

Carbon dioxide when you put in the air, it just accumulates in the atmosphere and ocean system and it takes a very long time for that to recover. The earth has mechanisms to stabilize its climate. It’s almost miraculous to imagine but it seems to be true but these mechanisms to stabilize the climate act very slowly; they take hundreds of thousands of years. And so we have it in our powers to change the climate of the earth for a very, very long time.

SUPREME MASTER TV: Is there a certain number a concentration level that once we reach we’ll see catastrophic events?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: I personally think that we’ve already passed a danger limit. The sea ice in the Arctic Ocean in 2007 just crumbled. The amount of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been decreasing over the years but then in 2007 it just crumbled. And the earthquake activity and the acceleration of the flowing ice in Greenland, I think these are signs that we are already in dangerous territory. Another way to specify or to define, to try to answer your question is to say when we can predict that things are not just possibly dangerous but likely to be harmful.

It’s very difficult to predict but people oftentimes define a dangerous temperature change as 2C warming over the natural level. So far the earth has warmed about 0.7C and even if the CO2 concentration in the air were to stop rising today and just stay at 380 forever, the temperature of the earth would continue to rise to about 1C. If we want to avoid warming more than 2C, we have to freeze the emission of carbon dioxide so industry has to stop growing.

Right now its growth is projected to be twice as fast, twice as much carbon dioxide emitted per year in 50 years as it is now. We need to freeze that and not let it grow, and then in the next couple of decades it has to start going down or else we will exceed a dangerous temperature change of 2C.

2C would be warmer than the earth has been in millions of years, so to try to predict where you would have droughts or whether hurricanes would get much more intense than they are today or whether sea levels could rise by tens of meters, it’s very difficult to make those kinds of predictions because that would be warmer than the earth has been in so long.

SUPREME MASTER TV: Would you say that there’s a certain point of no return if we warmed a certain number of degrees?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: Yes, I think there probably would be a point where the large ice sheets such as the Greenland ice sheet or the west Antarctic ice sheet would start to flow into the ocean and melt, raising the sea level. And it may already be starting; it’s possible. They can see acceleration of the ice, flowing faster than it used to, and they can hear earthquakes in the ice indicating that the ice is flowing faster than it used to. So if the ice sheets start to flow more quickly, that might be a point of no return.

SUPREME MASTER TV: What would the world look like, do you think, if we were to reach that point?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: Well, There have been times in the past like you mentioned before when CO2 concentrations were much higher than today and when there was basically no ice on the planet. So the sea level in such a hothouse world would be about 70 meters higher than today so if you just looked at a map of the earth, it would look different. Florida would be gone, for example, many of the river deltas would flood in such a situation.

It’s called a hothouse world; in a hothouse world there’s much less temperature difference between the equator and the poles so it’s basically almost tropical all the way to the poles. There are alligator teeth, crocodile teeth that they find, fossils in Siberia and in Alaska from these hothouse kinds of worlds. Crocodiles can’t live if it ever gets below freezing so that would be a world that would be tropical all the way to the poles.

But the details of how that climate could work or how many people it could support are difficult to predict, and what’s even harder to predict, actually, is the transition from our relatively cool world to such a world. The forests would all be in the wrong places, so do they just die or do new trees grow in to sort of keep up with the changes in climate? It’s very difficult to prepare for how society could cope with a transition like that.

SUPREME MASTER TV: It does seem like the problem of global warming is pointing us in a new direction where we would have to cooperate more, nations would have to be benevolent towards each other. (Yes) And even individuals would need a change in lifestyle, hopefully for the better.

DR. DAVID ARCHER: I think that’s true, although I think they could change the energy infrastructure so that when you plug something into the wall it comes from a carbon-free energy source. I mean individual virtue is a powerful thing in terms of changing energy use but it’s not going to be enough.

We have to stop building these coal-fired power plants or else all is lost. I feel that the United States should take the lead in making these kinds of changes. And I also feel that we have the resources that we can begin to develop alternative energy technology and then make that available to the rest of the world.

SUPREME MASTER TV: So you would say to the leaders of the government and the policy makers that the time to act is now?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: Yes. The last I heard there were 160 new coal-fired power plants that are being planned or designed or built in the U.S. alone and in China they are building a new coal-fired power plant every week and if they build all those things then all is lost. Those power plants are a crime against humanity is what I would tell the leaders.

SUPREME MASTER TV: Will we see like solar energy or hydrogen energy so that it’s green, so that we have energy that does not generate greenhouse gases at all?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: Yes. That would be much better. Hydrogen isn’t a source of energy; it’s more like a way of storing energy. We have to make hydrogen, so maybe you could use solar cells to split water to make hydrogen and then use hydrogen in a car or whatever, but there’s no place to sort of mine hydrogen exactly so it’s not a primary energy source.

But there’s lots of sunlight; there’s a thousand times more sunlight that hits the earth every day than we actually use in all of our energy production, so if we can start harvesting that efficiently that would solve all of our needs. I’ve read that to supply the United States would require covering about 2% of the land area of the United States, which is about how much area is covered by roads. So it sounds like a lot but if you told somebody a hundred years ago that 2% of the land would be covered by roads they would say that that was a lot too. They would probably say that it was impossible.

SUPREME MASTER TV: Do you stay up nights worrying about global warming?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: Yes, sometimes I do. I feel like we have the technology to avoid global warming. We know of alternative ways of extracting energy from coal, for example, and we’re starting to learn how to build windmills and solar cells and develop energy efficiency. So I don’t think it’s impossible to avoid. I think technologically we know how to do it but this is a more difficult social problem than humankind has ever faced before because it requires global cooperation.

SUPREME MASTER TV: There are two other University of Chicago researchers who have shown that adopting a vegetarian diet is one of the most effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Do you have any comments on their research?

DR. DAVID ARCHER: They looked at this very carefully. It’s very clear that when you grow grain and then feed it to animals and then eat the animals, you lose 90% of the energy from the original grain, and so not only can you feed fewer people on the agriculture that you have but as they discovered, it also requires a lot more fossil-fuel energy to make that happen. It makes that much difference to the CO2 emissions.

Along with the United Nation’s report and many other scientists’ observations, it is clear that adopting a vegetarian diet would be one of the most effective actions an individual can take to help reduce the effects of global warming.We sincerely thank, Dr. David Archer, for your invaluable research in the science of geophysics in providing us with further information on our Earth and the effects of climate change.

Supreme Master Ching Hai on Climate Change:The Solution


Part 1 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 61 MB )

Part 2 Play with flash player Play with windows media
( 59 MB )
There is solution, only three steps, no? VEGETARIAN, SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, PLANT TREES. How more simple, can it be?

If the government and the media jump in and help and spread all this and say, "It's really urgent, and everybody must do it," then we still have time. Two years. Okay, it's short, but we have time to keep the planet as is. As is. Not as good as before, but as is. And not worse.

They ban cigarettes and it's banned. And they banned drugs, and it's banned. It's not legal. Yeah, and the cigarette reduction now reduce a lot of illness everywhere in the world. People know that. The same with the climate change policy. If they just do what they know is good, then it's very quick. In no time we will recover, or we stop the effect. Because if we don't raise any more cattle or animals, then the Earth will be more sustainable. No more greenhouse gas or methane gas from the animals. No more multiplying all the time. Whatever we have already, we keep it. And no more, raising for profit and meat. Then the Earth will recover.

This is the only important thing right now. First you have to survive and then you can do anything else you want, but if you don’t survive, you don’t have the planet, what's the use? Unless they want to kill their children. If that’s what they decided, what are we going to do?

You see, the gasses are fuming from the ocean and from the land that's been defrosting. It's fuming everywhere. It's just that at the moment, it's not so intense. And then you probably have a headache when you pass by some place, you don't know why suddenly the headache come, and you don't know suddenly your heart hurt, burned. You don’t know why today your liver is no good, and then you take medicine and you forget about it. But it'll be more and more intense if we don't do something. It started long time already. It's just not intensive enough yet, you know, the density. The gas amount is not yet so lethal. Okay, it is lethal to some people in some area where it's more direct, nearby. But most people, they live far away, a little effected or not yet effected. Or very little effect, then they just blame it, "Okay, I ate something bad yesterday, or maybe I drank too much alcohol." And blame it on drinking or food or bad mood, or maybe old age or whatever, don't know that.

September 24, 2008

KINDNESS TO ANIMALS



KINDNESS TO ANIMALS

Baha'i

Briefly, it is not only their fellow human beings that the beloved of God must treat with mercy and compassion; rather must they show forth the utmost LOVING-KINDNESS TO EVERY LIVING CREATURE.
~Abdu'l-Baha, Writings of Abdu'l-Baha

Be ye the embodiments of justice and fairness amidst ALL CREATION.
~ Bah'u'llh, The Kitb-i-Aqdas (Most Holy Book)

Buddhism

A state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?
~ Samyutta Nikaya v. 353

All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Dhammapada

One is not a great one because one defeats or harms other living beings. One is so-called because one REFRAINS FROM DEFEATING OR HARMING OTHER LIVING BEINGS.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Dhammapada

Hurt not others with that which pains you yourself.
~ Buddhist Sutra Udanavarga 5,18

At the openings of ant hills, please have trustworthy men always put food and water, sugar and piles of grain.
~ Nagarjuna, Precious Garland, 249 - 50

All Buddhas and Bodhisattvas essentially practice the principle of great compassion. The suffering of living beings brings forth their great compassion. From this great compassion emerges the great wisdom, and with this great wisdom, they attain the ultimate enlightenment.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Avatamsaka Sutra

People who eat meat will fall into the horrible paths of transmigration and suffer boundless pain. People who eat meat will never succeed in getting any blessing or merit that they pray for. Meat-eaters cause the celestial beings to avoid them and other sentient beings to be afraid of them.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Surangama Sutra

Kasyapa asked the Buddha: "Why did the Lord previously allow Bhiksus to eat the 'three pure meats' or even 'nine pure meats'?" The Buddha said, "It was so instituted following the need of the occasion, and as gradual steps in the actual segregation from eating meat."
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Nirvana Sutra

All the saints abhorred eating blood or flesh…. Celestial beings never go near people who eat meat as their mouth always has a foul smell…. Meat is not good, meat is unclean; meat eating generates evils and destroys merits and blessings. All the saints denounce eating meat!
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Lankavatara Sutra

I forbid all meat eating, regardless of whether the animal dies naturally or is killed. I have never allowed my disciples to eat meat, and I will not allow in the present or future.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Lankavatara Sutra

All sentient beings came from the same origin. Through myriad reincarnations, all sentient beings have been relatives of each other. How can we eat the meat of our relatives?
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Lankavatara Sutra

People who eat meat are destroying the great merciful seed of their own Buddha nature, and any sentient beings seeing them would leave them. Therefore, all Bodhisattvas (spiritual practitioners) must refrain from eating the flesh of any sentient beings, as this will incur boundless sin.
~ Shakyamuni Buddha, Brahmajala Sutra

Christianity

Do to others as you want them to do to you.
~Luke 6:31, Holy Bible

Let the law of kindness show no limits. SHOW A LOVING CONSIDERATION FOR ALL GOD'S CREATURES.
~ Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), General Advices

Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
~ Matthew 5:7, Holy Bible

It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer and die.
~Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2418

Woe to the shepherds who only take care of themselves! Should not the shepherds take care of the flock?
~ Ezekiel 34:2-4, Holy Bible

Do not be among those who give themselves to wine-drinking, or among those who make themselves full with meat.
~ Proverbs 23:20, Holy Bible

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
~ 1st Corinthians 6:13, Holy Bible

To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I DELIGHT NOT IN THE BLOOD OF BULLOCKS, OR OF LAMBS, OR OF HE GOATS…And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of innocent blood. Put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil.
~ Isaiah 1:11, 15-16, Holy Bible

For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and who eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death. For in his blood every drop of their blood turns to poison; in his breath their breath to stink; in his flesh their flesh to boils; in his bones their bones to chalk; in his bowels their bowels to decay; in his eyes their eyes to scales; in his ears their ears to waxy issue. And their death will become his death
~ The Essene Gospel of Peace, Book 1

KILL NOT, NEITHER EAT THE FLESH OF YOUR INNOCENT PREY, lest you become the slaves of Satan. For that is the path of sufferings, and it leads unto death. But do the will of God, that His angels may serve you on the way of life.
~ The Essene Gospel of Peace, Book 1

And God said, 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is breath of life, I have given every green herb for meal and it was so.
~ Genesis 1:29-30, Holy Bible

But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
~ Genesis 9:4, Holy Bible

Thou shalt not kill.
~ Exodus 20:13, Holy Bible

Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith.
~ Proverbs: 15:17, Holy Bible

Jesus said, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice."
~ Matthew 9:13 & 12:7, Holy Bible

St. Paul: "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."
~ Romans 14:21, Holy Bible

Confucianism & Taoism

BENEFIT LIVING CREATURES AND HUMAN BEINGS. Cultivate goodness and happiness.
~ Yin-chih-wen (Confucian-Taoist treatise)

What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.
~ Confucius, The Confucian Analects, Lunyu 12.2

Respect the old and cherish the young. EVEN INSECTS, GRASS AND TREES YOU MUST NOT HURT.
~ Attributed to Ko Hung, Confucian-Taoist treatise T'ai-shang-kan-ying p'ien

Those who want to know the truth of the universe SHOULD PRACTICE REVERENCE FOR ALL LIFE; this manifests as unconditional love and respect for oneself and all other beings.
~ Hua Hu Ching 51

Buy captive animals and give them freedom.
~ Taoist teaching. The Tract of the Quiet Way

Hinduism

Those who have forsaken the killing of all; those who are helpmates to all; those who are a sanctuary to all; those men are in the way of Heaven.
~ Hitopadesa (Hindu Text)

Ahimsa (non-violence) is the highest Dharma. Ahimsa is the best Tapas. Ahimsa is the greatest gift. Ahimsa is the highest self-control. Ahimsa is the highest sacrifice. Ahimsa is the highest power. Ahimsa is the highest friend. Ahimsa is the highest truth. AHIMSA IS THE HIGHEST TEACHING.
~ Mahabharat Shantiparva, 262.47

The mode of living which is founded upon a TOTAL HARMLESSNESS TOWARDS ALL CREATURES is the highest morality.
~ Mahabharata, Shantiparva 262.5-6

What is the good way? It is the path that reflects on how it may AVOID KILLING ANY CREATURE.
~ Tirukural, Verse 324

PROTECT BOTH OUR SPECIES, TWO-LEGGED AND FOUR-LEGGED. Both food and water for their needs supply. May they with us increase in stature and strength. Save us from hurt all our days, O Powers!
~ Rig Veda Samhita 10.37.11
May all beings look at me with a friendly eye. May I do likewise, and MAY WE ALL LOOK ON EACH OTHER WITH THE EYES OF A FRIEND.
~ Yajur Veda 36.18


Islam

There is not an animal on the earth, nor a flying creature on two wings, BUT THEY ARE PEOPLE LIKE UNTO YOU.
~Qur'an, Al-An`am 6:38

Whoever is KIND TO ALL CREATURES OF GOD is kind to himself.
~ Prophet Mohammed, Hadith

TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD BE TREATED. What you like not for yourself, dispense not to others.
~ Abdullah Ansari, Islamic Sufi text

Seest thou not that it is Allah Whose praise all beings in the heavens and on earth do celebrate, and the birds of the air with wings outspread? Each one knows its own mode of prayer and praise, and ALLAH KNOWS WELL ALL THAT THEY DO.
~ Qur'an Sura Al-Nour, 41

A GOOD DEED DONE TO AN ANIMAL IS AS MERITORIOUS AS DONE TO HUMAN BEING, while an act of cruelty to an animal is as bad as an act of cruelty to a human being.
~ Prophet Mohammed, Hadith
ALL CREATURES ARE LIKE A FAMILY OF GOD: and He loves the most those who are the most
beneficent to His family.
~ Prophet Mohammed, Hadith

ALLAH WILL NOT GIVE MERCY TO ANYONE, EXCEPT THOSE WHO GIVE MERCY TO OTHER CREATURES. Where there is an abundance of vegetables, a host of angels will descend on that place.
~ Prophet Mohammed, Hadith

He who TAKES PITY EVEN ON A SPARROW AND SPARES ITS LIFE, ALLAH WILL BE MERCIFUL ON HIM on the Day of Judgement.
~ Prophet Mohammed, Hadith

THEIR FLESH AND THEIR BLOOD REACH NOT ALLAH, BUT THE DEVOTION from you reacheth Him. Thus have we made them subject unto you that ye may magnify Allah that He hath guided you. And give good tidings, O Mohammed, to the good.
~ Qur'an Sura Sura: AL-Hajj 37

At one time THE RASUL OF ALLAH SAID TO HIS COUSIN 'ALI, "O 'ALI, YOU SHOULD NOT EAT MEAT. If you eat meat for forty days, those qualities will come within you. Those actions will come within you. Their blood will come within you. Their qualities and their actions will come within you. Because of that, your human qualities will change, your compassionate qualities will change, the essence of your body will change. O 'Ali, you should not eat meat or flesh. You have to diminish that. Do not eat that."
~ Muhammad Raheem Bawa Muhaiyaddeen, Islamic Sufi saint

Jainism

Therefore, neither does he [a sage] cause violence to others nor does he make others do so.
~ Acharanga Sutra 5.101-2.

A man should wander about TREATING ALL CREATURES AS HE HIMSELF would be treated.
~ Sutrakritanga 1.11.33

Those whose minds are at peace and who are free from passions do not desire to live at the expense of others.
~ Mahavira, Acharanga Sutra

ONE SHOULD NOT INJURE, SUBJUGATE, ENSLAVE, TORTURE, OR KILL ANY ANIMAL, LIVING BEING, ORGANISM, or sentient being. THIS DOCTRINE OF NONVIOLENCE IS IMMACULATE, IMMUTABLE, AND ETERNAL. Just as suffering is painful to you, in the same way it is painful, disquieting, and terrifying to all animals, living beings, organisms, and sentient beings.
~ Acharanga Sutra 4.25-26

Have BENEVOLENCE TOWARDS ALL LIVING BEINGS.
~ Tattvartha Sutra 7.11

NON-INJURY TO LIVING BEINGS IS THE HIGHEST RELIGION.
~First Truth of Jainism, the maxim 'Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah'

THIS IS THE QUINTESSENCE OF WISDOM; NOT TO KILL ANYTHING. All breathing, existing, living sentient creatures should not be slain, nor treated with violence, nor abused, nor tormented, nor driven away. This is the pure unchangeable Law. Therefore, cease to injure living things.
~ Sutrakritanga 1.11.10-16

Judaism

Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I WILL MAKE A HELPER WHO IS LIKE HIM." So the LORD God formed out of the ground EACH WILD ANIMAL AND EACH BIRD of the sky, and brought each to the man to see what he would call it.
~ Genesis 2:18-19, Talmud and Christian Old Testament, Holy Bible

What is hateful to you, do not do to others.
~ Talmud, Shabbat 3id

I will make a covenant on behalf of Israel with the wild beasts, the birds of the air, and the things that creep on the hearths, that ALL LIVING CREATURES MAY LIE DOWN WITHOUT LIVING IN FEAR.
~Hosea, 2:18, Talmud and Old Testament, Holy Bible

The Jewish concept of tsa'ar ba'alei chaim is the OBLIGATION NOT TO CAUSE PAIN TO ANIMALS.
~ Code of Jewish Law

Sikhism

The highest religion is to rise to universal brotherhood; and to CONSIDER ALL CREATURES YOUR EQUALS.
~ Guru Nanak Dev, Jap Ji XXVIII

You say that THE ONE LORD IS IN ALL, so why do you kill chickens?
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 1350

Kabir says, TO USE FORCE IS TYRANNY, EVEN IF YOU CALL IT A RELIGIOUS SACRIFICE. When your account is called for in the Kingdom of God, what will your condition be then?
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 1374

Those mortals who consume marijuana, flesh and wine - no matter what pilgrimages, fasts and rituals they follow, they will all go to hell.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 1377)

You kill living beings and worship lifeless things, at your very last moment, you will suffer terrible pain.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 332

Bhagat Kabir says, that THE BEST FOOD IS EATING KICHREE (VEGETABLE) where nectar sweet is the salt. You eat hunted meat, but which animal is willing to have their head cut?
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 1374

Falsehood is my dagger and to EAT BY DEFRAUDING IS MEAT.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 24

Avarice is a dog, falsehood the sweeper and CHEATING THE EATING OF MEAT.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 15

The world eats dead carcasses, living by neglect and greed. Like a goblin, or a beast, they kill and eat the forbidden carcasses of meat. So control your urges, or else you will be seized by the Lord, and thrown into the tortures of hell.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 723

You kill living beings, and call it a righteous action. Tell me, brother, what would you call an unrighteous action? You call yourself the most excellent sage; then who would you call a butcher?
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 1103

The Lord has given me this one understanding: ALL CREATURES, ALL LIVING THINGS BELONG TO ONE CREATOR, may I never forget this, Oh Lord.
~ Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Granth Sahib, Jap Ji Sahib, 2

Just as clothes stained with blood become impure, one CANNOT HAVE PURE CONSCIOUSNESS WHEN ONE CONSUMES BLOOD AND FLESH OF OTHER BEINGS.
~ Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Granth Sahib, 140

BE KIND TO ALL BEINGS - this is more meritorious than visiting and bathing at the 68 pilgrimage sites and the giving of charity.
~ Guru Granth Sahib, 136

Global Warming & Ocean Gas: An Interview with Rice University Prof. Gerald Dickens Part 1


Part 2 Play with flash player
Part 3 Play with flash player

Global Warming & Ocean Gas: An Interview with Rice University Professor Gerald Dickens

Welcome to Planet Earth: Our Loving Home. In light of growing concerns about climate change and its effects on the planet, Supreme Master Television visited with Dr. Gerald Dickens, associate professor of Earth Science at the prestigious Rice University, located in Houston, Texas, USA.
The private institution has earned respect as a pioneer in the fields of nanotechnology, structural chemical analysis, and space science.

As one of the most widely known and highly regarded universities in the United States, it is often highly ranked in numerous reports. Professor Dickens is a leading researcher into the past history of the world’s oceans, with respect to the changing patterns of their geology, chemistry and biology.

Currently, he serves as the Paleoceanography Editor-in-Chief of the “American Geophysical Union,” the most cited journal in the Earth Sciences field throughout the world. Today, Professor Dickens shares his wealth of knowledge and provides a neutral base for us to discern the relations between global warming and marine geology,and how they affect the future of our planet.

SupremeMasterTV: We are meeting with Professor Gerald Dickens who is professor of Earth Science at Rice University here in Houston, Texas, USA. It’s a pleasure to have you on the program Professor Dickens and our topic of discussion is ocean gas and the potential effect of global warming on this ocean gas.
Can you tell me firstly, what ocean gas are we talking about?

Professor Dickens: Most of it’s methane, and there will be methane that is stored in the sediments at the bottom of the ocean.

SupremeMasterTV: I understand that it’s stored in a crystal form. Can you explain that?

Professor Dickens: Yes. Methane can be both dissolved in water, it can be as gas bubbles or it can be in an unusual structure, what we call methane hydrate. That’s when we take methane molecules and water molecules and then combine together to form a cage, with the methane on the inside.It looks very much like ice.

SupremeMasterTV: And I understand that it’s called “fire in ice.” Can you explain that?

Professor Dickens: Well, because it looks very much like ice, but as it melts it releases methane, which is the same gas that’s used in natural gas for stoves and things like that.So you can imagine if you put a match to it, it looks like a piece of ice with a flame on top.

SupremeMasterTV: Now the next thing is, are we talking about any other gases particularly in the ocean, or is it mainly methane?

Professor Dickens: Well, there is certainly carbon dioxide that’s dissolved in the ocean and that’s a major role, but we don’t usually think of it as in the gas phase there. And so really, the main gas that we’re thinking, in terms of the large amounts of gas in the marine system, is methane.

SupremeMasterTV: Can you tell me how is that methane produced in the oceans? How is it actually produced?

Professor Dickens: Most of it occurs when organic carbon lands on the sea floor. That means things, organisms, when they die, as they fall through the water and land to the bottom of the ocean. As they get buried, various microbes start consuming the organic carbon. And one set of microbes is the Archaea, and a sub-set of the Archaea are the ones that produce methane. So they take various constituents from the original organic carbon and convert it to methane.

SupremeMasterTV: Very interesting, and I understand there’s a whole eco-system in these organisms down there on the ocean floor in the sediment.

Professor Dickens: Yes.

SupremeMasterTV: How does the methane stay in the ocean? What is keeping the methane there?

Professor Dickens: This one’s a little bit complicated to explain. Essentially, it’s always there, but it’s always been added to and it’s leaving. So in other words, as the methane’s being produced, it’s also being consumed. So we end up with a steady state system.

Perhaps the best analogy would be a forest. So, with photosynthesis, we make new organic carbon in trees and as the trees die, they release organic carbon.

The same thing happens in marine sediments. So, as the organic carbon enters the sediment, the Archaea turn it into methane. That methane is now in the sediment but, at the same time, it’s slowly leaking out. And as it leaks out, it gets either consumed by oxygen or another species that’s dissolved in water which we call sulfate. So those are our sort of outputs.

SupremeMasterTV: And can you talk about temperature and water pressure in relationship to methane and hydrates of methane.

Professor Dickens: Sure. In this cycle that we’ve just talked about, as we make methane, if a lot of methane is made and we’re at relatively high pressure caused by the water, and at relatively cold temperatures, such as the bottom of the ocean, then, as we start making the methane, it will precipitate out in this solid clathrate phase that we talked about earlier, where the water and the methane combine to form this cage-like ice structure.

And that will precipitate and clog up the pores in the sediment. So you can imagine a little bit of methane going in, a little bit of methane coming out. But most of the methane in many parts of the world, is stored in the solid phase in the sediment.

SupremeMasterTV: And whereabouts is it distributed? Whereabouts in the ocean floor do we find this methane?

Professor Dickens: Well, in general we sort of need a couple of places. First we need, to get these very large methane deposits where the methane is in the solid phase, we need both cold temperatures and relatively high pressures. We’re talking generally 500 meters or so water depth.

Professor Dickens: For example, if we go out in the middle of the ocean, we have very cold temperatures at the sea floor. The waters are very deep. But there is very little organic carbon reaching the ocean there.
So we don’t see very much methane. In fact, in the middle of parts of the ocean, there is really no methane. However, as we get closer to the continents, we have both organic carbon coming off rivers, as well as we have fairly productive regions.

So you can imagine where this puts it, is on a sort of slope of continental margins, where we have both the input and supply of organic carbon, plus the pressure, plus the temperature.

SupremeMasterTV:The organic carbon is things like what, decomposing organisms or plants or…?

Professor Dickens: The simplest way for the average person to think of it is, a fish dies and it falls to the bottom. But in terms of overall mass, most of it is phytoplankton. So single celled organisms, algae, diatoms, various phytoplankton that live and die and fall down to the bottom of the ocean.

SupremeMasterTV: Is the methane fairly evenly distributed around the world on these continental slopes, or is there more concentration in various areas of the world?

Professor Dickens: It’s clearly distributed in some places more than others. It’s in particular in areas where we’ve had a lot of organic carbon land on the sea floor for quite some time. None of these systems are new. So they take a long time to accumulate very large amounts of methane, we are talking millions of years. So you need a supply of organic carbon for a long time.

There are certain areas where we’ve had this supply, and those are the areas we really find a lot of methane. It’s a little more complicated than that. Part of it is, there are areas around the world that we haven’t really looked, so we don’t know the full distribution. But I think it’s fair to say that it is unevenly distributed. But, in general, we have found it around all continents.

SupremeMasterTV: What are the beneficial effects of methane?

Professor Dickens: Well, I guess it depends who’s benefiting. I mean, certainly, for humans, we like to use methane as natural gas. It’s now a large fraction of the energy, in many countries, is derived off natural gas. And certainly, as we talked about before, you can light methane hydrates or the methane that comes off these materials.So it can be used as an energy source. Certainly, it’s part of the large eco-system that we have just scratched the surface. We don’t really understand this. But this very large, what we call the deep biosphere, this methane’s crucial to that eco-system.

SupremeMasterTV: Coming back now, so the fact that the methane stays sequestered in the ocean as long as the temperatures are cold enough and the depth of the ocean, and there’s enough pressure. So what about warming? How does global warming have the potential effect on this methane sequestered in the oceans?

Professor Dickens: We always have a little bit of methane being formed and a little bit of methane leaving in this large body of methane that's sitting there. However, that large body is sensitive to pressure and temperature and so, what we know, at least in the laboratory, is if we take the solid phase and we either increase the temperature or decrease the pressure, that solid phase goes from the ice-like crystal structure into its constituents, so into water plus gas.

And so what we think happens, and it certainly potentially can happen, is as you warm up marine sediment or decrease the pressure, the solid phase can convert to gas and then you have an over-pressured system, and we think that a lot of gas can come out very fast.

SupremeMasterTV: Coming back now, so the fact that the methane stays sequestered in the ocean as long as the temperatures are cold enough and the depth of the ocean, and there’s enough pressure. So what about warming? How does global warming have the potential effect on this methane sequestered in the oceans?

Professor Dickens: We always have a little bit of methane being formed and a little bit of methane leaving in this large body of methane that's sitting there. However, that large body is sensitive to pressure and temperature and so, what we know, at least in the laboratory, is if we take the solid phase and we either increase the temperature

or decrease the pressure, that solid phase goes from the ice-like crystal structure into its constituents, so into water plus gas.And so what we think happens, and it certainly potentially can happen, is as you warm up marine sediment or decrease the pressure, the solid phase can convert to gas and then you have an over-pressured system, and we think that a lot of gas can come out very fast.

SupremeMasterTV: So what would that do to the world? To the plant life, the human life the planet itself, if a lot of methane gas was released as a result of global warming heating up the oceans? What are the potentials?

Prof. Dickens: Well, the first thing to think about is, where does the methane go? So, if the methane comes out of the sediment there's really sort of two possibilities.

One is it would go into the ocean and be oxidized in the ocean, in which case the methane would be converted to carbon dioxide in the ocean. And probably the most significant effect right off the bat, is acidification. So you drop the pH.

SupremeMasterTV: Yeah, the oceans would become acidic, wouldn’t they?

Prof. Dickens: The second possibility is, of course, you could bubble methane up to the atmosphere. Or, it turns out an interesting phenomenon that we have discovered is that sometimes pieces of hydrate will float, and so they can float up very shallow and then dissociate near the ocean surface.
So, there's ways to get methane into the atmosphere.

Now, there, it turns out, what's interesting with methane, is it's a very potent greenhouse gas, much more potent than CO2. So the net effect of that is to essentially contribute to warming.

SupremeMasterTV: So we're talking about volumes here. How much volume of methane? I've read estimates of anything up to 10 trillion tons of methane in the ocean.

Prof. Dickens: Let's just think about this. I usually think in gigatons and so a gigaton is 1 trillion tons.
SupremeMasterTV: 1 trillion tons.

Prof. Dickens: And so we usually think somewhere on the order of 2,000 to 20,000 gigatons are the sort of estimates for how much methane is stored in the crystal phase, of which again there will be also gas bubbles and dissolved. And so the total system,

we're talking on the order of somewhere on that range of 2,000 to 20,000 gigatons of methane.
SupremeMasterTV: And if that was released into the atmosphere?

Prof. Dickens: Well, I don't think it would be ever possible to release it all, but even if a fraction of thathttp://www.suprememastertv.comhttp://www.suprememastertv.com We can think about, for example, what humans are doing today. So probably, you know, if we burned all the fossil fuels that are available today, somewhere on the order of 4,000 gigatons of carbon that will be added to the atmosphere.

So you can imagine that if 10,000 gigatons of methane - an average number for estimates that people have made…If one-tenth of that goes, you know, we are on the order of magnitude of what we are doing today, in terms of adding carbon dioxide.

SupremeMasterTV: So is methane toxic to humans?

Prof. Dickens: Certainly, if the entire atmosphere around you is methane, it is toxic.

SupremeMasterTV: There's no oxygen to breathe.

Prof. Dickens: But small amounts of methane are not going to be toxic, but certainly it's flammable so it's not a good idea to have lots of methane.

SupremeMasterTV: Has this ever happened in the past, where a lot of methane gas has been released into the atmosphere on Earth?

Prof. Dickens: We think so. We are very confident that there are times in the past where large amounts of carbon dioxide go into the ocean and / or atmosphere very quickly. We think that the source of that carbon dioxide is oxidized methane. So that methane has come into the system and either by mixing with oxygen in the ocean or through various reactions in the atmosphere, it converted to CO2.

SupremeMasterTV: And when did this happen?

Prof. Dickens: Probably the best studied of these times is about 55 million years ago, right after the Paleocene-Eocene boundary. And it's an interesting time, in that we see all sorts of environmental consequences. So something clearly happened.

In fact, that's why we have a boundary there, because the organisms on life changed quite dramatically across this time period. And we see things such as over 6, 7 degree warming around the world, including the high latitudes. We see changes in the hydrologic cycle, so some places become very dry, some places become very wet. We see ocean acidification. We see changes in oxygen content in the ocean. So many, many different environmental changes occurred during this time.

SupremeMasterTV: Has this ever happened in the past, where a lot of methane gas has
been released into the atmosphere on Earth?

Prof. Dickens: We think so. We are very confident that there are times in the past where large amounts of carbon dioxide go into the ocean and / or atmosphere very quickly. We think that the source of that carbon dioxide is oxidized methane.

So that methane has come into the system and either by mixing with oxygen in the ocean or through various reactions in the atmosphere, it converted to CO2.

SupremeMasterTV: And when did this happen?
Prof. Dickens: Probably the best studied of these times is about 55 million years ago, right after the Paleocene-Eocene boundary. And it's an interesting time, in that we see all sorts of environmental consequences. So something clearly happened. In fact, that's why we have a boundary there, because the organisms on life changed quite dramatically across this time period.

And we see things such as over 6, 7 degree warming around the world, including the high latitudes. We see changes in the hydrologic cycle, so some places become very dry, some places become very wet. We see ocean acidification. We see changes in oxygen content in the ocean. So many, many different environmental changes occurred during this time.

SupremeMasterTV: What happened to the animal life then? What happened to the plant life? Is there evidence what happened to them?

Prof. Dickens: Well, it’s interesting. So if you look at organisms in the bottom of the ocean, many of them seem to go extinct. So life was not too good at the bottom of the ocean. On land, it's a much different sort of response and, you know, looks like organisms migrate. And so we see just the distribution of organisms change very, very fast.

Prof. Dickens: If we go into the north pole and drill a hole there and collect the sediment that was deposited there 55 million years ago, it looks like temperatures somewhere in the 70 degrees, although we're not totally sure whether those are summer temperatures or annual temperatures. Nonetheless it's still quite warm.

SupremeMasterTV: Very interesting. And we are thinking that methane was probably the reason at that time, is that right?

Prof. Dickens: Somehow… we think that methane is some component of this. And what we're not sure is whether it's essentially the trigger or a feedback.

SupremeMasterTV: We were talking also about what can we do to help with global warming?

Prof. Dickens: As far as methane, in terms of global warming, probably, certainly over the next 100 or 200 years these methane reservoirs in the deep ocean are probably not responsive at that sort of time scale. On the other hand, if we go to up to permafrost regions, yes, we can get methane coming out from the permafrost, which may act as a feedback.

So as we start melting permafrost we release extra methane As far global warming, that is just a huge problem. I can give you my own personal opinions. I think it’s going to take a radical view of a change in lifestyle, as well as new technologies. And it’s really going to take a combination of both.

There are all sorts of these feedbacks, and many of them we don’t really fully understand. So, for example, there’s a paper, just a couple weeks ago, summarizing recent evidence that as you start warming things up, the biosphere, the plants start releasing more carbon than they take in.

So when you start doing things, they start taking in carbon, but then they start kicking it back out. So it’s like, gosh! That’s a feedback that’s really problematic. That’s not in our models. And there are many of these things that we just really don’t understand right now.

SupremeMasterTV: I remember, in reading the papers, you were saying that the carbon in the methane is actually like a huge capacitor that people haven’t really worked into their thinking, and to do with the carbon cycle.

Prof. Dickens: The carbon cycle. If you think of three boxes, it’s the easiest way to think of the carbon cycle. You have an atmosphere, a biosphere and the ocean.

Prof. Dickens: Biosphere, trees, plants; so the terrestrial biosphere. And all of these
are connected. So you think of three boxes, much like, I like to think of it as a swimming pool and 2 hot tubs. And so between each one of these boxes there are inputs and outputs. In the analogy between the swimming pool and the hot tub, it’s essentially the ocean is the big box. And it’s a common misconception for the average person, they think that all the carbon is in trees.

But it turns out that most of the carbon, about 93% of it, is in the ocean, not in trees or in the atmosphere. So what’s happening right now is we’re adding a lot of carbon to the atmosphere. It’s coming in much faster than it can go into the biosphere or into the ocean. So that’s why the CO2 is going up very, very quickly.But it turns out, that if you suddenly realize there is a lot of methane on the planet, somewhere there is now a 4th box.

So you can’t have an ocean that’s nominally 35,000 gigatons and then suddenly talk about methane being 10 or 20,000 gigatons. There’s another box in the system. So the simplest way to think about it is a capacitor. You have organic carbon. The normal way people think of the carbon cycle is, you have a little bit of carbon coming into the system, through volcanoes or through weathering, and a little bit of carbon coming out of the system. So you have this large box, a little bit of input and a little bit of output and the carbon cycle in between all this. And then, essentially by adding methane, what you have to say is, some portion of the organic carbon leaving the system then gets converted to methane, so you add a new box. Then a little bit leaks out and it goes back into the ocean.

The idea for the capacitor is that output can change dramatically in the time frame. Sometimes we can have a lot of methane come out very quickly.

SupremeMasterTV: With the temperature change.

Prof. Dickens: With the temperature change.

SupremeMasterTV: And the pressure change.

Prof. Dickens: Yeah.

SupremeMasterTV: Is there any other comments, anything else that you think the general public should know?

Prof. Dickens: The fantastic thing is, I think I mentioned to you earlier today, is that 15 years ago, I don’t think anyone would have even asked me. I just sort of did my own thing and studied methane and climate change. Now people are actually interested.

SupremeMasterTV: That’s a very important topic, very important. Well it’s been an absolute pleasure having you on the program, Professor Dickens. Thank you so very much for granting us this interview.

Prof. Dickens: Well thank you for having me.

We sincerely thank Dr. Dickens for sharing this discussion on the current studies of links between ocean gas and global warming. We sincerely wish you all the best in your endeavors to further our understanding in this very important area of research.