More
Wildfires = More Warming = More Wildfires
Why
scientists are scared of the link between bigger wildfires and rapid
thawing of northern permafrost.
—By
Chris Mooney
29
July, 2013
To
step into the US Army Corp of Engineers' Permafrost Tunnel Research
Facility in Fox, Alaska—just north of Fairbanks—is to step back
in time. Burrowed into the silt layers of an unassuming hillside, the
tunnel is like a scene out of a sub-Arctic Indiana Jones adventure.
Shivering, you walk the length of an underground football field, past
protruding bones of Ice Age animals (including mammoths) and huge ice
wedges, which were frozen in place long before Hebrew scribes
compiled the Old Testament. The smell is overpowering: Dead plants
and other organic materials are suspended in the frozen soil walls,
decomposing and reverting back into the carbon dioxide and water from
which they were originally formed. But because of the cold, that
process is extremely slow: Deep in the cave, a 32,000-year-old frozen
plant sticks out of a wall. It's still green. The leaves still
contain chlorophyll.
That
plant, like the permafrost cave as a whole, is in a state of frozen
suspension. But walking through the tunnel, you're acutely aware of
how quickly that suspension might end. The facility is maintained
through a cooling system at 25 degrees Fahrenheit, without which the
cave would collapse, and the ancient geological history lesson would
be abruptly over. And the carbon that had slowly accumulated in the
soils of the cave over tens of thousands of years? Much of it would
be released into the air.
A
view inside Alaska's unique permafrost research tunnel. US Army Corps
of Engineers
Throughout
Alaska and similar northern or "boreal" environments across
the world (from Canada to Russia), huge volumes of permafrost hang in
a similar balance. In much of this region, ground temperatures are
just below freezing, leaving their frozen soils right on the cusp of
thawing. "It's kind of at the thermal tipping point" for
permafrost, explains Rich Boone, an ecologist at the University of
Alaska-Fairbanks. What might tip it over? Climate change, which is
currently proceeding twice as fast in Alaska and the Arctic as it is
in the mid-latitudes. And the warming releases a pulse of carbon from
these frozen soils, as microorganisms break down the organic matter
they contain and give off carbon dioxide (and, sometimes, methane).
How much? Well, it is estimated that global permafrost contains twice
as much total carbon as the planet's atmosphere currently does. In
other words, a lot.
Scientists
have known for some time about the risk of large-scale carbon
emissions from thawing permafrost. But in recent years, they've
become increasingly attuned to an additional—and very
worrisome—aspect of this threat. As climate change proceeds, larger
and more intense wildfires are increasingly scorching and charring
the forests of the north. While these fires have always been a
natural and recurring aspect of forest ecosystems, they now appear to
be undergoing a major amplification. And that, in turn, may further
increase the threat of permafrost thawing and carbon
releases—releases that would, in turn, greatly amplify global
warming itself (and potentially spur still more fire activity).
"You
have this climate and fire interaction, and all of a sudden
permafrost can thaw really rapidly," explains Jon O'Donnell, an
ecologist with the National Parks Service's Arctic Network.
Scientists call it a "positive feedback," and it's one of
the scariest aspects of global warming because, in essence, it means
a bad situation is making itself worse.
When
it comes to understanding the wildfire-permafrost feedback and just
how bad it could be, one factor is clear: Wildfires are definitely
getting worse. "The area burned by wildfires has been increased
quite a bit over the last couple of decades," says Terry Chapin,
a biologist at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. Indeed, a new
study just out in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
suggests that recent fire activity in these "boreal"
regions of the globe is higher than anything seen in the last 10,000
years.
Fires
are also becoming more severe, says O'Donnell. Finally, the
seasonality of fires appears to be changing, with burns extending
later into the summer, when permafrost has thawed more
completely—once again, amplifying the overall impact of burning on
frozen soils and the carbon they contain.
And
here's where the feedback kicks in: Large northern fires don't just
burn huge swaths of forest. They can also burn off the upper layer of
lichen and mosses on the forest floor. When intact, this forest
surface layer insulates the underlying permafrost and protects it
from thawing—but getting rid of it takes away that protection, even
as it also exposes the area to the heating of direct sunlight.
Plus,
there's an added effect: After a fire burns through a region,
O'Donnell notes, it leaves behind an area of the earth's surface that
is blackened in color. And these dark areas absorb more heat from the
sun, thus further upping temperatures and thawing permafrost. As the
soil thaws, meanwhile, microbes have a much easier time decomposing
its organic matter. "The microbes can start to crank on that
carbon," says O'Donnell, adding that the process results in the
release of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
How
quickly could the wildfire-permafrost feedback work to amplify global
warming? That's what researchers are currently trying to determine.
"The main uncertainty is not whether it's going to happen, but
how quickly," explains Terry Chapin of the University of
Alaska-Fairbanks.
One
key factor is how severely northern forests continue to burn. Another
is whether there are any offsetting effects that might slow down the
feedback. For instance, after northern forests burn, new vegetation
gradually moves back in. And sometimes it isn't the same type of
tree: Often, black spruce forests will be replaced by aspens or
birch. These trees actually store more carbon, so that's a
potentially offsetting effect.
It's
important to note that overall, northern boreal forest regions have
been taking carbon dioxide from fossil fuel emissions out of the
atmosphere or, as scientists put it, serving as a net carbon "sink."
But that's changing. David McGuire, an ecologist at the University of
Alaska-Fairbanks who runs models to try to determine how wildfires
affect permafrost, estimates that about 5 percent of global carbon
emissions have been sequestered by boreal forests; but his
simulations suggest that because of the combination of global warming
and increased wildfire activity, that number is decreasing greatly.
"Fire increase in the boreal regions is potentially shutting
down that sink activity," says McGuire. The overall impact may
be so large that it could undermine the effectiveness of policies to
mitigate carbon emissions.
Deep
in the permafrost cave in Fox, you walk through a section of tunnel
that is, in effect, an ice cathedral. The entire ceiling is covered
by a huge wedge of ice, and the formation stretches down through the
cave walls to the floor on either side of you. You're surrounded by
ice, encircled. But as soon as you reach out your hand and touch the
ceiling, ice that hasn't melted in thousands of years undergoes a
phase change, becoming drops of water on your finger. It just takes a
touch of heat.
That's
essentially what we're doing to the earth's permafrost regions as a
whole—and hoping the cave doesn't collapse above our heads.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.