Japan Times, 7 Dec 17 KYODO, WASHINGTON– A former U.S. envoy has urged the Washington to hold talks with Pyongyang without preconditions to break the impasse over North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile threats.
“I am of the view that the two sides should agree to have ‘talks about talks’ without any preconditions,” Robert Gallucci, chief negotiator for the now-defunct 1994 nuclear freeze struck with North Korea, said in an interview.
Gallucci’s view is at odds with U.S. President Donald Trump’s policy of imposing “maximum pressure” on North Korea in concert with the international community to compel the hermit country halt its provocative acts and engage in credible talks for denuclearization.
Gallucci also questioned Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s emphasis on pressuring North Korea, pointing out Abe’s insistence that now is not the time to talk to the country, given that it hasn’t changed its provocative behavior.
“I can’t believe refusing to talk with North Korea is in the best interests of Japan,” he said, referring to Abe’s resolve to address Pyongyang’s abduction of Japanese nationals in the 1970s and 1980s. “I think an effort at lowering tensions would be. That he does not see it that way, I regret.”………
In a separate interview, Joshua Pollack, a senior research associate at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, California, said he does not believe pressure and sanctions alone will achieve the Trump administration’s goal of denuclearizing North Korea.
Pollack described the relationship as a seemingly endless cycle of provocations and pressure.
The foreign ministry said the military exercises involving hundreds of South Korean and U.S warplanes made the outbreak of war an “established fact.” It also blamed high-ranking U.S. officials, including CIA Director Mike Pompeo, for “bellicose remarks.”
Pompeo said Saturday that U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korean leader Kim Jong Un doesn’t have a good idea about how tenuous his situation is domestically and internationally as he pushes ahead with North Kore’s nuclear weapons program.
We do not wish for a war but shall not hide from it, and should the U.S. miscalculate our patience and light the fuse for a nuclear war, we will surely make the U.S. dearly pay the consequences with our mighty nuclear force which we have consistently strengthened,” North Korea, which regularly threatens the U.S. and its allies, said.
The comments were consistent with the tone of Pyongyang’s previous confrontational remarks and statements condemning Washington and Seoul.
The U.S. Air Force arrived in South Korea Saturday and plans to participate in a joint aerial drill this week in South Korea. The drill is known as “Vigilant Ace” and it comes just a week after North Korea launched its most destructive ballistic missile. For more on the story here is Zachary Devita. Buzz60
South Korea’s military said the drills — a Guam-based bomber simulated land strikes at a field near South Korea’s eastern coast — “displayed the allies’ strong intent and ability to punish North Korea when threatened by nuclear weapons and missiles.”
Flyovers have become an increasingly familiar show of force to North Korea, which after three intercontinental ballistic missile tests and six nuclear tests has moved closer toward building a nuclear arsenal that could viably target the U.S. mainland.
Will Japan ‘rent’ nukes from US to counter North Korean threat?
‘Dual key’ nuclear weapons-sharing with Washington would save Tokyo trouble of developing own arsenal, protect alliance, Asia Times, DOUG TSURUOKADECEMBER 6, 2017, “……the unthinkable has become publicly thinkable. There’s widespread debate in Japan about whether the country should go nuclear – either by developing its own arsenal, or sharing such weapons with the US under a “dual key” arrangement, popularly known as “rent-a-nukes,” to counter the growing threat from North Korea……. http://www.atimes.com/article/will-japan-rent-nukes-us-counter-north-korean-threat/
Although Kim Jong Un has yet to impact the United States’ physical environment, his nuclear tests have already caused extensive damage on his own soil. Testing at the country’s Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Facility has caused a majority of the trees—about 80 percent—in the area to die, according to defectors from the region. The defectors, who were interviewed by The Research Association of Vision of North Korea, also noted that the underground wells no longer had water, according to a report published in Chosun Ilbo, a South Korean newspaper.
Another notable concern is the bomb’s potential to contaminate the area with radioactive material. Although North Korean government radiation levels came back normal in September, there’s the still risk of future leaks, especially if more tests are conducted, Chinese scientists told the South China Morning Post.
The scientists warned that another nuclear test under Mount Mantap could cause it to collapse and suffer a radiation leak.
“We call it ‘taking the roof off’: If the mountain collapses and the hole is exposed, it will let out many bad things,” Wang Naiyan, former chairman of the China Nuclear Society and senior researcher on China’s nuclear weapons program, told the South China Morning Post.
Radiation also would impact other forms of life.
“In areas where humans are killed or injured by radiation, the same lethality for animals would be expected. If large herds of farm animals were affected, poor sanitation could become a significant problem,” authors of the bookEffects of Nuclear Earth-Penetrator and Other Weapons wrote.
The authors noted that plants would get hit hard too, especially pine and spruce, which are among the species that are the most sensitive to radiation.
“It is conceivable that forests could be killed, which in turn could result in forest fires. The demise of the pine forest near the Chernobyl plant was one notable example of this effect,” the authors, who are part of the National Academies of Sciences, wrote.
Earth’s ozone layer would also take a large hit from nuclear blasts, according to a 2006 study. Climate scientists who conducted the research found that the extent of damage capable of nuclear weapons could impact the Earth for decades.
“Nuclear weapons are the greatest environmental danger to the planet from humans—not global warming or ozone depletion,” Alan Robock, a coauthor of the study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research, told The Guardian.
Why can’t we live with a nuclear North Korea?, The Week, GracyOlmstead 6 Dec 17 How do you “solve” the North Korea problem? This question has dominated U.S. foreign policy discussions for years. Former President Barack Obama warned President Trump before his inauguration that the small, poor, nuclear-armed country could pose the most urgent foreign policy challenge of his presidency.
Despite extensive economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure, North Korea continues to advance its military power. Last week, North Korea tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that could potentially reach the entire continental U.S. American politicians are scrambling to figure out how to respond.
Unfortunately, the first and primary position on the part of most U.S. policymakers has been panicked overreaction. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told CNN, “If we have to go to war to stop this, we will. If there’s a war with North Korea it will be because North Korea brought it on itself, and we’re headed to a war if things don’t change.”…….
North Korea is an oppressive and dictatorial country, one that has committed a plethora of human rights atrocities against its citizens, and which uses propaganda and antagonism to anger its opponents on the world stage. We know this. But while concerning, this new step by North Korea is neither unexpected nor revolutionary. The fundamentals of the situation remain unchanged. Policymakers need to take a deep breath.
Calling for war or military strikes to remove their nuclear capabilities is a counterproductive and dangerous policy. U.S. resources and presence in the region are already considerable — as American University scholar Joshua Rovner explains, “The best way to deter nuclear powers from using their arsenals to act more conventionally aggressive is by maintaining local conventional superiority. This enhances deterrence without risking escalation, which in turn reduces questions about credibility and alleviates stress on alliances.”
South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in opposes preventive strikes in response to North Korea’s recent tests, and has expressed some concern that the U.S. might act prematurely. “We must stop a situation where North Korea miscalculates and threatens us with nuclear weapons or where the United States considers a pre-emptive strike,” he said at a recent emergency meeting in Seoul.
Attempting to overthrow or undermine North Korea’s regime would have massive implications for South Korea, as well as for China and North Korea’s vulnerable citizenry. In this instance, preventive military action would result in a bevy of unintended consequences, yet nobody in the Trump administration talks about this…….
Calling for war or military strikes to remove their nuclear capabilities is a counterproductive and dangerous policy. U.S. resources and presence in the region are already considerable — as American University scholar Joshua Rovner explains, “The best way to deter nuclear powers from using their arsenals to act more conventionally aggressive is by maintaining local conventional superiority. This enhances deterrence without risking escalation, which in turn reduces questions about credibility and alleviates stress on alliances.”
South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in opposes preventive strikes in response to North Korea’s recent tests, and has expressed some concern that the U.S. might act prematurely. “We must stop a situation where North Korea miscalculates and threatens us with nuclear weapons or where the United States considers a pre-emptive strike,” he said at a recent emergency meeting in Seoul.
Attempting to overthrow or undermine North Korea’s regime would have massive implications for South Korea, as well as for China and North Korea’s vulnerable citizenry. In this instance, preventive military action would result in a bevy of unintended consequences, yet nobody in the Trump administration talks about this.
…….”Maximum pressure” will not work with North Korea. The U.S. must instead consider a strategy that acknowledges North Korea’s purpose and personality — and one that inspires confidence and respect in our allies, most especially South Korea, whose confidence in usseems to have been shakenby recent events…….
Although a nuclear North Korea is far from ideal, descending into panic will not serve U.S. interests abroad, and it won’t keep America safe. The Trump administration must consider the dangerous ramifications of their belligerent stance toward North Korea, before they make a catastrophic miscalculation. http://theweek.com/articles/740247/why-cant-live-nuclear-north-korea
U.N. political chief makes rare visit to North Korea for ‘wide-ranging’ discussions, Japan Times, AP, AFP-JIJI, KYODO, STAFF REPORTUNITED NATIONS 5 Dec 17, –
The U.N.’s political chief, and America’s highest-ranking national in the U.N. Secretariat, arrived in North Korea on Tuesday to begin a rare four-day visit at the invitation of Pyongyang, for a “wide-ranging” discussion on policy issues “of mutual interest and concern.”
The trip comes a week after the isolated regime launched its most powerful missile to date, and during a massive joint air exercise by the U.S. and South Korea on the Korean Peninsula involving 230 aircraft and 12,000 American troops.
The highest-level U.N. official to visit North Korea in more than six years, U.N. Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman had met with China’s Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong on Monday before setting off for North Korea’s capital the next day, according to U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric. Feltman was later confirmed to have arrived in Pyongyang, after being seen earlier Tuesday in a U.N.-flagged car at the Chinese capital’s international airport from which North Korea’s Air Koryo operates flights.
Asked whether Feltman would meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Dujarric said that his current schedule included meetings with Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho, Vice Minister Pak Myong Guk, diplomats and U.N. staff for “wide-ranging” discussions.”………
Feltman’s visit comes at a time of heightened tensions between North Korea and South Korea, Japan and the United States, sparked by the reclusive country’s frequent missile launches and recent nuclear test, and particularly by its latest long-range ballistic missile launch.
Air drills put region on ‘brink of nuclear war’, warns North Korea, 9 News, By Richard Wood
The comments by North Korea represent rising escalation on the Korean peninsula and came as US National Security Adviser HR McMaster declared the possibility of war was “increasing” daily. Pyongyang described the drill as ‘warmongering’.
The five-day air drill called Vigilant Ace kicks off today over the Korean peninsula and involves 230 advanced warplanes from the South Korean and US air forces.
Commentary by Pyongyang’s Rodong Sinmun newspaper, carried by North Korea’s state media agency, criticised the exercise as a “dangerous provocation” propelling the region to “the brink of nuclear war”.
A total of 12,000 US personnel from the marines, navy and air force will take part in Vigilant Ace, reports The Wall Street Journal.
The aircraft flying from eight bases include the hi-tech F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning.
Both aircraft are more than a match for anything in North Korea’s largely Soviet-era air force and are cloaked in stealth coating, making them virtually invisible to enemy radar. Flying at 1930km/h, the F-35s can carry nuclear bombs and bunker-busting munitions, regarded as vital for targeting and destroying North Korea’s complex of military tunnels……. https://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/12/04/11/54/us-and-south-korean-air-drills-risk-war-north-warns
Those of us in the field of emergency preparedness shudder with the realization that a growing number of nations are joining the global thermonuclear arms race.
This reality is fraught with consequences that most people do not recognize, and frankly do not want to know.
In a nutshell, thermonuclear weapons, colloquially known as H-bombs, produce much larger yields of destructive power than the nuclear weapons that countries tested in the early days of nuclear weapon development.
For example, the nuclear bombs that the U.S. dropped on Japan in 1945 were in the 15 to 20 kiloton yield. This means that they had the destructive power of an equivalent of 15,000 to 20,000 tons of dynamite.
In addition to killing about 100,000 people, these weapons cause thousands of traumatic injuries, thousands of radiation injuries and hundreds of thermal burn victims.
Compare that to a thermonuclear weapon which is in the range of 75 to 49,000 kilotons of destructive power. Used on a densely populated urban center like New York City or Tokyo, just one weapon would kill millions of people and produce millions of casualties.
Those numbers are devastating enough, but the real nightmare is that the number of thermal burn casualties greatly multiply with a thermonuclear weapon relative to a simple nuclear weapon.
A typical serious thermal burn injury in a well staffed hospital takes three to four medical personnel per patient to provide adequate care. When we have hundreds of thousands of surviving burn patients due to an urban thermonuclear detonation, we are not going to be able to treat even a tiny fraction of them.
Until now, only wealthy and advanced nations – the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France and Israel – were able to produce these massively destructive thermonuclear weapons.
Now, with poor and unstable North Korea joining the thermonuclear club, other small nations may realize that this previously difficult threshold may be within their technical reach.
Even worse, nations around the world know that the Earth is getting to be a much more dangerous place when a nation like North Korea has such weapons, and many will perceive that their national safety now depends on procuring these terrible devices as well.
In academic journals and in the media, there is talk of Indiaacquiring thermonuclear weapons on the fast track, which will pressure Pakistan to do the same. The sense of urgency is even touching nations that previously eschewed the development of nuclear weapons.
Even Japan – which by its constitution is significantly restricted in its armaments and has no nuclear weapons at all – could use its enormous stockpile of nuclear waste to rapidly develop an equally enormous stockpile of thermonuclear weapons.
Despite repeated headlines about the growing possibility of nuclear war, most people, curiously, avoid thinking or talking about it. In over a thousand lectures on nuclear war medical response, I find even medical audiences do not want to address the issue.
In fact, I recently published an assessment of U.S. and Asian emergency medical responders’ hypothetical response to a nuclear event which found a striking lack of knowledge about patients affected by radiation after nuclear war and a strong reluctance to treat them, even though it is far less dangerous than treating infectious disease patients.
This fear of radiation is just as pronounced in the general population. We had a very hard time getting the medical and public health community to adequately address this issue even when we were focused on the smaller, Hiroshima-sized weapons, where it is feasible to mount a credible response. Now, we have to discuss the grim prospect of responding to the global thermonuclear arms race that we are now in – and currently losing.
While nuclear nonproliferation remains a top priority, the preparation for responding to the actual use of these terrible weapons is now a regrettable necessity that we must confront.
Cham Dallas is the director of the Institute for Disaster Management at the University of Georgia.
Air drills put region on ‘brink of nuclear war’, warns North Korea, 9 News, By Richard Wood
The comments by North Korea represent rising escalation on the Korean peninsula and came as US National Security Adviser HR McMaster declared the possibility of war was “increasing” daily. Pyongyang described the drill as ‘warmongering’.
The five-day air drill called Vigilant Ace kicks off today over the Korean peninsula and involves 230 advanced warplanes from the South Korean and US air forces.
Commentary by Pyongyang’s Rodong Sinmun newspaper, carried by North Korea’s state media agency, criticised the exercise as a “dangerous provocation” propelling the region to “the brink of nuclear war”.
A total of 12,000 US personnel from the marines, navy and air force will take part in Vigilant Ace, reports The Wall Street Journal.
The aircraft flying from eight bases include the hi-tech F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning.
Both aircraft are more than a match for anything in North Korea’s largely Soviet-era air force and are cloaked in stealth coating, making them virtually invisible to enemy radar. Flying at 1930km/h, the F-35s can carry nuclear bombs and bunker-busting munitions, regarded as vital for targeting and destroying North Korea’s complex of military tunnels……. https://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/12/04/11/54/us-and-south-korean-air-drills-risk-war-north-warns
North Korea celebrates becoming a nuclear state with huge rally and firework display
Troops cheered, laughed and smiled as a beautiful firework display lit up Kim Il-Sung Square in Pyongyang
North Korea is celebrating the declaration by dictator Kim Jong-Un that the Stalinist state is a nuclear power
It comes after the dramatic launch of the long-range Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday
By Iain Burns Daily Mail. UK,
Thousands of North Korean soldiers have appeared at a rally today to celebrate after dictator Kim Jong-Un declared the Stalinist regime a nuclear power.
Troops cheered, laughed and smiled as a huge firework display lit up Kim Il-Sung Square in Pyongyang following the successful test of the Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday.
State media reported that North Korea‘s leader Kim Jong-Un had declared the country had achieved the ‘historic cause’ of becoming a nuclear state on November 29……..
The Pentagon said the test missile traveled about 620 miles and landed within 200 nautical miles of Japan’s coast.
In a broadcast on state TV, North Korea said the missile reached an altitude of around 2,780 miles – more than 10 times the height of the international space station – and flew 600 miles during its 53 minute flight.
North Korea deliberately fires its missile on a near-vertical trajectory to artificially limit the range.
Tokyo, 1 December 2017 – On 30 November, Kansai Electric and Kyushu Electric announced that they are delaying the restart of four nuclear reactors for approximately two months due to ongoing investigations into Kobe Steel components. Greenpeace is calling for the immediate shutdown of operating reactors, owned by these same utilities, that may also have defective Kobe Steel components at the Takahama and Sendai plants.
While Kansai Electric has delayed operation of Ohi 3 and 4 reactors, it continues to operate its two reactors at Takahama. Similarly, Kyushu Electric has delayed operation of Genkai 3 and 4, while continuing to operate its two reactors at Sendai.
“If Kansai Electric and Kyushu Electric are delaying restart of the Ohi and Genkai reactors due to the need to conduct investigations, how can they justify continued operation of the reactors at Takahama and Sendai? The NRA has so far failed in its responsibilities as a regulator to get to grips with this rapidly evolving scandal. It must set aside nuclear industry interests and prioritize inspections. That includes shutting down operating reactors that may have defective parts until and unless safety can be guaranteed.” said Kazue Suzuki, Energy Campaigner Greenpeace Japan.
More than a month ago, Greenpeace Japan warned that there were potentially major safety risks with Kobe Steel components installed in reactors that warranted strong intervention by the NRA.[1] On 24 October, Greenpeace Japan, along with other citizens groups, submitted evidence to the NRA of Kobe Steel’s extensive supply chain to the nuclear industry, demonstrating the pervasiveness of the potential problems.[2] We called on the agency to take urgent action to launch a comprehensive investigation into the supply and widespread use of potentially flawed Kobe Steel products in the Japanese nuclear industry. Included in the demands were calls for the suspension of restart plans for the Ohi, Genkai reactors, and shutdown of the four reactors Takahama and Sendai.
As of today, the NRA has yet to issue detailed written instructions to all reactor operators to investigate the use of potentially faulty Kobe Steel components. Instead, submissions have been made by 6 of the 11 nuclear utilities and lack any substantial information and analysis.
In one example, On 13 October, it was confirmed that Shinko Metal Products Co., owned by Kobe Steel, supplied tubes to the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) for use in heat exchangers at the Fukushima Daini nuclear plant but failed to conduct required inspections.[3 & 4]
For further information:
[1] The letter was signed by Green Action, Mihama-no-kai, Citizens Nuclear Information Center, Citizen’s Watch on Nuclear Regulator, Friends of the Earth Japan, and Greenpeace Japan
[2] The Kobe Steel Group Supply Chain to the Nuclear Industry And Safety Implications (Greenpeace Japan Briefing Paper)
[3] See the TEPCO’s announcement (in Japanese)
[4] For more information on the risks of faulty steel in these components, see: “Irregularities and anomalies relating to nuclear reactor primary coolant circuit components installed in Japanese nuclear power plants”
A ‘preventive strike’ against North Korea would trigger ‘nuclear retaliation’
On Tuesday, North Korea test fired what experts believe is its most advanced long range, nuclear-capable missile yet.
In response, Sen. Lindsey Graham told CNN “If we have to go to war to stop this we will.”
A preventive strike against North Korea is not feasible and would have devastating consequences. The best path is still diplomacy. Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, USA, Ret. CNBC , 1 December 17,
On Tuesday, North Korea test fired what experts believe is its most advanced long range, nuclear-capable missile yet. In response, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) bluntly told CNN’s that Trump will not allow North Korea to even possess a nuclear missile capable of hitting the U.S.”If we have to go to war to stop this we will,” he said. “We’re headed towards a war if things don’t change.”If Sen. Graham’s binary choice accurately reflects the president’s thinking, then war will come, and millions could die, including thousands of Americans. Such a war is too costly to seriously consider absent an imminent attack.
It is difficult to overstate the negative consequences that would result should President Trump order any type of “preventive” military strike—that is, an attack to deprive them of a capability rather than to stop an actual, imminent launch—against North Korea.
Choe Kang-il, Deputy Director General for North American affairs at North Korea’s foreign ministry recently told the New York Times, “If the United States even hints at a strike on North Korea, we will proceed with a preemptive attack on the U.S.”In case some are tempted to think these threats are merely bluster by the Kim regime, they were echoed almost precisely last month in congressional testimony by the highest ranking North Korean official ever to defect.
Former diplomat Thae Yong-ho told members of Congress North Korean officers are trained to fire their weapons “without any further instructions from the general command if anything happens on their side.” Their response would be immediate and devastating.
Consider the most dangerous course of action: this latest test, reportedly fired from a mobile launcher, indicates North Korea has the ability to launch nuclear-tipped missiles. If the United States tries to take out launch points, or even a massive and sustained bombing campaign in an attempt to destroy their ability to retaliate, we will inflict extraordinary damage—but it is unlikely our attacks would successfully penetrate all their mountain bunkers.
That leaves the possibility that Kim Jong-un would order a mobile launcher to emerge from its protective bunker, and in retaliation, send a nuclear missile crashing into Guam, Hawaii, or Seattle.
Such an act would not be a fringe possibility were the U.S. to launch any type of “preventive” armed attack; it would be a likely outcome.
The window of opportunity to strike North Korea without risk of nuclear retaliation closed many years ago. For more than a decade, it has been impossible to take out North Korea’s ability to launch conventional and nuclear retaliatory strikes against our allies—the only recent development is that our homeland may now also be at risk of a counterstrike.
North Korea reveals images of new ballistic missile – it’s a monster, SMH, 1 Dec 17, North Korea released numerous images Thursday that it says are of the new intercontinental ballistic missile it claims is capable of striking “the whole mainland of the US.”
Dozens of photos of the Hwasong-15 missile were published in state media. North Korea claims to have achieved its goal of becoming a nuclear state with the missile launch Wednesday.
Michael Duitsman, a researcher at the Centre for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, California, tweeted soon after the photos were published: “This is very big missile … And I don’t mean ‘Big for North Korea.’ Only a few countries can produce missiles of this size, and North Korea just joined the club.”
Duitsman suggested the new ICBM appears to have a different engine arrangement and improved steering from the the smaller Hwasong-14 ICBM that the North tested twice in July.
“They wanted (to be able) to hit all of the US and they wanted something big to hit it with. This seems on the surface level to be that missile,” David Schmerler, a research associate at the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies, told CNN.
The Hwasong-15 appears to be the longest-range missile ever tested by North Korea, which said it reached an altitude of 2,780 miles (4473 km) and flew a distance of 590 miles (949 km) in 53 minutes.
Bomb shelter boss ‘wants North Korea to launch nuclear attack’ to help sell new ‘high street bunkers’Mirror UK, 30 Nov 17 British bunker experts have been working alongside a Korean company on making the world’s toughest shelters to prepare for nuclear war A bomb shelter boss ‘wants North Korea to launch a nuclear attack’ to help sell ‘high street bunkers’.
The bunkers have been built to withstand a nuclear attack, by Kim Jong-un are now being sold on Seoul’s high street.
British bunker experts Castellex have been working alongside the Korean company Chumdan Bunker System on making the world’s toughest shelters to prepare for nuclear war.
A ‘bunker showroom’ has now been opened in downtown Seoul, in the same shopping area where people are buying clothes and cosmetics. CBS owner Go Wan Hyeok says that demand from ‘petrified’ locals for affordable bunkers led him to set up in the busy retail district of Jangan-Dong – and wants to branch out to Europe and the UK within five years.
He said: “I’m wishing that he presses the button and shoots the bomb!
Analysis: How could the Agung volcano in Bali affect global temperatures? Carbon Brief, ZEKE HAUSFATHER 25.10.2017While human activity has been the dominant driver of climate change over the past century, natural factors can influence short-term variations in global temperature.
Major volcanic eruptions, in particular, can have a sizable cooling impact on the climate lasting for five years or so.
The Mount Agung volcano in Bali, Indonesia has been showing signs that an eruption is likely to occur this year. Last time Agung erupted, back in 1963, it had a noticeable cooling effect on the Earth’s climate.
Here, Carbon Brief examines how volcanoes influence the climate, and suggests that a new Agung eruption would likely only result in a modest and temporary cooling of global temperatures.
Volcanoes and climate changeVolcanoes generally have a cooling influence on the Earth’s surface.Eruptions send a cloud of ash and dust high into the atmosphere. The sulphur dioxidereleased combines with water to form sulfuric acid aerosols, which reflect incoming sunlight and influence cloud formation. When eruptions are powerful enough to reach the stratosphere (18 km or more above the surface at the equator), these sulphate aerosols can stay aloft for a number of years and have a strong cooling effect on the climate.
Volcanic eruptions also release CO2 into the atmosphere, meaning they contribute to warming by strengthening the greenhouse effect. But this influence is very small, and is outweighed by the cooling impact of the dust and ash.
The location of volcanoes also matter. Major volcanic eruptions near the equator are more likely to have a big effect on global temperatures, while high-latitude eruptions (like Laki) will have their effects more limited to the one hemisphere. Sulphate aerosols from high-latitude volcanoes generally will not cross the equator, while tropical volcanoes tend to cool both hemispheres………
This projection, which is based on the historical relationship between volcanic eruptions and temperature, suggests that an Agung eruption would reduce global temperatures between 0.1C to 0.2C in period from 2018 to 2020, with temperatures mostly recovering back to where they otherwise would be by 2023.
There is no guarantee that an eruption of Agung today would be the same size as the one in 1963, however. A small volcanic eruption that doesn’t reach the stratosphere would have a relatively minor climate impact, as sulphur dioxide from the volcano would quickly fall out of the atmosphere.
On the flip side, we have records of much larger volcanic eruptions, such as Tambora in 1815 that may have cooled the globe by 0.6C or more and led to the “year without a summer”. Even in large eruptions this cooling only lasts a few years, however, as once sulphate aerosols eventually fall back to earth the climate quickly returns to normal.
This projection, which is based on the historical relationship between volcanic eruptions and temperature, suggests that an Agung eruption would reduce global temperatures between 0.1C to 0.2C in period from 2018 to 2020, with temperatures mostly recovering back to where they otherwise would be by 2023.
There is no guarantee that an eruption of Agung today would be the same size as the one in 1963, however. A small volcanic eruption that doesn’t reach the stratosphere would have a relatively minor climate impact, as sulphur dioxide from the volcano would quickly fall out of the atmosphere.
nuclear-news 