Has warming put 'Dirty Dozen' pollutants back in the saddle?

Jul 24, 2011
Broken ice floats in the Arctic Ocean off the northern coast of Greenland in 2004. "Dirty Dozen" chemicals, including the notoriously toxic DDT, are being freed from Arctic sea ice and snow through global warming, a study published on Sunday suggested.

"Dirty Dozen" chemicals, including the notoriously toxic DDT, are being freed from Arctic sea ice and snow through global warming, a study published on Sunday suggested.

The "Dirty Dozen" -- formally known as (POPs) -- were widely used as insecticides and pesticides before being outlawed in 2001.

They are extremely tough molecules that take decades to break down in nature. They also bio-accumulate, meaning that as they pass up the food chain, concentrations rise, posing a fertility threat to higher species.

In addition, they are insoluble in water and easily revolatilise, so can swiftly transit from soil and water to the atmosphere in response to higher temperatures.

The study, published in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change, looked at atmospheric concentrations of three chemicals -- DDT, HCH and cis-chlordane -- monitored between 1993 and 2009 at a station in Norway's Svalbard Islands and at another in the .

The scientists indeed found a long-term downward trend in primary emissions after the Stockholm Convention banned production and trade in the "Dirty Dozen."

But a more complex and disturbing picture emerged when the same data was crunched through a simulation of the effect of global warming on POP concentrations.

It found a slight rise in secondary emissions, from POPs that had been locked in and snow but were now being gradually released because of warming.

"A wide range of POPs have been remobilised into the Arctic atmosphere over the past two decades as a result of ," said the study, led by Jianmin Ma of the agency Environment Canada in Toronto.

"could undermine global efforts to reduce environmental and human exposure to these ," it warned.

Pollution specialist Jordi Dachs of the Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research in Barcelona, Spain, said this news was grim.

The Arctic has been hit two or three times harder than other parts of the planet for warming, and thus could be the forerunner for POP releases from other stores, including the soil and deep ocean.

"It seems likely that persistent pollutants will affect the environment on even longer timescales than currently assumed," said Dachs.

"The remobilisation of pollutants generated by our grandparents... are unwanted witnesses to our environmental past that now seem to be 'coming in from the cold.'"

Explore further: US delays decision on Keystone pipeline project

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

UN: Treaty expanded by 9 more dangerous chemicals

May 09, 2009

(AP) -- A U.N.-sponsored treaty to combat highly dangerous chemicals has been expanded beyond the original "dirty dozen" to include nine more substances that are used in pesticides, flame retardants and other products, U.N. ...

Dirty snow may warm Arctic as much as greenhouse gases

Jun 06, 2007

The global warming debate has focused on carbon dioxide emissions, but scientists at UC Irvine have determined that a lesser-known mechanism -- dirty snow -- can explain one-third or more of the Arctic warming ...

Arctic Ocean waters warm suddenly

Oct 07, 2005

Water flowing from the North Atlantic Ocean into the Arctic provides evidence that the Arctic Ocean is warming, according to U.S. and European researchers.

Recommended for you

US delays decision on Keystone pipeline project

14 hours ago

The United States announced Friday a fresh delay on a final decision regarding a controversial Canada to US oil pipeline, saying more time was needed to carry out a review.

New research on Earth's carbon budget

21 hours ago

(Phys.org) —Results from a research project involving scientists from the Desert Research Institute have generated new findings surrounding some of the unknowns of changes in climate and the degree to which ...

User comments : 19

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

dogbert
2.3 / 5 (19) Jul 24, 2011
... a more complex and disturbing picture emerged when the same data was crunched through a simulation of the effect of global warming on POP concentrations.


Note. This is not a study of emissions released through global warming. It is a forecast based on simulations.

It is a meaningless publication.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (20) Jul 24, 2011
Maybe youre referring to another article entirely, on another internet at the other end of the continuum? This one says:
"The study, published in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change, looked at atmospheric concentrations of three chemicals -- DDT, HCH and cis-chlordane -- monitored between 1993 and 2009 at a station in Norway's Svalbard Islands and at another in the Canadian Arctic..."A wide range of POPs have been remobilised into the Arctic atmosphere over the past two decades as a result of climate change,"

-In other words its "a study of emissions released through global warming."

-At least in the minds of these scientists.
dogbert
2.1 / 5 (15) Jul 24, 2011
TheGhostofOtto1923,

Perhaps you are referring to another article entirely or did not read this one:
The scientists indeed found a long-term downward trend in primary emissions after the Stockholm Convention banned production and trade in the "Dirty Dozen."

But a more complex and disturbing picture emerged when the same data was crunched through a simulation of the effect of global warming on POP concentrations.


The supposed release of POPs from the Arctic are based on simulations, not measurements.

The study is not a study at all. It is, as I said, meaningless.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (18) Jul 24, 2011
Indeed it looks like otto goes off half-cocked because he missed this paragraph:
But a more complex and disturbing picture emerged when the same data was crunched through a simulation of the effect of global warming on POP concentrations.
I stand corrected. Had you merely cited this same paragraph you would have looked better than you usually do, which is not very rhetorically practiced. A little friendly advice.
dogbert
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 24, 2011
I'm impressed Otto. Good show!
FrankHerbert
2 / 5 (15) Jul 24, 2011
... a more complex and disturbing picture emerged when the same data was crunched through a simulation of the effect of global warming on POP concentrations.


Note. This is not a study of emissions released through global warming. It is a forecast based on simulations.

It is a meaningless publication.


Much like your posts.
dogbert
2.5 / 5 (13) Jul 24, 2011
No Frank. Like your posts. Except your posts are not just meaningless, they are trolls.

Again, I'll ask. Why don't you try to engage in the conversation in a positive way? Why the constant trolling?
omatumr
2.1 / 5 (10) Jul 24, 2011
"Dirty Dozen" chemicals, including the notoriously toxic DDT, are being freed from Arctic sea ice and snow through global warming, a study published on Sunday suggested.


This is not a study . . . It is a forecast based on simulations.


Dogbert is right: This is NOT a study.

Government science has become a tool of government propaganda, as Eisenhower warned might happen in his 1961 farewell address:

www.youtube.com/w...ld5PR4ts

The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis probably encouraged world leaders to adopt the very strategy that Eisenhower warned about.

The rest of the story is here:

http://dl.dropbox...oots.pdf

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo

Sancho
4 / 5 (5) Jul 25, 2011
""Dirty Dozen" chemicals, including the notoriously toxic DDT"

-----------------------------------------------

Propaganda. I've seen DDT consumed by the handful without effect by a human being. This gentlemen made a career of demonstating DDT's "safety" (he was an industry flack) by consuming the stuff, on camera, repeatedly. ... DDT is, of course, "notoriously toxic" to disease-carrying mosquitoes.

Point being, too many journalists repeat "common knowledge" as if it were true (e.g., today's NYT asserted without qualificastion that Lee Harvey Oswald was "an ardent Leftist" -- a howler for anyone familiar with Oswald's actual history.)
ubavontuba
3 / 5 (8) Jul 25, 2011
This is simply ridiculous. They're reporting this like it's an ongoing and developing fact, when their own measurements belie everything they're claiming!

I LOVE climate change science! It's the only science where you can announce any result you want, without regard to the facts ...and be lauded for it!

Worse, they're simply stunned when the public doesn't believe them!

Seriously, if this was any other science, they would have to report it thusly:

Although some scientists have expressed concern, there's no indication climate change has freed any of the "Dirty Dozen" chemicals (including the notoriously toxic DDT) from Arctic sea ice and snow through global warming.

Even then, it's still slanted toward fear-mongering (but at least it's factually correct)!

Howhot
3 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2011
"A wide range of POPs have been remobilised into the Arctic atmosphere over the past two decades as a result of climate change," said the study, led by Jianmin Ma of the agency Environment Canada in Toronto.


You bunch of freaking deniers, Your total paid by the word ignorant crap you post, blows my mind. The above quote is speaks the scientific truth on the issue. But typical of your kind, you spin science to be "FEAR MONGERING". Pissant POS.

Enjoy your hot summer. You made it, now you live in it.
ubavontuba
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2011
You bunch of freaking deniers,
Obviously, you didn't understand the claims you quoted in the article. Those claims were in regard to a simulation. The actual measurements are described thusly:

The study... looked at atmospheric concentrations of three chemicals -- DDT, HCH and cis-chlordane -- monitored between 1993 and 2009 at a station in Norway's Svalbard Islands and at another in the Canadian Arctic.

The scientists indeed found a long-term downward trend in primary emissions after the Stockholm Convention banned production and trade in the "Dirty Dozen."


And this encompasses the 2007 record low Arctic sea ice event!

Howhot
3 / 5 (4) Jul 26, 2011
I think that you will find that atmospheric concentration of certain POP's would have easily contaminated the arctic ice.
Ice Melts.
hush1
1 / 5 (1) Jul 26, 2011
Sly of hand. I am familiar with this expression. The article extends the meaning to words. Sly of words. O.k.
Thks to the Astute. Good catch.

Otto, I empathize. "I stand corrected" were the very words I conceded to Frajo (after he corrected my denial about widespread division by zero in mathematics).

It's threads and insights like this one that makes up for all the Mist throw at each other as a rule rather than as a exception.

hush1
not rated yet Jul 26, 2011
Typo correction in CAPS:
"...the Mist THROWN at..."
ubavontuba
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2011
I think that you will find that atmospheric concentration of certain POP's would have easily contaminated the arctic ice.
Ice Melts.

This serves to demonstrate the danger of these smokescreens, double-speak, and scare tactics.

Even though the article specifically states there's been a long-term downward trend, and even after the most severe ice-melt in recorded history, you still perceive an imminent danger.

Remarkable.

Howhot
2 / 5 (4) Jul 26, 2011
No, that is misleading uba. Yes, the article states there has been a downward trend (thank god) in POP's spread in the atmosphere. What the concern is about (fear mongering if you want to call it that) is all of the POP chemicals that where released into the atmosphere back in the 40s-50s-60s that settled into the Arctic/An-Arctic ices. With global warming and the melting of the ice, large concentrations of POP chemicals could be dumped back into the ocean doing all kinds of harm to the biology of the oceans.

Remarkable indeed!
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.1 / 5 (13) Jul 27, 2011
Otto, I empathize. "I stand corrected" were the very words I conceded to Frajo (after he corrected my denial about widespread division by zero in mathematics).
Yeah, I know your god is only a Schnuller and yet Im still compelled to act morally. I admit my mistakes, I have a hard time lying, and I even returned a dollar that fell out of a guys pocket the other day.

Imagine that.

hush1
1 / 5 (1) Jul 27, 2011
lol
Then only digression and reiteration is left:
"I'm impressed Otto. Good show!" - Dogbert

Physorg is a challenge - finding curves of mutual learning.
You are good - for any imagination.

People ask me daily all the time "How much?" when giving them something for free. I say to them "It's free - take as much as you want" Only once did a person take everything - of the offers I had for free.

That is psycho crap, nothing philo about that.

More news stories

Magnitude-7.2 earthquake shakes Mexican capital

A powerful magnitude-7.2 earthquake shook central and southern Mexico on Friday, sending panicked people into the streets. Some walls cracked and fell, but there were no reports of major damage or casualties.

New research on Earth's carbon budget

(Phys.org) —Results from a research project involving scientists from the Desert Research Institute have generated new findings surrounding some of the unknowns of changes in climate and the degree to which ...

Health care site flagged in Heartbleed review

People with accounts on the enrollment website for President Barack Obama's signature health care law are being told to change their passwords following an administration-wide review of the government's vulnerability to the ...

Airbnb rental site raises $450 mn

Online lodging listings website Airbnb inked a $450 million funding deal with investors led by TPG, a source close to the matter said Friday.