Glaciers To Reach Peak Rate of Extinction In the Alps In Eight Years
(Tuesday December 16, 2025 @05:00AM (BeauHD)
from the mark-your-calendar dept.)
- Reference: 0180394131
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/12/16/0335255/glaciers-to-reach-peak-rate-of-extinction-in-the-alps-in-eight-years
- Source link:
A new study warns that glaciers in the European Alps will [1]hit their peak extinction rate within eight years , with global glacier loss accelerating toward thousands per year unless emissions are rapidly cut. "Glaciers in the western US and Canada are forecast to reach their peak year of loss less than a decade later, with more than 800 disappearing each year by then," adds the Guardian. From the report:
> About 200,000 glaciers remain worldwide, with about 750 disappearing each year. However, the research indicates this pace will accelerate rapidly as emissions from burning fossil fuels continue to be released into the atmosphere. Current climate action plans from governments are forecast to push global temperatures to about 2.7C above preindustrial levels, supercharging extreme weather. Under this scenario, glacier losses would peak at about 3,000 a year in 2040 and plateau at that rate until 2060. By the end of the century, 80% of today's glaciers will have gone. By contrast, rapid cuts to carbon emissions to keep global temperature rise to 1.5C would cap annual losses at about 2,000 a year in 2040, after which the rate would decline. [...]
>
> The new study, [2]published in Nature Climate Change , analyzed more than 200,000 glaciers from a database of outlines derived from satellite images. The researchers used three global glacier models to assess their fate under different heating scenarios. Regions with the smallest and fastest-melting glaciers were found to be the most vulnerable. The study estimates the 3,200 glaciers in central Europe would shrink by 87% by 2100 -- even if global temperature rise is limited to 1.5C, rising to 97% under 2.7C of heating.
>
> In the western US and Canada, including Alaska, about 70% of today's 45,000 glaciers are projected to vanish under 1.5C of heating, and more than 90% under 2.7C. The Caucasus and southern Andes are also expected to face devastating losses. Larger glaciers take longer to melt, with those in Greenland reaching their peak extinction rate in about 2063 -- losing 40% by 2100 under 1.5C of heating and 59% under 2.7C. However, the melting is forecast to continue beyond 2100. The researchers said the peak loss dates represent more than a numerical milestone. "They mark turning points with profound implications for ecosystems, water resources and cultural heritage," they wrote. "[It is] a human story of vanishing landscapes, fading traditions and disrupted daily routines."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/15/alpine-glaciers-rate-extinction-climate-crisis
[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02513-9
> About 200,000 glaciers remain worldwide, with about 750 disappearing each year. However, the research indicates this pace will accelerate rapidly as emissions from burning fossil fuels continue to be released into the atmosphere. Current climate action plans from governments are forecast to push global temperatures to about 2.7C above preindustrial levels, supercharging extreme weather. Under this scenario, glacier losses would peak at about 3,000 a year in 2040 and plateau at that rate until 2060. By the end of the century, 80% of today's glaciers will have gone. By contrast, rapid cuts to carbon emissions to keep global temperature rise to 1.5C would cap annual losses at about 2,000 a year in 2040, after which the rate would decline. [...]
>
> The new study, [2]published in Nature Climate Change , analyzed more than 200,000 glaciers from a database of outlines derived from satellite images. The researchers used three global glacier models to assess their fate under different heating scenarios. Regions with the smallest and fastest-melting glaciers were found to be the most vulnerable. The study estimates the 3,200 glaciers in central Europe would shrink by 87% by 2100 -- even if global temperature rise is limited to 1.5C, rising to 97% under 2.7C of heating.
>
> In the western US and Canada, including Alaska, about 70% of today's 45,000 glaciers are projected to vanish under 1.5C of heating, and more than 90% under 2.7C. The Caucasus and southern Andes are also expected to face devastating losses. Larger glaciers take longer to melt, with those in Greenland reaching their peak extinction rate in about 2063 -- losing 40% by 2100 under 1.5C of heating and 59% under 2.7C. However, the melting is forecast to continue beyond 2100. The researchers said the peak loss dates represent more than a numerical milestone. "They mark turning points with profound implications for ecosystems, water resources and cultural heritage," they wrote. "[It is] a human story of vanishing landscapes, fading traditions and disrupted daily routines."
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/15/alpine-glaciers-rate-extinction-climate-crisis
[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02513-9
No surprise here. (Score:2)
by Qbertino ( 265505 )
This has been going on for decades due to man made climate change. That the alpine glaciers will be gone within a decade has just about been common knowledge too. The true story is that time is quickly running out on getting an eco-turnaround happening that will prevent the worst.
Re: (Score:2)
by Barsteward ( 969998 )
Could be the start of the wars over water supply
Isn't AI going to fix this? (Score:2)
by votsalo ( 5723036 )
We'll be able to have billions of AI-generated glaciers, at least one in each home. Is this what Eric Schmidt meant?
Hydroelectric dams (Score:1)
When the climate gives you meetings, why not make electricity from it? Just surround the Alps with dams and it could generate a few trillion megawatts of free electricity to the world.
Re: (Score:2)
*meltings (fuck ottocarwrecked)
Re: (Score:2)
Lemon, man! Watch what you twype!
Re: (Score:3)
Cute, but I think reality would like a few words:
Planning permission. Especially so in Europe, maybe not such a problem with Trump, apart from the fact he *hates* anything "green".
Geology. Not all ground is suitable for building a heavy structure like a dam, or retaining the water it would hold back, reducing the number of glaciers this could apply to somewhat, and a proper survey can take a lot of time. You definitely do not want to build a dam on unsuitable ground.
Geography. You'd need to be able
Re: (Score:3)
> why not make electricity from it?
The Alps are already a major source of hydropower for their countries. Switzerland owns 200 dams [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] totalling 13 GWhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropower_in_Switzerland ; France operates 65 dams in its part of the Alps [2]https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] totalling 8 GW [3]https://www.edf.fr/sites/group... [www.edf.fr] .
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dams_and_reservoirs_in_Switzerland
[2] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_lacs_de_barrage_de_France
[3] https://www.edf.fr/sites/groupe/files/2024-10/EDF_plaquette_hydroAlpes_2024_BD.pdf
Re: (Score:2)
I often compare with Quebec to get an idea of the order of magnitude:
[1]https://www.hydroquebec.com/ge... [hydroquebec.com]
> Hydro-Québec’s generating fleet comprises 61 hydroelectric generating stations and 24 thermal plants with a total installed capacity of 37.2 GW. Its hydropower facilities also include 28 large reservoirs with a combined storage capacity of over 176 TWh, as well as 681 dams and 91 control structures.
Wikipedia:
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
[1] https://www.hydroquebec.com/generation/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec