A scenario of European climate change for the late twenty-first century: seasonal means and interannual variability

A scenario of European climate change for the late twenty-first century is described, using a high-resolution state-of-the-art model. A time-slice approach is used, whereby the atmospheric general circulation model, HadAM3P, was integrated for two periods, 1960–1990 and 2070–2100, using the SRES A2 scenario. For the first time an ensemble of such experiments was produced, along with appropriate statistical tests for assessing significance. The focus is on changes to the statistics of seasonal means, and includes analysis of both multi-year means and interannual variance. All four seasons are assessed, and anomalies are mapped for surface air temperature, precipitation and snow mass. Mechanisms are proposed where these are dominated by straightforward local processes. In winter, the largest warming occurs over eastern Europe, up to 7°C, mean snow mass is reduced by at least 80% except over Scandinavia, and precipitation increases over all but the southernmost parts of Europe. In summer, temperatures rise by 6–9°C south of about 50°N, and mean rainfall is substantially reduced over the same area. In spring and autumn, anomalies tend to be weaker, but often display patterns similar to the preceding season, reflecting the inertia of the land surface component of the climate system. Changes in interannual variance are substantial in the solsticial seasons for many regions (note that for precipitation, variance estimates are scaled by the square of the mean). In winter, interannual variability of near-surface air temperature is considerably reduced over much of Europe, and the relative variability of precipitation is reduced north of about 50°N. In summer, the (relative) interannual variance of both variables increases over much of the continent.     

Inverted-polarity electrical structures in thunderstorms in the Severe Thunderstorm Electrification and Precipitation Study (STEPS)

Balloon-borne electric field soundings and lightning mapping data have been analyzed for three of the storms that occurred in the Severe Thunderstorm Electrification and Precipitation Study field program in 2000 to determine if the storms had inverted-polarity electrical structures. The polarities of all or some of the vertically stacked charge regions in such storms are opposite to the polarities observed at comparable heights in normal storms. Analyses compared the charge structures inferred from electric field soundings in the storms with charges inferred from three-dimensional lightning mapping data. Charge structures were inferred from electric field profiles by combining the one-dimensional approximation of Gauss's law with additional information from three-dimensional patterns in the electric field vectors. The three different ways of inferring the charge structure in the storms were found to complement each other and to be consistent overall. Charge deposition by lightning possibly occurred and increased the charge complexity of one of the storms.Many of the cloud flashes in each case were inverted-polarity flashes. Two storms produced ground flash activity comprised predominantly of positive ground flashes. One storm, which was an isolated thunderstorm, produced inverted-polarity cloud flashes, but no flashes to ground. The positive and negative thunderstorm charge regions were found at altitudes where, respectively, negative and positive charge would be found in normal-polarity storms. Thus, we conclude that these storms had anomalous and inverted-polarity electrical structures. Collectively, these three cases (along with the limited cases in the refereed literature) provide additional evidence that thunderstorms can have inverted-polarity electrical structures.     

Seismic anisotropy beneath Dronning Maud Land, Antarctica, revealed by shear wave splitting

Shear wave splitting analyses have been carried out using teleseismic data from broad-band seismograph stations deployed at temporary and permanent locations in Dronning Maud Land (DML), Antarctica. In most cases, the observed anisotropy can be related to major tectonic events that formed the present-day Antarctic continent. We rule out an anisotropic contribution from recent asthenospheric flow. At the Russian base Novolazarevskaya near the coast in central DML, waveform inversion suggests a two-layer model where the fast direction of the upper layer is oriented parallel to Archean fabrics in the lithosphere, whereas the anisotropy of the lower layer is interpreted to have been created during the Jurassic Gondwana break-up. Recordings at the South African base Sanae IV, however, show enigmatic results. For narrow backazimuthal segments, splitting parameters show strong variations together with a multitude of isotropic measurements, indicative of complex scattering that cannot be explained by simple one- or two-layer anisotropic models. In the interior of the continent, the data are consistent with single-layer anisotropy, but show significant spatial variations in splitting parameters. A set of temporary stations across the Heimefront shear zone in western DML yield splitting directions that we interpret as frozen anisotropy from Proterozoic assembly of the craton. An abrupt change in fast axis direction appears to mark a suture between the Grunehogna craton, a fragment of the Kalahari–Kaapvaal craton in southern Africa and the Mesoproterozoic Maudheim Province.     

A solution of the elastodynamic equation in an anelastic earth model

A formal solution to the elastodynamic equation in an anelastic earth model is presented. The derivation also incorporates the effects of aspherical structure, rotation, self-gravitation, and pre-stress. It is found that the solution can be expressed as a sum of the normal modes of the earth model along with additional terms accounting for anelastic relaxation processes. However, the derivation does not assume that such an eigenfunction expansion is possible, and so avoids difficulties previously encountered due to the non self-adjointness of the problem.     

People and community as constituent parts of hazards: the significance of societal dimensions in hazards analysis

Nature-triggered hazards and disasters have traditionally been treated only from the lens of geophysical and biophysical processes, implying that the root cause of large-scale death and destruction lies in the natural domain rather than in a coupled human–environment system. Conceptually, the physical domain has been seen as discrete and separate from human entities, and solutions were sought in the technological intervention and control of the physical environment—solutions that often ended up being less effective than hoped for and sometimes even counter productive. At all levels, institutions have directed and redirected most of their financial and logistical resources into the search for scientific and engineering solutions without allocating due attention and resources towards the assessment of effects and effectiveness of the applications of such technological outcomes. However, over the last two decades, forceful criticisms of the ‘dominant’ technocratic approach to hazards analysis have appeared in the literature and consequently there has not only been a shift in thinking of causation of disaster loss in terms of human vulnerability, but also newer questions have arisen regarding distinguishing between the ‘physical exposure’ of people to threats and societal vulnerability, and linking them with propensity to hazards loss. Though the vulnerability/resilience paradigm has largely replaced the hazards paradigm within the social sciences and much of the professional emergency and disaster management communities, this shift of thinking has not progressed to much of the physical science community, decision-makers and the public, who have not yet accepted the idea that understanding and using human and societal dimensions is equally or more important than trying to deal and control nature through the use of technology. This special issue is intended to further the idea that the aspects of community and peoples’ power to mitigate, to improve coping mechanisms, to respond effectively, and recover with vigor against the environmental extremes are of paramount conceptual and policy importance.     

Epikarst communities: biodiversity hotspots and potential water tracers

There is an exceptionally rich aquatic fauna in the epikarst, the skin of karst. High species richness in the epikarst, coupled with its special vulnerability as the first point of entry of nearly all toxic spills, makes its protection especially important. The epikarst fauna may also be an useful tool in tracing the potential route of pollutants. Copepods in epikarst have extremely local distributions, and their body size is such that they are largely at the mercy of directional flows. In a series of caves in southwest Slovenia and West Virginia, a significant fraction of the copepod species occur in less than 100 m of linear extent. This suggests a pattern of highly restricted lateral flow under normal conditions and the distribution of copepods could potentially be used to trace water movement. Under high flow conditions as would often be the case with toxic spill, mounding of water may increase the lateral radius of flow. Nevertheless, copepods may be useful tracers.     

Factors Controlling Sulfide Geochemistry in Sub-tropical Estuarine and Bay Sediments

The primary factors that control the concentration of total reduced (inorganic) sulfide in coastal sediments are believed to be the availability of reactive iron, dissolved sulfate and metabolizable organic carbon. We selected nine sites in shallow (<3 m), close to sub-tropical, estuaries and bays along the central Texas coast that represented a range in sediment grain size (a proxy for reactive iron), salinity (a proxy for dissolved sulfate), and total organic carbon (a proxy for metabolizable organic carbon). Based on these parameters a prediction was made of which factor was likely to control total reduced sulfide at each site and what the relative total reduced sulfide concentration was likely to be. To test the prediction, the sediments were analyzed for total reduced sulfide, acid volatile sulfide, and citrate dithionate-extractable, HCl-extractable and total Fe in the solid phase. Using solid-state gold–mercury amalgam microelectrodes and voltammetry, we determined pore water depth profiles of Fe(II) and ΣH₂S and presence or absence of FeS_(aq). At five of the nine sites the calculated degree of sufildization of citrate dithionite-reactive-iron was close to or greater than 1 indicating that rapidly reactive iron was probably the limiting factor for iron sulfide mineral formation. At one site (salinity = 0.9) dissolved Fe(II) was high, ΣH₂S was undetectable and the total reduced sulfide concentration was low indicating sulfate limitation. At the last three sites a low degree of sulfidization and modest total reduced (inorganic) sulfide concentrations appeared to be the result of a limited supply of metabolizable organic carbon. Fe(II)–S(-II) clusters (FeS_(aq)) were undetectable in 10 out of 12 bay sediment profiles where ΣH₂S was close to or below detection limits, but was observed in all other porewater profiles. Acid volatile sulfide, but not total reduced sulfide, was well correlated with total organic carbon and ranged from being undetectable in some cores to representing a major portion of total reduced sulfide in other cores. Although predicted controls on total reduced sulfide were good for very low salinity water or sandy sediments, they were only right about half the time for the other sediments. The likely reasons for the wrong predictions are the poor correlation of total organic carbon with grain size and differing fractions of metabolizable organic carbon in different sedimentary environments. Differences in sediment accumulation rates may also play a role, but these are difficult to determine in this region where hurricanes often resuspend and move sediments. This study demonstrates the need to examine more complex and often difficult to determine parameters in anoxic “normal marine” sediments if we are to understand what controls the concentration and distribution of sulfides.