Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
PORTUGAL’S PEGO DO Altar reservoir looks like a disused quarry now, its bare, exposed slopes rising up steeply on each side and shimmering in the sun as it holds barely 11% of the water it was designed for.
The huge lake where people used to swim, boat and fish has shrunk to a slither of water, surrounded by baked, cracked earth and a handful of white fish carcasses.
It is a desolate and disturbing sight — and one that has become increasingly common in southern Portugal.
While parts of the United States and the Caribbean are drowning in water amid ferocious hurricanes, a drought is tightening its grip on wide areas of Portugal.
More than 80% of the country is officially classified as enduring “severe” or “extreme” drought — conditions among the country’s worst in more than 20 years.
Water has sporadically been scarce in this part of southern Europe for centuries. But Portuguese Environment Secretary Carlos Martins tells the Associated Press that “it has gotten worse with climate change”.
The prolonged dry spell is most acute in the Alentejo region, south and east of Lisbon, the capital. Here, the essential river is the Sado, Portugal’s seventh-largest. As its flow has dwindled, so the reservoirs in the river basin, such as Pego do Altar, are drying up. In some places now, the Sado is a thin, knee-deep flow.
Dead fish
The receding water at Pego do Altar has exposed a small, 18th-century stone bridge which was last seen in 1999. Locals have been coming to take photos of themselves next to it.
The dead fish in Pego do Altar’s dried mud are the canary in the mine for authorities.
Large numbers of fish dying due to depleted oxygen levels would contaminate the area’s public drinking water, so a program to scoop out the doomed fish from four Sado basin reservoirs is now underway. It’s a race against the clock.
“It’s a preventive measure,” says Carlos Silva, a spokesman for EDIA, a state company that helps manage the Alentejo’s water supply. “It would be a catastrophe if the fish started dying off” in large quantities.
Fishermen Tomaz Silva, 25, and Miguel Farias, 29, nudge their boat toward silver nets buoyed by empty plastic water bottles that they had strung across the reservoir the previous day. They throw the fish into a box where they flap around – some weigh 5 or 6 kilograms (up to 13 pounds) and are as long as an adult’s arm. Many, however, are skinny due to the fierce competition for diminishing food.
With the water level so low, it’s a bit like shooting fish in a barrel.
Silva and Farias catch on average between 1 and 1.5 metric tons a day. Their haul is taken away to be turned into fishmeal. Over about six weeks, officials expect to harvest more than 100 metric tons from the four Sado reservoirs.
Drinking water
Martins, the environment secretary, said a government drought monitoring committee is working to reconcile the conflicting demands placed on the region’s scarce water resources. Making sure there’s enough water for drinking faucets is the top priority, he says.
That could end up bringing a ban on the irrigation of farmland, which uses up 80% of the region’s available water. Farmers are fretting over their parched pasture land and wilting cereal crops. Cattle breeders are demanding drinking water for their livestock. And energy companies want water to flow to keep up their hydroelectric production at dams.
The Alentejo is a famously pretty part of Portugal, with groves of olive trees, stone pines and cork oaks — native varieties resilient enough to survive its weather extremes. But it’s also one of the European Union’s poorest regions — sparsely populated, covering 34% of the country but containing only 7% of its population. Almost half of its residents are more than 65 years old.
Many people here make a living from farming, and cutting off irrigation would sound the death knell for their jobs.
At Torrao, a 15th-century hilltop village with a panoramic view of the Sado basin’s Vale do Gaio reservoir, locals live with daily evidence of the drought.
Antonio Sardinha, an 82-year-old subsistence farmer says he has never seen the reservoir so low. Official records say it’s at 18% of capacity.
The water in his well is so shallow, he says, that his bucket hits the bottom.
“Water is the key to everything,” Sardinha said. “You need water to create everything else.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
That headline pretty much sums up the alarmist and utterly devoid of actual scientific reasoning that passes for comment on climate change these days. A once in 20 years event occurring cannot be blamed on climate change as the variance is too high.
@Mike: Totally agree. The measured global data is seemingly irrelevant now, but don’t let that get in the way of spreading the fear.
@Mike: See Figure 3 on page 7, the upper left graphic for Iberia, in the following paper; it shows a clear increase in drought frequency and severity affecting southern Europe since the 1950s, there’s a clear trend:
Spinoni, J., Naumann, G., Vogt, J.V. and Barbosa, P., 2015. The biggest drought events in Europe from 1950 to 2012. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, 3, pp.509-524.
They concluded:
“Southern and Western Europe (in particular the Mediterranean area) show the highest drought frequency and severity from the early 1990s onwards. In general, we found a small but continuous increase of the European areas prone to drought from the early 1980s to the early 2010s. These findings agree with recent scientific literature (Hoerling et al., 2012; Sheffield et al., 2012; Van der Schrier et al., 2013; Spinoni et al., 2014a; Vicente-Serrano et al., 2014).”
@Mike: The one in a hundred years events will soon be one in ten.
@Mike: So from your comment I can assume you deny man is having an effect on climate. The one thing people who deny that man has an influence on climate never ask themselves is “what if I’m wrong?”
The alternative is “maybe” wasting money but with technology advancing it’s becoming more affordable to use renewable energy sources.
If you’re wrong….
@Mike: “That headline pretty much sums up the alarmist and utterly devoid of actual scientific reasoning”
Did you actually try reading the scientific article which explains it? No, you didn’t. Because you’re dumb and incapable of understanding science.
@David Jordan: They should have you write these article so! I don’t get why headline writers and journalists make out 1 in 20 year event occurring are proof of anything. IMO the climate is changing. The extent to which can be attributed to carbon and what we should do about it are the issues.
@Philip King: You know the phrase; to assume makes an …
How on earth could a mere 7 billion plus human beings with the amplifying effect of intensive agriculture, huge industrialisation, ICE powered transport, deforestation, and other human agencies have any effect on a delicately balanced climate system or perhaps the aggregate effect will have an impact, one for the worse, first exhibiting itself in extreme phenomena?
@Seán Ó Briain: Says the science guy. I said the headline for starters, the article underneath doesn’t explain a thing. What are you talking about?
@Mike: How will I phrase this for a small mind.
Busses used to arrive once every 50 minutes, but the last two busses arrived 20 minutes apart. Someone changed the time table, busses are arriving sooner.
There’s a rumor they will change the timetable again, and buses will arrive every 10 minutes tomorrow and every 5 minutes the day after.
In a few days time, there will be no space between busses and their will be a crash.
@David Jordan: David, I wasn’t criticizing your original comment. Maybe read it again, small minds and all that.
@David Jordan: I think on climate change more that other topics people just make assumptions and post away, it’s quite a polarizing topic. I am of the opinion that climate change is happening. I just hate the way every hurricane and drought is individually blamed on climate change.
@Mike: I don’t blame the events on climate change unless they are more extreme than they usually are. That’s the key difference in my opinion.
@Dave O Keeffe: Weather records are more extreme than before, and the trends shows a clear warming trend.
Did you know that 75% of newly recorded all time temperature records in the US are for the highest temperature ever recorded at a particular weather station, rather than the lowest temperature ever recorded.
It’s predicted that by mid-Century, only 1 in 20 new temperature records will involve a new lowest temperature, by 2100 it will be 1 in 50.
Meehl, G. A., C. Tebaldi, G. Walton, D. Easterling, and L. McDaniel. 2009. Relative increase of record high maximum temperatures compared to record low minimum temperatures in the U.S. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36:L23701.
@David Jordan: you’re preaching to the choir
@David Jordan: so average temperatures are going up and extreme high temperatures are increasing in frequency whilst extremely low record type temperatures are decreasing in frequency.
This would tend to support the reality that temperatures are increasing, that is warming, which leaves the remaining piece as to whether or not it is the activities of humanity which is contributing to that increase.
@Dave O Keeffe: I don’t think he’s listening
@Mike: he will when he’s paying €2.50 a litre for water from a desalination plant, but by then it’ll be too late
@Mike: It does if the surrounding factors point to global warming as well like ocean temperature and co2 levels in the air?
Over 8 million acres already burned this year in US and even in the land of ice Greenland large swathes of it were on fire for the first time ever as permafrost melted and bogs of peat went on fire. Its not just the fires.flood,hurricanes and beetle infestation consuming million of trees in US – its also the oceans where the plankton is dying – the plankton that we need for every second breath we take. On top of that the Jet Stream had destabilized and the Polar Vortex is breaking down as the Arctic looses more and more ice and with less ice to reflect heat back up into the atmosphere, the planet is heating up even faster than before. Trump thinks this is all a hoax and plans massive drilling for oil in the Arctic – same Arctic that according to Deniers is not even melting.
@GO GREEN: with the potential for the release of massive banks of subterranean methane into the atmosphere.
@Fiona deFreyne: Yes Fiona, the thick ice protecting us from the frozen methane hydrates on the ice floor is gone and now only very thin ice left and on the verge of melting mass amounts of frozen methane hydrates from the sea floor 25 times more potent as a driver of climate change global warming than co2.
@GO GREEN: On the ocean floor should have said.
Climate change ate my hamster.
What about solar activity?
@Joe Murphy: What about it? The sun works on a 11-year cycle. The warming is consistent got several decades now.
@Joe Murphy: but is it the sole and exclusive factor in changes which are currently being exhibited.
@Joe Murphy: There is no correlation with drought frequency and/or intensity in Europe and the 11 year cycle of solar activity.
The gradual trend of increasing drought frequency and severity affecting Europe, especially Southern Europe, that began in 1990, has grown steadily worse. This has coincided with increased wet winter weather in the UK and Ireland.
It is influenced by the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a variation in air pressure over the Atlantic. The NSO has shifted the Atlantic storm track further north, moving away wet weather from southern Europe and towards us.
The conditions of Atlantic”s NAO is influenced by ocean currents, temperature and salinity, which is influenced by the melting of Greenland Ice due to climate change (the Arctic is warming 6 times faster than temperate regions of the Earth). This melting dilutes seawater with vast amounts of fresh water, slowing the North Atlantic Drift.
See: https://nsidc.org/greenland-today/
See the diagram showing the Greenland ice sheet is still melting in September, this is unprecedented.
@David Jordan: thank you. That is informative and accredited. It is also helpfully explanatory.
@David Jordan: https://www.john-daly.com/solar/US-drought.htm
@George Salter: https://www.john-daly.com/solar/US-drought.htm
I am not convinced that per se such extreme events, taken in isolation are ipso facto incontestable empirical proof of the hypothesis of anthropogenic climate change but, assuming the global warming hypothesis to be valid, what we are seeing are is entirely consistent with the models and the predicted outcomes of those models.
Applying the precautionary principle suggests that we should start operating on the assumption that anthropogenic climate change is a reality which we need to do our best to mitigate. Not acting risks appalling consequences for humanity, with the most vulnerable and least substantial contributors at the greatest and earliest risk.
We should think of others, including our descendants and the need to live in some degree of sunstainable harmony with the delicate ecosystem we live in.
@Fiona deFreyne: Applying the precautionary principle was included in the Kyoto Protocol. However, and as usual, national and international politics and self-interests, including individual, are determining that intergenerational and intragenerational equity are taking a back seat. And because things aren’t bad enough for enough people yet, most can go with ‘natural part of the climate cycle’.
@Felicity Hensen: sadly true. Short termism and intentional blindness are at work.
On the economic dimension, Lord Stern shows that delaying remedial measures will deliver a much more expensive bill in the medium and long term.
@Fiona deFreyne: It was interesting to read in the revised Stern Report that he admitted they undercalculated, though if memory serves unintentionally, the global ecomonic impact of climate change and extreme weather events. It appears people will only truly start paying attention when the proverbial really begins hitting the fan, from climate change refugees – which will far surpass the numbers due to conflict, and food production yields begin to fall, and that’s before you go anywhere near fresh water. Trying times ahead.
@Felicity Hensen: yes, he erred on the side of under estimation so as to be able to rebut any criticism. The bad trends are going in one direction with a heavy human cost for current apathy and denial.
@Felicity Hensen:
With half of florida flattened the proverbial may be hitting the fan as we speak.
@Fiona deFreyne: It never ceases to amuse me that requesting we treat our home better by making wiser environmental choices, thereby creating a safe(r) and sustainable living space for all species, must be done with kid gloves. And people genuinely think the ‘hippies’ and ‘ecoterrorists’ are the ones blowing the situation out of proportion when if anything, data has been played down and language softened – a lã the earlier IPCC ARs – to suit political and big business interests. Even with the serious global economic impacts laid out in the Stern Reports, people either don’t care, or don’t realise the consequences coming down the line, if not for them, certainly for their children.
How many canaries in the mines need to die for us in order for us to come to grips with the consequences of the impact of humanity on our climate system?
@Fiona deFreyne: “come to grips with”. Can’t be done while the whole world economy is run in the interests of the capitalist billionaires.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/07/14/pers-j14.html
Is anyone else watching the Hollywood scary mad climate movie on RTE2 at the moment? The screenwriters must have been on serious chemicals.
@Patrick J. O’Rourke: that’s called fictional drama. It’s entertainment.
@Fiona deFreyne : Tony, I know. However large slices of the US public actually think William Wallace was a blue midget and that alien spaceships run on Windows operating systems.
@Patrick J. O’Rourke: true. I have encountered so many climate change deniers deny on the basis that the film is wrong and that the film is a supposed documentary. So, the debate becomes fixated on the film instead on the real issues.
From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, many human brains are extremely poor in processing future risks which are uncertain in timing, not immediately observable, difficult individually to control and requiring a small amount of short term sacrafice for the potential future benefit of others, as well as ourselves and families.
At least it cannot be said that humanity was ambushed by the problem and did not have the chance to take responsible and appropriate mitigation and avoidance measures.
In terms of human adaptive response to new circumstances, this may be the greatest intelligence test yet to be faced by humanity. With Trump as President if the US, it would be foolish to be overly optoimistic.
@Fiona deFreyne: “From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, many human brains are extremely poor in processing future risks which are uncertain in timing, not immediately observable, difficult individually to control and requiring a small amount of short term sacrafice for the potential future benefit of others, as well as ourselves and families.”
Well Tony, congratulations !, you pretty much summed up the punters who go into Paddy Power.
Earth is fu*ked
@Paul Radburn: humanity may have challenges ahead. The Earth will survive but with a consideration reduction in the number of human beings and in the quality of lives of those who would remain. It is future generations which will suffer the worst impacts.
@Paul Radburn:
Earth isn’t but humanity as we know it may well be.
@Fiona deFreyne: Not sure Earth will survive – no other than S Hawking has stated that Earth may turn into another Venus https://www.livescience.com/59693-could-earth-turn-into-venus.html
The good news is that we are as far away from a drought in Ireland as we ever were.
Have they tried, De-salination plants and run them on Solar or tidal energy?
@Stephen murphy: Good ideas there.
@Stephen murphy: at 100 million each and a cost of 2.50 to produce 1 litre of water sure why not.
I feel guilty
So… you’ve been to Portugal and left the shower and taps running then? That’s my facetious reply to your facetious comment on a very serious problem!
@TravellingTheWorld: I know, I was in Portugal a few years ago and I never built any aqueducts, not one. You too?
@Tom Harpur: I avoid links like this. Facebook is unreliable.
If climate change is to blame now, what was the cause 20 years ago?
@Alan Farrell: sighs
@Gavin Daly: as much as climate change is real it’s just another drama to sell to people aside from war and politics. Not a great deal can be done anyway as the solutions lead to further problems. Overpopulation is at the heart of the problem since we simply cannot change our eating and other habits so easily and climate change is probably the natural way of decimating our numbers.
So what happened 20 years ago
It is one of the great semi-annual events where the Sun comes into view for the first time in 6 months in a few days after a dawn that has lasted constantly for over a month -
https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm
This polar sunrise is matched at the North pole by polar sunset where the Sun will remain out of view until the March 2018 equinox. It only takes a little familiarity to become accustomed with the polar day/night cycle and the surface rotation behind, a rotation that is responsible for Arctic sea ice development and many other effects for people to enjoy. The polar day/night cycle is real as is the surface rotation behind it so this is the point of departure for discussing climate.
@Gerald Kelleher: departure for where and from where?
@Fiona deFreyne: Chill out and enjoy polar dawn and the upcoming sunrise for the one and only time at the South pole this year . It takes a little effort to understand the surface rotation behind that polar sunrise but it is the one of two days in a year where there are two types of sunrises.
@Gerald Kelleher: You post the same non point on any article to do with the climate. What is your actual point?
@Bryan Whaley: So what problem have you with the polar day/night cycle and its rotational cause. If you can’t manage to appreciate why the temperatures will start to go down over the next 6 months and with it the development of sea ice then don’t come asking me what the point is. This is new and a real way to appreciate planetary temperatures and ultimately climate. If you can find a website explaining what I just explained then good for you but it ain’t going to happen.
@Bryan Whaley:
He doesn’t have one. Never has.
@Avina Laaf: It is not that men don’t reason like men anymore but that they never had a chance to consider astronomy and terrestrial sciences as they actually exist through lack of familiarity. I would say that even with the strongest effort, readers can’t draw themselves to think of planetary climate other than the rigged notion of the Earth as a greenhouse with a heavy emphasis on social politics whereas genuine climate research begins with the Sun coming into view each weekday and its cause followed by the great polar day/night cycle. The real tragedy is that the meaningless hype may have destroyed climate research for decades to come and long after people have lost interest in the stock phrases and slogan chanting of doomsayers.
https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm
In 5 days polar dawn will give way to polar sunrise, a unique event arising from a second surface rotation of the planet, this time arising from the forward orbital motion of the Earth through space. Maybe some day others will enter the 21st century and enjoy the event for what it is even though presently it is being obscured by a rabble of no-nothings and their hype .
@Gerald Kelleher:
What exactly does that have to do with climate change?
Jesus Henry Christ get it right. No matter what side you’re on on its ‘global warming’ not climate change . The climate always changes ffs. Idiots.
@Susan Adair Farrelly:
The overall effect on a global scale is warming, but local effects can also include cooling, hence the term ‘climate change’ which is preferred by the scientific community.
@Avina Laaf: actually no its not the preferred term, global warming describes the average global surface temperature increase from human emissions of greenhouse gases. Climate change does not.
have your say