Arctic meltdown sounds alarm bells

You would expect it to be front-page news, but with everything else going on at the moment, the story was shoved beyond page 20 in your newspaper or worse, consigned as a NIB.

Yesterday, it was confirmed by the US National Snow and Ice Center that the Arctic sea ice had shrunk by 18% (some 700,000 sq km) compared to 2007 levels, reaching a record low of 3.41 million sq km in the process. The culprit is clear; between 70% and 95% of the shrinkage can be explained by human activity, according to the Environmental Research Letters.

After the findings were released, Climate Change and Energy Secretary Ed Davey reiterated the UK’s policy to steer the 2013 climate change talks in Doha towards 30% emission reductions for all members. “The fact is we cannot afford to wait”, he said.

We certainly can’t. In fact, it’s more than likely that any resolutions from the summit will be too little too late from the Arctic’s point of view. According to Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University, all of the ice will be completely gone by 2016, bringing with it destruction of local ecosystems and communities, while compounding the speed of global warming.

The warming process is a vicious circle of destruction. Progressively fewer of the sun’s rays are being reflected back into space, instead being absorbed by the darker body of seawater. The result is the melting of permafrost, which in turn releases methane, trapped since the last ice age. The global warming process could well accelerate.

What’s more, although this is much more difficult to predict precisely, extreme weather brought about by the effect to the jet stream is likely to become more common. The warmer air rising from the ever-expanding Arctic sea has both weakened the jet stream and caused it to move further north. The Met Office says the shrinkage has caused drier, colder winters in the UK which will continue for years to come.

And the sad irony is that as the ice melts, more opportunities are presented to offshore oil drilling, worsening the situation even more. There are 19 geological basins in the Arctic region altogether, which between them hold an estimated 13% of undiscovered global oil supplies. Since the 1970s, around half have been explored, although many projects have been botched due to soaring costs and safety concerns.

Many, including the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), are pointing the finger at Shell’s huge $4.5 billion offshore project, which was postponed until 2013 this week after spill-containment dome Arctic Challenger was damaged. This has raised deep concerns about Shell’s code of practice.

Not only this, but pollutants including “black carbon” have been darkening the ice since oil drilling began, exacerbating the melting process. Meanwhile, physical (and also noise) pollution in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas is likely to affect the 7,500 Inupiat people dependent on marine mammals for food.

The sooner the UN’s International Marine Organization comes up with a strict “Polar Code” outlining clear regulations on such matters, the better.

There is perhaps a crumb of comfort in all this. Precisely 0.1% of comfort, in fact. According to a Norwegian study, that is how much CO2 emissions could be cut each year if global shipping routes were re-wired to utilise the new Arctic shortcuts, although the impact of shipwrecks and soot were not accounted for.

But this crumb of comfort is crushed by the despair which confronts the world’s climate, the northern hemisphere weather system and, most of all, the Arctic region. It doesn’t take a genius to work out that if we are to save the Arctic ice, something extraordinary needs to be achieved very quickly indeed.

Murray's New York slam dunk

On September 10th 1933, Fred Perry claimed the first of his eight Grand Slam titles. The world number three overcame Jack Crawford, ranked number two, in five sensational sets of tennis. Everyone was stunned; the Australian Open champion of that year who was gunning for his sixth major title and regarded as one of the greatest players ever, was beaten. Fast-forward 79 years and you would be forgiven for thinking history was repeating itself.

Last night, the ghost of Fred was finally laid to rest as Andy Murray overcame Novak Djokovic 7-6, (12-10) 7-5, 2-6 3-6 6-2, a match which lasted almost five hours, and undoubtedly one of the great modern finals. The Scot averted the ignominy of losing one’s first five Grand Slams finals in the Open era to cap the finest year in British sport, from Sergio Aguero’s last minute strike for Manchester City, through to Bradley Wiggins’ Tour de France victory and the quite sensational Olympics and Paralympics.


Andy Murray kisses the US Open trophy, and kisses goodbye
to years of Grand Slam woe

Many thought the day would never come as Murray seemingly had the misfortune of crossing lines with arguably the greatest generation of tennis players. The unprecedented imperiousness of the Federer, Nadal and Djokovic triumvirate were like members of an exclusive club, taunting Murray with their membership cards and blocking his path to the sport’s ultimate prize. Despite his talent, Murray was seemingly destined to be left with an unfinished career.

The Olympic final match has been mentioned so much in terms of Murray’s development, and its importance cannot be understated. The manner in which he defeated Federer in a best-of-five set match after the heartbreak of Wimbledon led to coach Ivan Lendl, when asked at a press conference if Murray would ever win a Grand Slam, replying “He already has one”. We always knew he had the ability, but the stuff between the ears was holding him back. For instance, if you took away Djokovic’s five Grand Slams, their head-to-head was six apiece, with Murray leading 26-23 in titles. In many cases, it boils down to a few points here and there, and which man truly believes they can succeed.

But Murray’s road to this US Open final had been far from academic. After suffering early defeats in the Cincinnati and Toronto Masters, the Scot produced uncertain performances in the early rounds, before confidently dispatching the much-hyped Milos Raonic in round four. Hearts were in mouths as he went a set and a double break down to Marin Cilic before mounting a memorable comeback, after which a nervy four-set win over Berdych sealed his progress to the bitter end. Some will point out not he did not face either Nadal or Federer, both absent from semi-finals of a Grand Slam for the first time since 2004, but this in no way detracts from the scale of his achievement.

It was easy to see why many tipped Djokovic. He was on a remarkable 27-match unbeaten run at hard court Grand Slams, stretching back to the US Open of 2010. He had swept past his opponents with consummate ease, including a straight-sets victory over Juan Martin Del Potro. And he also beat Murray in their last Grand Slam encounter, an equally-epic contest in the Australian Open semis. That day, Murray was also a set away from glory but failed to deliver the killer blow. Not this time.

The first set was a tense affair with breaks being traded twice each, exemplified by an incredible 54-stroke rally in game five. Few believed this would go down as a classic until we witnessed that gripping tie break. Murray came from 5-3 down to put Djokovic on the ropes, squandering six set points against the Serb’s incredible defences before eventually claiming the set. It was a microcosm of Murray’s career; denied on so many occasions but finally engineering the breakthrough.

Then the form which won him an Olympic gold medal flowed early in the second set, despite a great comeback from Djokovic at 4-0 down. The inside-out forehand had more weight to it as well as the cross-court backhand, but such hitting completely deserted him in the third set. The fourth was arguably the most entertaining in terms of quality with so many unbelievable rallies, but Murray was always playing catch-up. Almost inevitably, we entered the tennis equivalent of a penalty shootout.

It seemed as though Djokovic was about to emulate Richard Gonzales’ feat 63 years ago, when he came from two sets down to beat Frederick Schroeder in five. But out of nowhere, Djokovic was broken twice, struggling both physically and mentally. All of a sudden, it was he who had legs like jelly and, towards the end of this gladiatorial carnage, he sounded like a wounded animal gasping for survival. Murray was composed throughout and, for once, used his challenges wisely to correct two marginal decisions when serving for the championship, shrugging off the pain of losing a toe nail and ending the agony of a nation. The impact on British tennis and the potential to inspire a generation could prove to be priceless.

Ivan Lendl was 24 when he won the first of his eight Grand Slams, and so, at 25, Murray has plenty of time to win more Slams. The remaining highlights of the year include the Shanghai and Paris Masters, both in October, followed by the ATP World Tour Finals at the O2 in November. For now, though, Murray deserves a good break to recharge depleted batteries before preparing himself to enter the 2013 ring. It is certainly a mouth-watering prospect with Nadal returning from injury, Del Potro getting closer to his 2009 peak, Federer still going strong and a hungry Andy Murray finally finally being unshackled by the game’s greats.

Murray magic routs Raonic

Milos Raonic was in bullish mood during Monday’s pre-match press conference. “My job is to go out there and make my opponents adjust to me. I feel like I have the ability to be more dangerous than most players when I have the ball out of my hand on the serve… A lot of matches can depend on me.”

“Challenge accepted”, thought Murray, and, two hours later, “mission accomplished”, as he raced into the quarter finals of the US Open with a masterclass 6-4, 6-4, 6-2 victory over his opponent. Raonic, the 21-year old Moldovan-born Canadian and one of the rising stars in world tennis, was fancied by many to cause an upset with his booming serve. But the way in which he was dismantled by Murray will have fans of the Scot purring with delight. He may have been off the pace against Bogomolov and Lopez, and OK against Ivan Dodig, but this was a different level of tennis and one which sends out a clear message of intent to his rivals.

It’s easy to understand why Raonic thought he had a chance. Standing at a towering 6’5’’, his average first serve speed measures 138mph (his fastest is known to be a whopping 155mph) as he is able to generate incredible power from his huge legs. It led to John McEnroe commenting before the match that it could be the greatest serve of all time. At the end of 2010 his ranking was a lowly 156; he has since elevated himself 140 places up that list and it surely won’t be long until a top-10 breakthrough is accomplished.

But Murray, a player who relishes the challenge of big servers, made him look, well, ordinary. The number of shots he has in his locker is quite staggering, and the variety, as well as his exceptional return game, was too much for Raonic. The Canadian was pulled around the court like a puppet, a powerless figure subjected to Murray’s talent and imagination. Forehand drop shots brought Raonic to the net, disrupting his deep baseline rhythm, and lobs were used to send him scrambling back again. As the match went on, Raonic went for broke and committed six double faults and numerous forehand mistakes.

Murray’s pin-point backhand down the line was utilised perfectly in the second set, as well as the inside-out forehand, a shot Murray fans have craved to see more often. And then we saw those incredible passing shots, in both directions for both forehand and backhand, which left the Arthur Ashe crowd stunned on countless occasions. Unforced errors seemed a distant memory at times, putting Raonic under all sorts of pressure, and the serve was remarkably consistent; 88% of first serve points were won and precisely zero break points were even offered.

There was a point during the third set when Raonic had a chink of light at 0-30, but four first serves from Murray slammed the door shut. In previous years, Murray would have been conceding break points, buckling under the pressure and getting irritated with himself. True, Raonic needs to improve his returns if he is to make an imprint at the highest level (his reactions are slow and his swing somewhat exaggerated), but when Murray serves at 65% or above, there is usually only one outcome.

Murray’s performance has come at the perfect time as he prepares to take on another big server in Marin Cilic, who overcame another young rising star in Martin Klizan and defeated Murray in the 2009 quarter finals. But that was a different Murray to now, and if he can replicate anywhere near today’s performance, a semi-final date with either Berdych or Federer will be secure.

Remaining fourth round predictions:

Tipsarevic vs Kohlschreiber: Tipsarevic in 5 sets

Richard Gasquet vs David Ferrer: Ferrer in 5 sets

Juan Martin del Potro vs Andy Roddick: del Potro in 4 sets

Stanislas Wawrinka vs Novak Djokovic: Djokovic in 3 sets

Andy Murray targets US Open glory

There was a moment in the London Olympics final when you knew Andy Murray was going to strike gold. Federer, crushing a forehand most players would have left with a resigned look, thought he had won the point. But Murray stunned the Swiss with a sensational backhand down the line at full stretch to a standing ovation from the Centre Court crowd. And with a 6-4 6-2 6-3 victory, the first best-of-five set triumph Murray ever had over Federer, the gold medal was around his neck. So with the US Open kicking off on Monday, is this the turning point in Murray’s career?

Well first of all, this is Murray’s first US Open with coach Ivan Lendl and it’s impossible to underestimate his importance here. Lendl, an eight-time Grand Slam winner, was famous for his brash style and ability to wear down opponents from the baseline with aggressive tennis; they called him “The Terminator” for a reason. Everyone can see how this has rubbed off on Andy in recent months. There is more bite and length in that forehand now than 12 months ago. The second serve has improved immeasurably of late and his ability to hold himself together mentally on crucial points has been encouraging. What’s more, there is a curious symmetry between the two men as well; Lendl lost his first four Grand Slam finals, as has Murray.

But critics will say that we have often hyped up a Murray “turning point” which never happened all too often in the past. No Grand Slams final appearances followed from the 2008 US Open final for 18 months and he seemed as powerless against Djokovic in the 2011 Australian Open final as the year before against Federer. And this year, his unbelievable performance in the Australian Open semis was also meant to herald a new era, despite losing to Djokovic. But disappointingly, Rome aside, he didn’t replicate such form until Wimbledon, in July. Unfortunately, until Murray wins a Grand Slam, many will look back on his career as incomplete.

Due to the absence of tendonitis-ridden Rafael Nadal, who has appeared in the last two finals, only four players have any realistic chance of glory in New York – Andy Murray, world number one Roger Federer, defending champion Novak Djokovic, and 2009 winner Juan Martin Del Potro. Many have Federer down as the favourite, having won five times here between 2004 and 2008, and demolishing Djokovic in Cincinnati last week. Should he reach the semis, Federer could face Murray. And should he reach the final, he could face Djokovic or Del Potro, who are likely to wage war in the quarters.

There have been some fascinating battles at Flushing Meadows between this trio over the years. Having lost to Federer at three consecutive US Opens, Djokovic has beaten the Swiss in the last two semi-finals, saving two match points in each encounter. It was always going to be hard to replicate the form of 2011, but Djokovic has still had a very good year, winning in Canada, Miami and Australia. I’m not too sure we can read too much into his Cincinatti defeat from a mental perspective, since best-of-three set matches are a different ball game to five sets. Nevertheless, Djokovic may have missed a trick in not skipping either Cincinatti or Toronto the previous week to rest; he reached the finals of both competitions after all. Time will tell how much this will affect his US Open, but at the end of the day, it’s about who can hold their nerve during those crucial points.

And don’t be surprised if a certain Argentine upset the Serb and reached the final. Juan Martin del Potro’s US Open victory over Federer in 2009 will go down as one of the great modern finals; the quality was breathtaking and del Potro rattled Federer with those sledgehammer serves and forehands. He is back to his very best after a serious wrist injury which ruled him out for 18 months; the marathon 19-17 set in the Olympics against Federer is testament to that. He also took a two-set lead against Federer in the French earlier this year, before the Swiss mounted a memorable comeback. On his day, he can beat anybody, and on arguably his favourite surface of all, he can settle into an ominous attacking rhythm.

The fast courts at Flushing Meadows may also suit the big-serving Americans, notably Andy Roddick and the giant John Isner. Roddick has a decent draw in front of him and will fancy his chances of making the third round, not a bad deal considering his injury problems of late, while Isner will hope to please the home crowd by at least matching his quarter final appearance of last year. Meanwhile, Tsonga and Berdych, two talented players who would have won majors in any other era, are in Murray’s half of the draw and will be difficult obstacles to overcome. Don’t underestimate the qualities of Feliciano Lopez or Milos Raonic either, other potential opponents for the Scot should he overcome Alex Bogomolov in the first round.

Murray will have his work cut out if he is to win his first Grand Slam, since this is a surface which many players adore. But no player has really dominated the season so far – we have had three different Grand Slam winners after all – so now is as good a time as ever for Murray to do it.

Predicted winner: Andy Murray

Predicted runner up: Juan Martin del Potro

Dark horse: Milos Raonic

Recent US Open finals:

Year	Winner	Runner-up	Score
2011	Novak Djokovic	Rafael Nadal	6-2, 6-4, 6-7, 6-1
2010	Rafael Nadal	Novak Djokovic	6-4, 5-7, 6-4, 6-2
2009	Juan Martin del Potro	Roger Federer	3-6, 7-6, 4-6, 7-6, 6-2
2008	Roger Federer	Andy Murray	6-2, 7-5, 6-2
2007	Roger Federer	Novak Djokovic	7-6, 7-6, 6-4
2006	Roger Federer	Andy Roddick	6-2, 4-6, 7-5, 6-1
2005	Roger Federer	Andre Agassi	6-3, 2-6, 7-6, 6-1
2004	Roger Federer	Lleyton Hewitt	6-0, 7-6, 6-0

Roger that?

You would think that, after winning a momentous gold medal in the singles and silver in the mixed doubles, Andy Murray would want to put his feet up for a week or two. The last month has been extremely busy for the British number one, going the distance at Wimbledon before claiming gold at the London Olympics when he crushed Roger Federer in the final.

Not so. Yesterday, Andy Murray jetted off to Canada to take part in Toronto’s Rogers Cup, a Masters 1000 event which marks the start of the hard court season. It is one of the key warm-up events ready for the US Open later this month and is a tournament which Murray has recently excelled in, winning twice in the last three seasons.

Andy Murray wins gold at the London Olympics

But is Murray taking a physical risk playing so soon after his Wimbledon and Olympic exertions? By Sunday, Murray will have played in 22 tournaments so far this year, and considering he only played 19 tournaments for the whole of 2011, it appears Murray is going the distance in 2012. Cincinatti, another Masters 1000 event, is coming up next Monday as well. Will Murray have enough energy for the US Open?

Many will remember there were 14 retirements at the 2011 US Open, an unfortunate record for the tournament. Whether this was a one-off fluke or a result of the busy tennis schedule is up for debate, but one man is taking no chances. Perhaps wisely, Roger Federer has pulled out of the Rogers Cup, saying: “After a long stretch of tournaments, I will need some time to recover”.

Milos Raonic, the Canadian world number 24 and Murray’s opponent in today’s third round match, seemed to attack Federer’s decision to pull out: “I’ve only been on the tour two years, but I’ve gone back-to-back from San Jose to Memphis, which is nine hours of travel, and you deal with it. You try to get past those first few days and you know it’s just going to get better and better.”

It was a naïve thing to say; Raonic does not go deep into the tournaments like Federer and can therefore participate in more events. In the past, Federer’s decision to miss tournaments here and there has paid dividends, saving his energy for those which matter.

Murray must be wary of suffering the same fate of 2011 when excessive playing time lead to him pulling out of the ATP World Finals at the O2 in November. Of course, if he is feeling good physically then his plan may prove to be a masterstroke in preparing for the US Open and overtaking Rafael Nadal as world number 3. With these different approaches, it will be interesting to compare Federer and Murray’s prospects for the rest of the year.

Ye Shiwen accusations are insulting

On Saturday evening, one girl stunned the world of swimming and indeed the Olympic Games. The women’s 400m individual medley final was won in sensational style by 16-year old Chinese Ye Shiwen, who smashed Stephanie Rice’s previous world record of 4:29:45 by swimming 4:28:43. Many have mentioned that, incredibly, her time in the last 50 metres was faster than men’s 400m IM gold medallist, Ryan Lochte.

However, instead of praising this quite remarkable achievement, one man’s shameful public comments created front pages this morning which are sadly unnecessary. US swimming coach, John Leonard, stated that Ye’s last 100m was “disturbing”, going on to say: “Every time we see something unbelievable it more often than not turned out to be some form of cheating… No woman has ever split the men.”

Ye Shiwen dominated the 400m IM final on Saturday

These are very strong words and quite frankly he should be punished. First of all, if he was so concerned about Ye cheating, why did he not have the guts to go straight to the International Olympic Committee (IOC) who deal with these cases? Instead, he has just thrown a very loose accusation with no support whatsoever into the public domain, creating a “row” which never should have existed.

It’s easy to see how China’s reputation may have been tarnished by instances of cheating.  Their swimming team was hit with doping scandals throughout the 1990s, in particular during the 1994 Asian Games, while another 16-year old, Li Zhesi tested positive for performance-enhancing drug erythropoietin just last month.

But crucially in this case, Ye Shiwen was cleared by WADA (World Anti-Doping Association) before the Games, enough proof from the outset that she is not a cheat. In the unlikely event that she is, she and every other gold medal winner’s samples have be retained by the IOC for another eight years. This means if testing evolves (which it will do) then the new technology can be run on the samples to double check the results.

In any case, it has been well documented how brutally intense some of the Chinese training regimes can be for their promising athletes, which is why we are seeing some brilliant performances at these Games. There have been many reports of children being whisked away at an early age to camps going through regimes which are far more intense than anything experienced here in the Western world.

This indeed is what happened to Ye. She swims several hours almost every day and could perform 20 chin-ups at the age of seven. Her large hands and limbs, and her masculine upper-body structure, were immediately recognised by her coaches, and they have put her through everything imaginable and more to ensure she fulfils her potential at these Olympics. She must have felt deeply insulted, after all this hard work and effort, to have heard Leonard's comments.

Furthermore, the last point which coach Leonard makes above, that “no woman has ever split the men”, although factually correct, is interestingly placed in relation to the previous comments. Is he suggesting that the only explanation behind women going faster than men in swimming, or any sporting event for that matter, is that they cheated and took drugs? If so, it is also completely unnecessary to say during an Olympics which has embraced female participation across every nation.

So these comments by Leonard are shockingly misguided and baseless. We should believe in Ye’s brilliance until we are proven otherwise by the IOC and WADA. And we must remember the Olympic motto – “faster, higher, stronger”. Sadly this has been forgotten by some. Ye Shiwen is a remarkable athlete and one wonders when her achievements will be replicated.

A trip to Brontë Parsonage Museum

The story of the Bronte family, and the stories they penned themselves, have captured the imagination of book lovers for over 150 years. Charlotte, who wrote the beautifully crafted Jane Eyre, and Emily, author of Wuthering Heights, were the literary geniuses of their era and their influence lives on to this day.

This afternoon, I had a glimpse into their lives at the Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, a picture-postcard village in West Yorkshire, about ten miles west of Bradford. Needless to say, Haworth is now a major regional tourist attraction. People all over the world flock at this time of year to soak up the history, culture and landscape of plunging hills and stunning views which surround the settlement. It became clear how the Yorkshire moorland influenced the setting of their work and the nature of the characters.

The room in which the Bronte masterpieces were written

Cramped little shops snake up the hill leading to the village square and are well worth a look. Inside the square and at the summit of the hill is the famous Black Bull pub, which proudly overlooks everything else of importance in the village. Inside you can see the chair which Branwell Bronte (brother of Charlotte and Emily) sat on to enjoy his pint of beer.

These sights set up the trip to the Parsonage very nicely indeed, and we were not to be disappointed. We learned the Brontes moved in the residence in 1820, when Emily and Charlotte were small children. Their elder sisters, Maria and Elizabeth, succumbed to an early grave due to a typhus epidemic caused by disgracefully poor sanitary conditions. Their father, Patrick, had secured a job as the Perpetual Curate of Haworth Church and somehow ended up outliving his entire family, finally passing away in 1861 at the grand old age of 84.

Patrick’s study – a den of quiet concentration – was meticulously presented, epitomised by the magnifying glass used to assist his extensive reading and writing, placed on the table. As the major political figurehead of the village, one can imagine he spent many hours here. Among other commitments he founded a Sunday school in 1832 and campaigned for a clean water supply to Haworth, secured in 1856.

Perhaps most interesting was the dining room, one of the more most spacious areas in the house. It was where the sisters’ literary triumphs were forged, including Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights. A rocking chair in the corner next to a grand fireplace would have been regularly used to ponder the next sentence, while, on a more sorrowful note, the sofa opposite was the piece of furniture on which Emily died.

We were also taken around the tiny kitchen, the generous servants’ room and the art studio of Branwell, filled with paintings – some excellent, others rather amateurish. Most interesting was Branwell’s bedroom, where he eventually died as a result of his all-too-frequent trips to the Black Bull and dire alcoholism.

So, if you’re living in the region and interested in your literature, I would recommend a visit! I’m hardly a bookworm but it was a thoroughly enjoyable experience.