Meteorologist Paul Douglas writes about Minnesota weather daily, trying to go beyond the "highs" and "lows" of the weather story to discuss current trends and some of the how's and why's of meteorology. Rarely is our weather dull - every day is a new forecast challenge. Why is the weather doing what it's doing? Is climate change a real concern, and if so, how will my family be affected? Climate is flavoring all weather now, and I'll include links to timely stories that resonate with me.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
El Nino Mild Signal Dominates - 40s in December - Why Storm Temperature Trumps Snowfall Amounts
34 F. high in the Twin Cities Tuesday. 32 F. average high on December 1. 6 F. "high" on December 1, 2014, after waking up to -3 F. in the Twin Cities.
3" snow on the ground at KMSP.
5.2" snow so far this winter season. 10.3" average snowfall in the Twin Cities as of December 1. 9.4" snow had fallen last year, as of December 1.
December 2, 1985:
Record low highs are set in north and east central Minnesota with
temperatures ranging from the single digits below zero to the singles
digits above. Alexandria was the cold spot with a high of 4 degrees
Fahrenheit below zero. Other record low high temperatures included
Redwood Falls with 3 below, Long Prairie with zero, and Litchfield and
Little Falls with 5 degrees above zero. December 2, 1982: A record high of 63 degrees is set at the Twin Cities.
Temperature Trumps Snowfall Amounts Vague Hints of March On The Way
It may seem counter-intuitive but 10 inches of snow at 32F is easier to deal with on the roads than an inch at 10F. Monday's
"storm" was a blunt reminder that ultimate impacts depend on
temperature, not only at the surface, but the lowest mile of the
atmosphere. Wet sloppy snows often melt on contact, keeping ultimate
snowfall totals lower and roads wet.
"How many inches Paul?" We're
fixated on snowfall totals, but that's the wrong question (on so many
levels). The colder the storm the worse the travel conditions. Worth
remembering the next time snow-related panic sets in. First check the
predicted temperature for the duration of the storm - that's a better
indicator of how ugly your commute is going to be.
Now that we've
had our ration of snowy excitement - welcome to March! Watch for icy
patches each morning, but Pacific air coupled with sunny breaks may
translate into highs topping 40F from late this week into much of next
week. Whatever feeble pile of slush remains in your yard will be
mostly-gone by the weekend. Life isn't fair - neither is the weather.
Forget
the calendar; "meteorological winter" kicked off December 1. If anyone
asks: the statistical odds of a white Christmas at MSP are about 75
percent.
The pattern turns colder after December 15; it'll be close this year.
* Statistical odds of a white Christmas in Minnesota courtesy of the MN DNR.
6th Wettest November on Record. The summary graphic above is courtesy of the Twin Cities NWS.
What a Difference a Year Makes.
A 16F. temperature difference between November, 2014 and November 2015
in the Twin Cities? A new definition of weather-whiplash. Data courtesy
of the Twin Cities National Weather Service.
Pacific Breeze.
Unseasonably mild weather for early December spills over into much of
next week, prevailing winds from the west, from an El Nino-warmed
Pacific; a persistent pattern that may set the stage for a (much) warmer
than average winter. We'll see more snow and cold fronts - count on it.
But we probably will not see the volume or duration of cold we normally
experience at this lofty latitude.
El Nino Signature.
El Nino winters tend to be dominated by Pacific storms that push across
the southern USA and then (often) right up the east coast. The 10-Day
GFS accumulated precipitation field shows some extreme (15-20"+) amounts
for the higher terrain of the Pacific Northwest; another surge of rain
pushing up the east coast. Guidance: NOAA and AerisWeather.
10-Day Accumulated Snow Outlook.
The blue streak over northern Minnesota is the residual snow from
Monday's (alleged) storm; snow tapering to flurries later today. Most of
the USA remains snow-free into much of next week, but changes may be
brewing for the latter half of December.
Pattern Shift by Mid-December?
I think I said the honeymoon would end back in late September or early
October. The persistence of the mild signal is impressive, driven
(mostly) by an El Nino that isn't nearly done with North America just
yet. Even so steering winds are forecast to buckle within 2 weeks,
allowing much colder air to push south out of Canada, carving out a deep
trough of low pressure that may spark a series of storms for the
southern and eastern USA by the third week of December.
After Soggy El Nino, Beware the "Diva of Drought".
Will we flip from El Nino to La Nina, increasing the potential for a
2016 drought from California to the Plains? Here's an excerpt from eenews.net: "...Moreover,
some recent research suggests the lingering effects of a La Niña
pattern -- what one meteorologist called a La Niña "hangover" --
contributed to the severity of the current drought. All of this leads
some meteorologists to suggest that even if El Niño produces monster
storms where California needs them most, the state will likely remain in
a drought and will be facing challenging forecasts in the coming years.
"By winter 2016-2017, the El Niño will return to normal conditions, if
not La Niña conditions," said Paul Ullrich, a climate modeler at the
University of California, Davis. "In that case, we predict below-average
rainfall. So, unless this year is very dramatic -- meaning twice
average -- it's going to be very hard to erase our rain dent..." (Image credit: NOAA NESDIS).
New Weather Service Outlook Will Tell You About the Next Snowmageddon Up To A Week in Advance.
I'm not sure this is being put into effect for Minnesota and Wisconsin;
they may be testing it in Washington D.C., where a forecast of
"flurries" can incite mass panic. Here's an excerpt from Capital Weather Gang: "...Data
from more than 60 computer model simulations from the U.S., Canada, and
Europe, feed into the threat matrix. “It utilizes everything we can get
our hands on,” says Strong. The model data are then drawn into a flow
chart which, in simple terms, evaluates whether the amount of wintry
precipitation forecast by the models is light or heavy and whether some
of the conditions most often seen prior to a “big snow” in the
Mid-Atlantic are present, namely cold air at high altitudes and a feed
of moisture off the Atlantic ocean. It also assesses whether models
agree with each other or not to determine the level of confidence..."
Below-Normal Atlantic Hurricane Season Ends; Active Eastern and Central Pacific Seasons Shatter Records.
All or nothing when it came to hurricanes in 2015; the apathy-factor
continues to increase, especially in Florida. Here's an excerpt of a NOAA update: "The
Atlantic, eastern and central Pacific hurricane seasons officially
ended yesterday, and as predicted, the Atlantic season stayed below
normal with 11 named storms, while the eastern and central Pacific were
above normal with both regions shattering all-time records. Overall, the
Atlantic hurricane season produced 11 named storms, including four
hurricanes (Danny, Fred, Joaquin and Kate), two of which, Danny and
Joaquin, became major hurricanes. Although no hurricanes made landfall
in the United States this year, two tropical storms – Ana and Bill –
struck the northeastern coast of South Carolina and Texas, respectively.
Ana caused minor wind damage, beach erosion and one direct death in
North Carolina, and Bill produced heavy rain and flooding while it moved
across eastern Texas and Oklahoma. Hurricane Joaquin is the first
Category 4 hurricane since 1866 to impact the Bahamas during the month
of October..."
Map credit: "The 2015 Atlantic hurricane season ended with a below-normal 11 named storms, four of which became hurricanes". (Credit: NOAA).
Social Media a Blessing - and a Curse - for Meteorologists.
Amen to that. The democratization of information (and weather models)
via social media has made it easier to share cat videos and snowfall
pics, but it has added to the noise, chaos and confusion. Here's are a
few excerpts from meteorologist Scott Sistek at KOMO News in Seattle: "...Then
as social media came along, people could share those maps directly with
their friends. And as forecast models have advanced, they have become
somewhat simpler to read. All of a sudden, meteorologists have lost sole
possession of the megaphone. Now there are thousands of
megaphones....People are sharing forecasts directly with each other -
you don't have to wait for the 5 p.m. newscast anymore (although we
certainly encourage you to do so...It's an adjustment for those of us in
the business that now we have to react to events sooner, and face the
challenge of communicating effectively through the clamor of all the
other megaphones that, yes, that model 5 days out might show some snow
around here, but maybe it's the only one? Maybe it's the outlier?..."
MIT Study: Little Risk of Earth's Geomagnetic Field Flipping.
Well here's a little ray of sunshine, a tweet-worthy nugget. We have
enough bad and uncertain news on our plate - at least we don't have to
add this to our list. Gizmag
reports: "A new MIT study suggests that there is little danger of
Earth's geomagnetic field flipping in the near future. Previous research
in the area had predicted an imminent flip (in geological terms) that
would leave all life on Earth temporarily un-shielded from a plethora of
dangers posed by deep space phenomenon. Generated from deep within our
planet, Earth's geomagnetic field
acts as a protective shield, guarding us from dangerous space weather
and charged particles that would otherwise pose a dire threat to life on
Earth..."
Image credit above: "MIT graphic displaying a
flip of the geomagnetic field (Credit: Huapei Wang (with material
courtesy of NASA's Earth Observatory) and edited by MIT News)."
Saudi Arabia To Build World's Tallest Tower, Reaching 1 km into the Sky. Take that Dubai. Here's an excerpt from CNN: "Dubai, long champion of all things biggest, longest and most expensive, will soon have some competition from neighboring Saudi Arabia. Dubai's iconic Burj Khalifa, the world's tallest building, could be stripped of its Guinness
title if Saudi Arabia succeeds in its plans to construct the even
larger Jeddah Tower -- a prospect looking more likely as funds for the
$1.23 billion project have been secured..."
What's a "Car" Grandpa?
Will future generations question the wisdom of one person per vehicle?
Probably. Here's an excerpt of an interesting story/interview and peek
into the future at The Los Angeles Times: "...The single-occupancy
car is not good. Do we want to keep buying the cow, when what we really
want is the milk? We need to develop a car-light lifestyle. Uber, Lyft,
driverless vehicles, robo taxis are steps in that direction. Even Bill
Ford Jr. will tell you that the single-occupancy car is not the future.
The self-driving car is on the way. They will be coming in some numbers
by 2017-18. Tesla already has new software that will allow its Model S
to automatically steer, change lanes and park. There is the Google car.
Self-driving buses are now being tested, and many car companies are
developing autonomous vehicles..."
Photo credit: "Gabe
Klein, an author and futurist, speaks on the importance of communities
to plan for the self-driving vehicle in a talk at UCLA on Nov 19." (Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times).
Bad Drivers Are Forcing an English Town to Paint Its Ponies. Isn't this a tune..."painted ponies"? Bad flashbacks from the 70s. CityLab has the curious story; here's the intro: "More
than a hundred years ago, the hapless traveler might have encountered a
supernatural hound on the grounds of England’s Dartmoor National Park.
This moody, quiet moorland inspired one famous mystery writer to pen a tale about the family Baskerville.
Today, however, joyriders around Dartmoor more likely to encounter
another frightening sight: a glow-in-the-dark pony. A new pilot project
in the southwestern English town involves a fluorescent strip of paint
used to protect the native ponies from dangerous drivers..." (Photo: Karla Mckechnie).
TODAY: Mostly cloudy, few flakes. Winds: NW 8-13. High: 36
WEDNESDAY NIGHT: Patchy clouds, a touch of fog possible. Low: 20
FRIDAY: Patchy clouds and fog, mild breeze. Winds: S 8-13. Wake-up: 23. High: 41
SATURDAY: More clouds than sun, still dry. Winds: S 10-15. Wake-up: 29. High: 44
SUNDAY: Peeks of sun, milder than average. Winds: W 5-10. Wake-up: 27. High: near 40
MONDAY: Waiting for December. Sunny spurts. Wake-up: 26. High: 40
TUESDAY: Some sun, little or no snow left. Wake-up: 28. High: 42
Climate Stories...
Bloomberg Carbon Clock. To get the latest CO2 readings and graphs click here.
The Most Important Number in Climate Change.
40 planetary climate models pretty much reach the same conclusion: a
doubling of CO2 will result in a temperature increase of 1.5C to 4.5C. Scientific American has an excellent article, a worthy read. Here's an excerpt: "...The
Earth is a complex system, an irreducible complexity that defies
simplification into computer models. As a result, real world effects of
increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2, like the meltdown of Arctic land and sea ice,
appear to be happening faster than massive computer simulations have
predicted. But the range of sensitivity is not the simple product of
computers running simulations of how the atmosphere and ocean—two great
roiling fluids in congress—react to more heat trapped by more CO2. It is
also based on ancient air entombed in Antarctic ice, the steady decay
of radioactive elements in stone and other observations of the planet's
remote past. In terms of climate, the deep past isn't merely the past,
it's a preview of what the world might experience again in the future..."
Image credit above: "ENERGY
BUDGET: How much global warming to expect depends on how Earth's
climate responds to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases
trapping heat." Courtesy of NASA
10 Things to Know About the U.N. Climate Talks in Paris. Here's an excerpt from NPR: "...It's no exaggeration to say that what happens in Paris will affect the future of the planet. Greenhouse gas emissions keep going up,
and scientists say that continuing with business as usual will produce
rapid and devastating warming. This won't just be bad news for polar
bears and beachfront homeowners. Unchecked warming means that dependable
food and water supplies could be disrupted, dangerous pathogens could
spread to new areas, and rising seas could remake maps. What's more,
extreme weather, plus worse droughts and more fierce wildfires, could
become increasingly common. Security experts even worry that scarce and shifting resources could lead to violence..."
Photo credit above: "From
the left, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Microsoft CEO Bill
Gates, US President Barack Obama, French President Francois Hollande and
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wave during the 'Mission
Innovation: Accelerating the Clean Energy Revolution' meeting at the
COP2, United Nations Climate Change Conference, in Le Bourget, north of
Paris, Monday, Nov. 30 2015." (Ian Langsdon, Pool photo via AP).
World Leaders Show Rare Unity in Climate Summit Opening. Christian Science Monitor has the story - here's the introduction: "For
a brief few hours in the outskirts of Paris Monday, the world seemed to
set aside old grudges and rally around a unifying cause. Heads of state
from across the globe called for a strong climate agreement on the
opening day of this year's much-anticipated United Nations climate
summit. Representatives assembled here in suburban Le Bourget have no
shortage of issues to divide them, and tensions are sure to flare as
negotiations unfold over the next two weeks. Still, Monday's remarks by
world leaders offered a rare moment of commonality among nations as
diverse as the United States, China, Russia, France, and dozens of other
countries..."
Paris Climate Summit: Chinese President Urges World Leaders to Unite to Tackle Common Challenge. Here's a clip from the South China Morning Post: "President
Xi Jinping on Monday called on leaders from more than 140 countries to
abandon the “zero-sum” mindset on climate change and unite to tackle the
common challenge. On the opening day of the United Nations Climate
Change Conference in Paris, Xi said a deal for post-2020 action should
be “comprehensive, balanced, ambitious and binding”. But rich nations
should also honour their commitment to financial aid for developing
nations. The president said the deal had to galvanise global efforts to
cut greenhouse gas emissions as well as respect the rights of developing
countries to grow their economies..."
Photo credit: "President Xi Jinping addresses world leaders at the UN climate summit in Paris on Monday." Photo: EPA.
Paris: Curbing our Enthusiasm (Optimism). Some additional warming is "locked in", no matter what comes out of Paris. Here's a clip from Yale Climate Connections: "...The
first thing to keep in mind is that only the climate gets final-say:
the measure that matters most for what comes out of Paris will be the
reaction, over time, of the climate itself. Countless unambiguous
signals, ranging from disappearing arctic ice to sea level rise, tell us
that human-induced changes in climate are already happening. It’s too
late to stop global warming; the world’s nations can only try to prevent
its worst effects by drastically reducing further emissions of
greenhouse gasses. The world may yet do so, but not solely as a result
of any agreement that comes out of Paris..."
Why Climate Change Hope is Not Misplaced. There's a change in the air across Canada - let's hope it's contagious. Here's a clip from The Toronto Star: "...We
have a better opportunity now because we do not have the disinformation
campaign being waged by the oil and gas industry. They are not actively
trying to trip up Canadian policy today as they did then.’’ The
mainstream media is no longer the portal it once was for climate
deniers, Anderson says, and Trudeau has begun talks with the provinces
from the bottom up, not the top down. Given the history of
oft-acrimonious federal-provincial relations in this country, that is
key, he says..."
Photo credit above: Manuel Balce Ceneta / The Associated Press. "Recent
polls indicate Canadians would pay more for products and services in
the name of reducing emissions, but support will decline once voters are
presented with a bill, writes Tim Harper."
The "Fossil of the Day" Award is the Best Part of the Paris Climate Summit. So says Eric Holthaus at Slate; here's an excerpt: "...The Fossil of the Day has been regularly awarded at climate talks since 1999, flamboyantly presented with a backdrop of a fire-breathing Jurassic Park logo. The awards ceremony has become an essential reprieve from the tedium of jargon and procedure
of the climate meetings, and a crucial expression of the activist
culture. It’s the best part of the international climate negotiations.
Despite being unabashedly fun, the Fossil of the Day also plays a key
role in the negotiations by giving the recipient country’s press extra
ammunition with which to question its leaders. Past awards have
frequently gone to Canada, Japan, Australia, and the United States..."
Photo credit above: "There’s
nothing like public humiliation to drive action on climate change. New
Zealand and Belgium jointly won the first “Fossil of the Day” award in
Paris on Monday." Photo by Climate Action Network.
The Last Stand of the Climate Change Deniers. Here's an excerpt at The Week: "...Perhaps
more importantly, the GOP is now at odds with a high-tech and
rapidly-growing industry. Last year solar photovoltaic alone already
accounted for more jobs than coal mining. As Greg Sargent documents,
conservative politicians' latest (and lamest) excuse for denial,
claiming "I'm not a scientist," makes them sound both scientifically and
economically illiterate. That brings me to the final redoubt of
excuse-making. Wrongfooted on the science, conservatives are now
reverting to their traditional understanding that climate change is just
some dumb hippie idea. For example, "China could care less" about
climate change, as GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina recently claimed..." (Photo credit: Reuters/stringer).
Miami Republicans in Congress Sign On To Climate-Change Resolution.
South Florida is on the front lines of a rapidly changing climate with
rising seas now flooding the Florida Keys and Miami Beach, even on a
sunny day with no storms nearby. At some point outright denial gives way
to a grudging pragmatism. Here's a clip at The Miami Herald: "In a symbolic move ahead of Pope Francis'
visit to Congress, a group of Republicans plans to file a resolution
acknowledging climate change caused at least in part by human activities
and pledging to address its detrimental consequences. Among those U.S.
House members signing on are Miami Republicans Carlos Curbelo and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,
both of whom represent coastal South Florida districts. Curbelo's
district includes the low-lying Florida Keys. "South Florida is the
frontline of climate change, where we have seen its negative impact in
the form of rising sea-levels and the erosion of our coastal
communities," Curbelo said in a statement. "In Miami-Dade County alone,
more people live less than a mere four feet above sea level than any
state in the union with the exception of Louisiana. In fact, 40 percent
of Florida's population is at risk of rising sea levels, posing a clear
and present danger..."
File photo credit above: "A
cyclist and vehicles negotiate heavily flooded streets as rain falls,
Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2014, in Miami Beach, Fla. Certain neighborhoods
regularly experience flooding during heavy rains and extreme high tides.
New storm water pumps are currently being installed along the bay front
in Miami Beach. National and regional climate change risk assessments
have used the flooding to illustrate the Miami area's vulnerability to
rising sea levels." (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky).
Why Climate Change is Increasingly Seen as an Urgent Health Issue. Here's an excerpt from Vox: "...In a big report
released this summer, The Lancet brought together the world’s leading
experts on environmental health. They argue that "[t]he implications of
climate change for a global population of 9 billion people threatens to
undermine the last half century of gains in development and global
health":
The direct effects of climate change
include increased heat stress, floods, drought, and increased frequency
of intense storms, with the indirect threatening population health
through adverse changes in air pollution, the spread of disease vectors,
food insecurity and under-nutrition, displacement, and mental ill
health...
Image credit above: Lancet "The direct and indirect effects of climate change on health and well-being."
Stop Emissions! A
climate scientist argues that it should no longer be acceptable to dump
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere; here's are two excerpts from his
Op-Ed at MIT Technology Review: "...Already,
in the middle latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, average
temperatures are increasing at a rate that is equivalent to moving south
about 10 meters (30 feet) each day. This rate is about 100 times faster
than most climate change that we can observe in the geologic record,
and it gravely threatens biodiversity in many parts of the world...How
can we get environmentally friendly energy systems that can compete on
price with coal or natural gas? We need more incentives. The cost
reductions in wind and especially solar over the past decade stemmed
mainly from many small process improvements that came about as these
technologies were more widely deployed. But many near-zero-emission
technologies will cost more than coal or natural gas. Unless there is a
tax or price on carbon dioxide emissions, there will be no markets for
the innovations that a research and development effort can provide..."
ExxonMobil Takes Aim at Columbia University Journalists for Role in Climate Reports. If the facts aren't going your way attack the messenger. Here's an excerpt at Politico: "ExxonMobil
is hurling ethics accusations against a team of Columbia University
journalists whose reporting helped stoke calls for probes into whether
the company deliberately misled the public about climate change. The oil
giant went on the offensive in a Nov. 20 letter, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO. It comes as investigations by the Columbia journalists in the Los Angeles Times and a separate report by the nonprofit website InsideClimate News
continue to stoke Democratic calls for a federal probe into whether the
company concealed its internal understanding of the global warming
threat posed by burning fossil fuels. Exxon, which through its
foundation gave more than $200,000 to the university last year,
addressed the letter to Columbia President Lee Bollinger and sent a copy
to university trustees..."
Uncertainty is Exxon's Friend, But It's Not Ours. Here's a snippet from The Guardian: "...Appeals
to uncertainty to preclude or delay political action are so pervasive
in political and lobbying circles that they have attracted scholarly
attention under the name “Scientific Certainty Argumentation Methods”, or “SCAMs” for short.
SCAMs are politically effective because they equate uncertainty with
the possibility that a problem may be less serious than anticipated,
while ignoring the often greater likelihood that the problem may be more
deleterious. In the case of climate change, analyses of the role of
scientific uncertainty in the climate system have repeatedlyrevealed that greater uncertainty about the climate’s sensitivity to carbon emissions means that there is greater, not lesser, risk..."
Photo credit above: "A view of the Exxon Mobil refinery in Baytown, Texas in this September 15, 2008 file photo." Photograph: Jessica Renaldi/Reuters.
Imagining a World Without Growth.
Not possible, but I'm still intrigued by the concept, however esoteric
and theoretical, of "sustainable capitalism". What would that look like?
Capitalism, a market-based economy requires growth, growth requires
energy, which up until recently has been powered almost exclusively by
fossil fuels. That has to change. Here's an excerpt of an Op-Ed at The New York Times: "...The good news is that taking action against climate change need do no such thing. It will not be easy, but we can glimpse technological paths
that will allow civilization to keep growing and afford the world
economy a positive-sum future. More than how to stop growth, the main
question brought out by climate change is how to fully develop and
deploy sustainable energy technologies — in a nutshell, to help the
world’s poor, and everybody else, onto a path to progress that doesn’t
rely on burning buried carbon."
White House: GOP Hostile to Climate "Facts and Science". If we don't like the facts let's make up a new set of facts we do like. Here's a snippet from TheHill: "The
White House is accusing congressional Republicans of being openly
hostile to the scientific facts behind climate change and to addressing
the issue. Speaking with reporters Monday, White House press secretary
Josh Earnest made the charge in highlighting the GOP fight against
President Obama’s climate agenda. “We’re well aware of the fact that
there is an abiding hostility in the Republican conference to facts and
science and evidence,” Earnest said in response to a question about the
GOP effect on Obama’s promises at the United Nations climate conference
in Paris..." (File image: Wikipedia).
Bill Gates: "We Need To Move Faster Than The Energy Sector Ever Has". Gates is putting his money where his mouth is, which you have to respect. Here's an excerpt at The Washington Post: "...Bill
Gates, in Paris for the start of the international climate talks,
faulted governments and private industry alike for stinting on basic
research into new technologies for generating, storing and transmitting
energy. He warned that the climate threat is too serious to allow
technology to evolve at the usual slow pace. “Historically, it takes
more than 50 years before you have a substantial shift in energy
generation, but we need to do it more quickly,” Gates told The
Washington Post. “We need to move faster than the energy sector ever has...”
Photo credit above: "Bill
Gates is teaming up with fellow billionaires and multiple countries to
boost research in clean energy. He's expected to make that announcement
Monday at the U.N. climate change summit in Paris." (Reuters).
* More perspective on what Gates is trying to do to jump-start new energy technologies here.
Success in Paris: In Reach..But In Eye of Beholder (and Media?)Yale Climate Connection takes a look at lofty expectations and what can truly be accomplished at the Climate Summit in Paris: "...Paris
won’t satisfy the short-term desires and needs to limit warming to no
more than two degrees C. And it won’t reduce CO2 concentrations to a
350-, 400-, or even 450-ppm concentration. But it can still end up
easing the transition to a low-carbon global economy. That in itself
will be one more constructive effort in what inevitably will be a
decades-long undertaking. The theatrics and the atmospherics, no pun,
surrounding the lead-up to Paris, the actual event, and its aftermath –
and the global media’s coverage of it and their audiences’ resulting
impressions – will matter, and do matter..."
The Biggest Climate Challenge: Leaving Carbon in the Ground. Bill McKibbon explains at Scientific American; here's an excerpt: "...If we committed ourselves, Stanford University professor of environmental engineering Mark Jacobson and his team have shown,
every state in the union (and every country on the planet) could supply
their needs with clean, reliable electricity by 2030 at an affordable
price. Polls show that most people would like that change. The ones who
wouldn’t are the people who own coal mines and oil wells—people who have
a good deal of political clout. For instance, the richest man on Earth
is the two Koch Brothers taken together. They are oil and gas barons—in
fact, they are the largest leaseholders in those Canadian tar sands that
are one of the deposits the scientists say we must leave largely
untouched. And they have announced that they’ll spend $900 million on
next fall’s U.S. elections—that’s more money than the Democratic or
Republican parties spent the last time around..."
Nature Has Lost Its Meaning. The author of this story at The Atlantic
says that to solve climate change we need to reimagine our entire
relationship to the nonhuman world. Dominion vs. stewardship - which
will win out? Here's an excerpt: "...There are now more than 7
billion people on this planet, drinking its water, eating its plants and
animals, and mining its raw materials to build and power our tools.
These everyday activities might seem trivial from the perspective of any
one individual, but aggregated together they promise to leave lasting
imprints on the Earth. Human power is now geological in scope—and if we are to avoid making a mess of this, our only home, our politics must catch up. Making
this shift will require a radical change in how we think about our
relationship to the natural world. That may sound like cause for
despair. After all, many people refuse to admit that environmental
crises like climate change exist at all. But as Jedediah Purdy reminds
us in his dazzling new book, After Nature,
our relationship with the nonhuman world has proved flexible over time.
People have imagined nature in a great many ways across history..."
Researchers Sound The Alarm on Mt. Everest Flood Risk. Here's a clip from Forbes: "Melting
glaciers on Mount Everest are forming large lakes and creating concerns
of increasing flood risks, according to an international team of
researchers that spent the last few months in the Himalayas. The changes
are occurring against the backdrop of a warming climate and measured
during what may turn out to be the hottest year ever in recorded history.
“A decade or so ago, there were individual ponds on the Khumbu glacier
but in the past five years or so they have begun to get larger and join
up,” Ann Rowan, leader of the team from the UK universities of Sheffield
and Leeds told the BBC..."
The Great Thaw. As
temperatures continue to rise most of America's western glaciers could
vanish in the coming decades - here's a snippet from a Washington Post story: "...The
decline of glaciers here and around the world is frequently cited by
scientists as evidence of a climate undergoing rapid change. Scientific
studies have confirmed that more than 90 percent of the world’s glaciers
are retreating, and many of the smaller ones — like the alpine ice
sheets of Glacier National Park — are rapidly disappearing. The impacts
extend well beyond the loss of majestic scenery. Thawing glaciers
account for about 20 percent of the sea-level rise recorded in the past
century, adding to the meltwater coming from polar ice caps and ice
sheets. In the United States, the loss of mountain glaciers and snow
cover is depriving Western states of a critical water source during the
summer, when snowmelt feeds streams and rivers and helps farmers and
wildlife survive the dry months..."
Photo credit above: "Upper Grinnell Lake, next to the remnants of the Grinell Glacier in Glacier National Park, Mont." (Ben Herndon).
3.2 Millimeters: A Troubling Rise in Sea Level. The New York Times reports; here's an excerpt: "...Still,
there is no question about the basic facts. Since 1993, the average
rate of increase has nearly doubled, to 3.2 millimeters a year. The
retreat of glaciers, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the loss
of sea ice have contributed to these accelerating increases. Extreme
sea levels during storm surges like that of Hurricane Sandy
in 2012 have increased since 1970, mainly the result of rising seas. By
2081, yearly increases are likely to be as high as 16 millimeters a
year, or about six-tenths of an inch. By the end of this century, seas
will have risen by as much as three feet, and levels will almost
certainly continue to rise for many centuries..."
Unsafe Climates. Elizabeth Kolbert wrote an article for The New Yorker; here's an excerpt: "...A
recent study by researchers at Loyola Marymount University and the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology concluded that unabated warming
would render Persian Gulf cities like Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and Dhahran
virtually unlivable in a matter of decades. “A plausible analogy of
future climate for many locations in Southwest Asia is the current
climate of the desert of Northern Afar on the African side of the Red
Sea, a region with no permanent human settlements,” the researchers
wrote. One of the most robust predictions that can be made about climate
change is that it will send millions—perhaps tens or hundreds of
millions—of people in search of new homes. And, in an “extraordinarily
interconnected” world, disaster cannot be cordoned off..." (Illustration credit: Tom Bachtell).
Earth is a Warmer, Wilder Place Since Last Climate Deal Made.
The changes are slow, until they hit you over the head (repeatedly).
Ironically it's the increasingly freakish weather that is causing many
to wake up and acknowledge that something has changed. Here's an excerpt
from AP: "...The
five deadliest heat waves of the past century — in Europe in 2003,
Russia in 2010, India and Pakistan this year, Western Europe in 2006 and
southern Asia in 1998 — have come in the past 18 years, according to
the International Disaster Database run by the Centre for Research on
the Epidemiology of Disaster in Belgium. The number of weather and
climate disasters worldwide has increased 42 percent, though deaths are
down 58 percent. From 1993 to 1997, the world averaged 221 weather
disasters that killed 3,248 people a year. From 2010 to 2014, the yearly
average of weather disasters was up to 313, while deaths dropped to
1,364, according to the disaster database. Eighteen years ago, the
discussion was far more about average temperatures, not the freakish
extremes. Now, scientists and others realize it is in the more frequent
extremes that people are truly experiencing climate change..."
No comments:
Post a Comment