Earth is the warmest it's been in 100,000 years, a new reconstruction of historical temperature data finds, and with today's level of fossil fuel emissions the planet is "locked into" eventually hitting its highest temperature mark in 2 million years.
Nobody with a sound mind disputes that the temperature is rising on earth. Or that burning fossil fuels are largely responsible for that increase.
Except for Trump and his goofy supporters which proves my sound mind theory.
Carolyn Snyder works at the EPA as a climate policy official. Environmental Protection Agency, see fracking. Hottest temps, India hit with 123F or about temps, India's hottest temps ever this past May-June 2016 hundreds perished, massive crop failure hundreds of farmer suicides, (severe drought). Summer before, 2015 India about 2,500 perished extreme heat waves, etc. Start riding bicycles, one less car!
Sobering news, and the best we get from the D and R debate is which candidate has the "best temperment" to be president. We are in serious trouble here folks.
Should we be impressed with Clinton who gives lip service to climate science and endorses fracking at the same time?
I have been watching the climate change debate unfold for some decades and have personaly watched the climate change for many decades. In the early 1970's both the young and the old were talking about how the weather was not the same anymore. Predictable weather patterns were changing and everyone wondered why. I have been listening to climatologists underestimating the effects of global warm as they were consistently releasing the conservative estimates from their models rather than be forthright and tell the bigger story. From how I see it now they are now starting to see that since our CO2 level has passed 400 PPM the Earth is now headed to catastrophic levels of climate change for the biosphere of the Earth. We are witnessing the next mass extinction on Earth as the world continues to warm. People seem to miss the point that CO2 is a form of insulation and we have pumped way more insulation into the atmosphere than what the Earth has seen in over 400,000 years. There is so much now we are can only watch the temperature continue to rise and rise and rise and if it is 3 or 5 or 9 C increase we have two tasks ahead of us. One is to stop adding more insulation. Two is to focus on a battle that is more important than and bigger than the Manhattan Project or putting humans on the Moon. It will be the activity that has allowed humans to survive for thousands of years, the ability to adapt and change to a changing environment. We have the foresight to see that the oceans are going to rise and flood low lying areas all over the Earth so now is the time to plan for that because we are facing the largest transfer of humans in history. Billions of refugees will need to be housed and fed. As it stands now we are totally unprepared for what we can see on the horizon while we are stuck in a paradigm that was founded in the 18th century that the Earth has infinite ability to withstand whatever we do to it.
good algebra lesson
We're only locked into these temperatures if you don't ask the inventors. If you do ask the inventors the answer is more subtle:
No, we're not locked into these temperatures, first because we can get rid of almost all fossil fuel use in heating buildings, in transit/transportation and in nighttime/stored electricity generation, and second because we can restore the Arctic Ocean's natural ice pack by transferring heat out of the top 100 feet of ocean each winter, plus we can recoat the tundra with new snow from wind-powered snowmaking machines. This changes the Arctic's albedo and short-circuits the world's biggest positive feedback loop.
However, our species is doing close to zilch right now, nothing, nada, on any of these fronts. So, until we get off the dime, yes, we're locked into these temperatures.
Our ocean food supply is becoming 2% less productive every year. California suddenly wasn't its usual salad bowl due to the climate drought, and we know that the wheat belt is likely turn into a dust bowl. Expect consequences, children.
The answer is yes, we should be impressed with Clinton. Her green energy proposal is very ambitious. If most of that green energy replaces fossil fuels that will be a big positive step in emissions reductions. The fracking issue with regard to climate change is complicated although you would never know it by many of the comments posted here. A good portion of the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions the US has achieved has been due to replacing coal with natural gas from fracking. The complications occur when you start factoring in methane emissions from fracking and natural gas transmission. The point is it that it is rather unclear whether fracking contributes to global warming or helps combat global warming when natural gas is substituted for coal. And Clinton is absolutely right that an immediate ban on fracking is not practical because to supply enough energy coal burning would have to be increased. The US at the moment is far too dependent on natural gas to have a national ban on fracking. Clinton is simply trying to deal with a reality that has to be dealt with because of failure of the to act a number of years ago to combat climate change. The George W. Bush administration in particular represents lost years in the effort.
I'm just worried about the next 20 or so, after that, if I last that long. It won't be an issue for me. I'll just do what I can during that time.
I am glad to find one other person who knows that we have gone off the edge and a total secession of burning fossil fuel will not slow our destiny to be like Venus ...900 degrees and 300 MPH winds. The forest and brush fires are generating more CO2 than we ever did and soon the methane ices will start adding that to the air.
The filthy rich have several hundred trillion dollars in their hedge funds and since those families caused this it would be appropriate if they would spend a few tens of trillions and hire a few billion of the people who are here because they blocked birth control education and funding worldwide. Read today's NY times and note that Science times tells us how to calculate carbon credits and the business section quantitizes the contribution of polluters or rather quotes their denials. Places like the advancing tree line in Canada offer millions of acres of new land to plant fast growing trees...where the billions of newly employed former refugees could go to work and get the air back to 300 ppm in a few decades. also, the rich will get back every penny by selling carbon credits to all those who want to continue to pollute and being sure they are doing the planting at a hefty profit margin.
An excerpt from an excellent piece written by Dr. Peter Wadhams:
As Arctic Ocean Ice Disappears,
The Global Climate Impacts Intensify
26 SEPT 2016
“In my professional lifetime, I have witnessed the transformation of the top of the world from a beautiful ice-bound expanse of wilderness to a region now characterized by warming and melting on all fronts. These changes represent a spiritual impoverishment of the earth, as well as a practical catastrophe for humanity. The time for action has long since passed.”
Floods, droughts, fires, spread of invasive species, extinctions, vector borne diseases, tree deaths, ocean acidification will only intensify as the arctic continues to melt and other tipping points are crossed.
Note his comment about CO2 extraction.
This sounds like a 'must have' article from Nature, including the accompanying assessment.
While both Lee Kump and Richard Alley have chosen the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum as a 'closest analogy' to what we are doing, I am always drawn to Peter Ward's reconstruction of the entire Phanerozoic climate record graph, after the work of another author whose name escapes me just now in "The Global Carbon Cycle".
It show CO2 vs Temperature for the last 550 million years roughly.
What strikes me is the similarity of the time prior to the end-Permian Mass Extinction, the largest on record, when the world was in an Ice Age, with low CO2 levels - like now. The Paleocene/Eocene was a time of hot temperatures worldwide, and high CO2.
I remember President Carter's fireside chats. Ronnie Rayguns damn near first order of business was to make a joke of President Carter's solar panels, and soon had them removed from the White House roof. I keep saying ride a bicycle, and get a bicycle- trailer, bicycle baskets, bicycle racks, and bicycle saddle-bags, bicycle panniers, etc. You choose what bicycle set-up is best for you. So when you have to run for groceries, etc. you are not driving a effing car everywhere ya go, America!
Great post Cindy, (Hidey-holes! Good one!)
I liked your take on the election: That's exactly what's going on. I knew it would, too, but like watching a magic show, I allowed myself to believe for a while, that elections are real in the Kingdom of Fake Democracies.
And then you had to go and tell us how the magic trick really works! Dang Cin, I was really getting into the Bern Revolution fantasy, too! Apparently Bern wasn't invited to run naked in the Redwoods at the Bilderberg Wise Owl Marathon (ssshhhhhhhh!). Nixon said he didn't like it much. The thought of these two new candidates naked, makes me glad I wasn't invited.
Meanwhile, back at the Burning Daily Planet...
This is a typical EPA-type government report talking about thousands of years in the future. But newsflash sportsfans: We are already at 1.5 degrees Celsius over baseline in 2016. It was 100 degrees F all over the planet this year, coast to coast from "heat domes" (Ocean is red hot all the way down the water column so cannot absorb heat any more, giving coast to coast heat waves in North America and India.)
If that trend goes beyond 2016, it may validate the theory of "Abrupt Climate Change" that holds that extinction events didn't happen gradually, but hit tipping points causing drastic temp anomalies in as little as three years time.
The hidey-holes better be real deep and cooled by nuke reactors, cause it gets real hot in mine shafts. Can't come back up for air since 400 nuke plants are going to Fuk you if you exchange air with the surface.
And just whacha going to eat in your hidey-hole Ms. Red Tyrant Queen? Each other? The wheat supply will die off at 2 degrees C above baseline.
Due to 5 typhoons hitting Japan, the fabled "Wall of Ice" just melted at Fukushima. A whole new blob of radioactive water will be coming to the West Coast in about five years if the last blob was any indication. Veteran's Today posted a story saying many cities in the US are already showing over 1000 cpm on the old rad meter.
Here's the Fuku story if you missed it:
.... and no more professional sports, flying, stupid plastic stuff... We need an OFF switch for most of our economy/culture. Are we going to get that?... No.... we'll die with people running off to football games and Starbucks, flying to Cancun for winter vaca.
So on the low range it's gonna be 4 degrees Celsius, on the high range 9 in the "next few thousand years". According to other "estimates" it's gonna be 2 degrees by the end of this century. It's gonna be nonlinear? 2 deg be 2100 and then the other 2-7 in the next thousand years? These guys have to get together and come up with unified theory, otherwise nobody is gonna fall for it.
I think I've seen that movie. Mad Max? Or was it The Postman? Or Steel Dawn?