Mythopoeika
I am a meat popsicle
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 51,919
- Location
- Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
IPCC rumbled!
ramonmercado
CyberPunk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 58,467
- Location
- Eblana
Prehistoric Climate Change.
Shifting monsoon altered early cultures in China, study says
February 6, 2017 in Earth / Earth Sciences
The annual summer monsoon that drops rain onto East Asia, an area with about a billion people, has shifted dramatically in the distant past, at times moving northward by as much as 400 kilometers and doubling rainfall in that northern reach. The monsoon's changes over the past 10,000 years likely altered the course of early human cultures in China, say the authors of a new study.
Researchers from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Xi'an studied ancient water levels for Lake Dali, a closed-basin lake in Inner Mongolia in the northeast of China. They found that the lake was six times larger and water levels were 60 meters higher than present during the early and middle Holocene—the period beginning about 11,700 years ago, and encompassing the development of human civilization.
"I think it is important to emphasize that these spatial fluctuations in the monsoon drive large changes in northern China," said Yonaton Goldsmith, a graduate student at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and lead author of the paper. "When the monsoon is strong, it shifts northward and northern China becomes green. When the monsoon is weak, the monsoon stays in the south and northern China dries out. Such large fluctuations must have altered the ecosystems in northern China dramatically."
The study, appearing this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, also ties the shifting monsoon to changes in the earth's orbit and other periodic changes in the climate system. The study should help scientists understand how the monsoon is affected by those natural cycles, and how a changing climate today might influence the monsoon in the future.
Goldsmith said it's still unclear how the monsoon will react to global warming. One view is that the monsoon should grow stronger, but the area studied has been drying out over recent decades, he said, "so there is still a lot that needs to be done in that region before we can get definitive answers."
Dali Lake is located near the northwestern limit of the East Asian monsoon, and so would reflect the changes brought about when the monsoon shifted north. The researchers studied outcrops of sediments left behind when the lake was far larger, and used those and other markers to construct a timeline of lake levels, and the fluctuation of rainfall over millennia.
They found that the lake reached peak levels around 123,000 years ago, again around 58,000 years ago, and once more between 11,000 and 5,500 years ago. They tie the periodic increases in rainfall to the range of the monsoon shifting north by as much as 400 kilometers. The lake record is "highly correlated" with measurements taken earlier from cave deposits in both northern and southern China. ...
https://phys.org/news/2017-02-shifting-monsoon-early-cultures-china.html
Shifting monsoon altered early cultures in China, study says
February 6, 2017 in Earth / Earth Sciences
The annual summer monsoon that drops rain onto East Asia, an area with about a billion people, has shifted dramatically in the distant past, at times moving northward by as much as 400 kilometers and doubling rainfall in that northern reach. The monsoon's changes over the past 10,000 years likely altered the course of early human cultures in China, say the authors of a new study.
Researchers from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Xi'an studied ancient water levels for Lake Dali, a closed-basin lake in Inner Mongolia in the northeast of China. They found that the lake was six times larger and water levels were 60 meters higher than present during the early and middle Holocene—the period beginning about 11,700 years ago, and encompassing the development of human civilization.
"I think it is important to emphasize that these spatial fluctuations in the monsoon drive large changes in northern China," said Yonaton Goldsmith, a graduate student at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and lead author of the paper. "When the monsoon is strong, it shifts northward and northern China becomes green. When the monsoon is weak, the monsoon stays in the south and northern China dries out. Such large fluctuations must have altered the ecosystems in northern China dramatically."
The study, appearing this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, also ties the shifting monsoon to changes in the earth's orbit and other periodic changes in the climate system. The study should help scientists understand how the monsoon is affected by those natural cycles, and how a changing climate today might influence the monsoon in the future.
Goldsmith said it's still unclear how the monsoon will react to global warming. One view is that the monsoon should grow stronger, but the area studied has been drying out over recent decades, he said, "so there is still a lot that needs to be done in that region before we can get definitive answers."
Dali Lake is located near the northwestern limit of the East Asian monsoon, and so would reflect the changes brought about when the monsoon shifted north. The researchers studied outcrops of sediments left behind when the lake was far larger, and used those and other markers to construct a timeline of lake levels, and the fluctuation of rainfall over millennia.
They found that the lake reached peak levels around 123,000 years ago, again around 58,000 years ago, and once more between 11,000 and 5,500 years ago. They tie the periodic increases in rainfall to the range of the monsoon shifting north by as much as 400 kilometers. The lake record is "highly correlated" with measurements taken earlier from cave deposits in both northern and southern China. ...
https://phys.org/news/2017-02-shifting-monsoon-early-cultures-china.html
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Storms linked to climate change caused more than £3.5m to cricket clubs
Storms in December 2015 linked to climate change caused more than £3.5m worth of damage to cricket clubs in the UK, says a report.
Two clubs affected - Sowerby Bridge in Yorkshire and Appleby Eden in Cumbria - have yet to return to their grounds.
And 130-year-old Corbridge Cricket Club had to have their clubhouse demolished as a result of Storm Desmond.
The England and Wales Cricket Board distributed more than £1m in emergency funding to clubs last year.
And the ECB has also earmarked £1.6m for 2017.
The "Weather Warning" report, which comes from the Climate Coalition, is backed by more than 100 organisations including the WWF-UK, the RSPB, the National Trust and the Women's Institute.
Professor Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate, which analysed the report, said science could now show that climate change made the record wet weather in December 2015 more likely.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/38888624
Storms in December 2015 linked to climate change caused more than £3.5m worth of damage to cricket clubs in the UK, says a report.
Two clubs affected - Sowerby Bridge in Yorkshire and Appleby Eden in Cumbria - have yet to return to their grounds.
And 130-year-old Corbridge Cricket Club had to have their clubhouse demolished as a result of Storm Desmond.
The England and Wales Cricket Board distributed more than £1m in emergency funding to clubs last year.
And the ECB has also earmarked £1.6m for 2017.
The "Weather Warning" report, which comes from the Climate Coalition, is backed by more than 100 organisations including the WWF-UK, the RSPB, the National Trust and the Women's Institute.
Professor Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate, which analysed the report, said science could now show that climate change made the record wet weather in December 2015 more likely.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/38888624
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
New UN climate chief: 'Action on warming unstoppable'
By Roger Harrabin BBC environment analyst
The UN’s new climate chief says she’s worried about President Donald Trump – but confident that action to curb climate change is unstoppable.
President Trump said he’d withdraw from the UN climate deal and stop funding the UN’s clean energy programme.
But former Mexican diplomat Patricia Espinosa told BBC News that the delay in any firm announcement suggests the issue is still unresolved.
She travels to US this weekend to try and meet the new US secretary of state.
Ms Espinosa said it would be more damaging for the US to leave the on-going climate talks process altogether than to stop funding the clean energy programme.
The US pays approximately $4m towards this programme every year - and often an extra $2m in voluntary funding.
But she said the rest of the world would carry on tackling climate change without the US, if necessary.
She said China’s stated willingness to lead the world in curbing emissions might cause American diplomats to ponder the implications of allowing China a role of global moral leadership.
“We are of course worried about rumours that the possibility of the US pulling out of the Paris agreement and the convention on climate change,” she said.
“It would be very bad if there were a change of position in the US. That’s why I’m looking forwards to engaging with the US as a partner.”
She did not explain how the US would be able to remain within the Paris framework whilst scrapping action on its own emissions strategy that helps underpin that process.
But she drew hope from the vast number of firms and cities looking towards a low-carbon future – in the US and round the world: "A lot of US businesses are really going into the agenda of sustainability and some are making their own commitments in emissions reductions in their own operations."
“An incredible amount of cities have embarked on ambitious goals; some states like California have been for many years in the forefront of this agenda.
“In International Petroleum Week, I was very encouraged to hear how much some of the oil and gas companies are realising that the future of their industries is in a transformation into clean energy companies - and they have embraced this in their own interest.
“The transformation has started. I think it’s unstoppable.”
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39081783
By Roger Harrabin BBC environment analyst
The UN’s new climate chief says she’s worried about President Donald Trump – but confident that action to curb climate change is unstoppable.
President Trump said he’d withdraw from the UN climate deal and stop funding the UN’s clean energy programme.
But former Mexican diplomat Patricia Espinosa told BBC News that the delay in any firm announcement suggests the issue is still unresolved.
She travels to US this weekend to try and meet the new US secretary of state.
Ms Espinosa said it would be more damaging for the US to leave the on-going climate talks process altogether than to stop funding the clean energy programme.
The US pays approximately $4m towards this programme every year - and often an extra $2m in voluntary funding.
But she said the rest of the world would carry on tackling climate change without the US, if necessary.
She said China’s stated willingness to lead the world in curbing emissions might cause American diplomats to ponder the implications of allowing China a role of global moral leadership.
“We are of course worried about rumours that the possibility of the US pulling out of the Paris agreement and the convention on climate change,” she said.
“It would be very bad if there were a change of position in the US. That’s why I’m looking forwards to engaging with the US as a partner.”
She did not explain how the US would be able to remain within the Paris framework whilst scrapping action on its own emissions strategy that helps underpin that process.
But she drew hope from the vast number of firms and cities looking towards a low-carbon future – in the US and round the world: "A lot of US businesses are really going into the agenda of sustainability and some are making their own commitments in emissions reductions in their own operations."
“An incredible amount of cities have embarked on ambitious goals; some states like California have been for many years in the forefront of this agenda.
“In International Petroleum Week, I was very encouraged to hear how much some of the oil and gas companies are realising that the future of their industries is in a transformation into clean energy companies - and they have embraced this in their own interest.
“The transformation has started. I think it’s unstoppable.”
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-39081783
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Antarctic temperatures hit unprecedented high of 17.5C as continent's warming accelerates
Researchers record hottest ever reading on Earth's coldest continent where temperatures usually range between -10C and -60C
Ben Kentish
Thursday 2 March 2017 11:01 GMT
Temperatures in Antarctica have reached a record high, hitting an unprecedented 17.5C, the United Nations weather agency has announced.
An Argentine research base near the northern tip of the Antarctic recorded the temperature in March 2015, new analysis has revealed.
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) announced the finding after analysing data from a number of recording stations.
The temperature, more common in the Mediterranean than near the South Pole, is a significant departure from Antarctic averages, which range from -10C on the continent’s coast to -60C in the interior.
The region is made up of ice 4.8 kilometres thick, which contains 90 per cent of the world’s fresh water. If it were all to melt, experts say sea levels would rise by 60 metres.
The Antarctic Peninsula is among the most rapidly warming areas of the planet, with temperatures having increased by almost 3C over the last 50 years.
Rising temperatures in the Arctic and Antarctic are a particular concern because they are causing the ice caps to melt at a worrying speed.
This causes sea levels to rise and has an impact on everything from global temperatures to ocean currents.
Scientists said the findings showed the need to improve collection of weather data in the polar regions.
“The Antarctic and the Arctic are poorly covered in terms of weather observations and forecasts, even though both play an important role in driving climate and ocean patterns and in sea level rise," said Michael Sparrow, a polar expert with the World Climate Research Programme.
“Verification of maximum and minimum temperatures help us to build up a picture of the weather and climate in one of Earth’s final frontiers.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...seas-climate-change-melting-ice-a7607211.html
Researchers record hottest ever reading on Earth's coldest continent where temperatures usually range between -10C and -60C
Ben Kentish
Thursday 2 March 2017 11:01 GMT
Temperatures in Antarctica have reached a record high, hitting an unprecedented 17.5C, the United Nations weather agency has announced.
An Argentine research base near the northern tip of the Antarctic recorded the temperature in March 2015, new analysis has revealed.
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) announced the finding after analysing data from a number of recording stations.
The temperature, more common in the Mediterranean than near the South Pole, is a significant departure from Antarctic averages, which range from -10C on the continent’s coast to -60C in the interior.
The region is made up of ice 4.8 kilometres thick, which contains 90 per cent of the world’s fresh water. If it were all to melt, experts say sea levels would rise by 60 metres.
The Antarctic Peninsula is among the most rapidly warming areas of the planet, with temperatures having increased by almost 3C over the last 50 years.
Rising temperatures in the Arctic and Antarctic are a particular concern because they are causing the ice caps to melt at a worrying speed.
This causes sea levels to rise and has an impact on everything from global temperatures to ocean currents.
Scientists said the findings showed the need to improve collection of weather data in the polar regions.
“The Antarctic and the Arctic are poorly covered in terms of weather observations and forecasts, even though both play an important role in driving climate and ocean patterns and in sea level rise," said Michael Sparrow, a polar expert with the World Climate Research Programme.
“Verification of maximum and minimum temperatures help us to build up a picture of the weather and climate in one of Earth’s final frontiers.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...seas-climate-change-melting-ice-a7607211.html
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
A spectacular iceberg has been spotted close to shore in Newfoundland
David Millward
13 April 2017 • 5:43pm
Canada is set for a record iceberg season with hundreds already visible off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.
They appear to have arrived earlier than usual, with Canada’s iceberg season normally taking place later in the summer.
At the last count there are already 481 icebergs in the region, the Huffington Post reported.
"There are certainly a significant amount of icebergs out there. When you look at the iceberg chart it's truly incredible," said Rebecca Acton-Bond, acting superintendent of ice operations with the Canadian Coast Guard.
"Usually you don't see these numbers until the end of May or June. So the amount of icebergs that we're seeing right now, it really is quite something," she told CBC news.
The icebergs are created by a process known as calving, in which chunks of ice break off from the edge of a glacier.
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/13/canada-set-record-iceberg-season/
Photos on page.
David Millward
13 April 2017 • 5:43pm
Canada is set for a record iceberg season with hundreds already visible off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.
They appear to have arrived earlier than usual, with Canada’s iceberg season normally taking place later in the summer.
At the last count there are already 481 icebergs in the region, the Huffington Post reported.
"There are certainly a significant amount of icebergs out there. When you look at the iceberg chart it's truly incredible," said Rebecca Acton-Bond, acting superintendent of ice operations with the Canadian Coast Guard.
"Usually you don't see these numbers until the end of May or June. So the amount of icebergs that we're seeing right now, it really is quite something," she told CBC news.
The icebergs are created by a process known as calving, in which chunks of ice break off from the edge of a glacier.
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/13/canada-set-record-iceberg-season/
Photos on page.
ramonmercado
CyberPunk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 58,467
- Location
- Eblana
How do alpine plants react to warmer climatic conditions? Due to their longevity, the plants may survive longer than expected in their habitats, but produce offspring that are increasingly maladapted. Population size may decrease faster than the contraction of the species range, as UZH researchers show using computer models. Scientists who wish to track the precise extinction risk of plant species must not only measure their dispersal, but also the densities of the local populations.
For alpine plant species, climate change presents a special challenge: To escape increased greenhouse warming, the species have to move to a higher-altitude habitat. Due to the pyramidal structure of mountains, however, little surface area is available for this endeavor. To estimate the extinction risk of these plants, scientists have previously resorted to static models that insufficiently mapped the dynamic responses of flora to climate change.
More reliable predictions
Now, the team of Frédéric Guillaume of the Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Sciences of the University of Zurich, in cooperation with research groups from Grenoble and Vienna, has developed a new model that takes eco-evolutionary mechanisms into consideration, therefore permitting more reliable predictions. The researchers have applied their model to four alpine plant species and used supercomputers to simulate the dispersal and adaptation of these species under three possible climate scenarios up to the year 2090.
The more favorable climate scenarios that assume a warming by one degree show that the plant populations recover again if the warming slows after 2090. "If climate change continues to develop without restraint, however," Guillaume says," the plants will have a big problem." A problem that may remain undetectable under superficial observation and become obvious only when examining the situation more deeply. ...
https://phys.org/news/2017-05-extinction-alpine-undetectable.html
For alpine plant species, climate change presents a special challenge: To escape increased greenhouse warming, the species have to move to a higher-altitude habitat. Due to the pyramidal structure of mountains, however, little surface area is available for this endeavor. To estimate the extinction risk of these plants, scientists have previously resorted to static models that insufficiently mapped the dynamic responses of flora to climate change.
More reliable predictions
Now, the team of Frédéric Guillaume of the Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Sciences of the University of Zurich, in cooperation with research groups from Grenoble and Vienna, has developed a new model that takes eco-evolutionary mechanisms into consideration, therefore permitting more reliable predictions. The researchers have applied their model to four alpine plant species and used supercomputers to simulate the dispersal and adaptation of these species under three possible climate scenarios up to the year 2090.
The more favorable climate scenarios that assume a warming by one degree show that the plant populations recover again if the warming slows after 2090. "If climate change continues to develop without restraint, however," Guillaume says," the plants will have a big problem." A problem that may remain undetectable under superficial observation and become obvious only when examining the situation more deeply. ...
https://phys.org/news/2017-05-extinction-alpine-undetectable.html
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
There are diseases hidden in ice, and they are waking up
Long-dormant bacteria and viruses, trapped in ice and permafrost for centuries, are reviving as Earth's climate warms
By Jasmin Fox-Skelly
4 May 2017
Throughout history, humans have existed side-by-side with bacteria and viruses. From the bubonic plague to smallpox, we have evolved to resist them, and in response they have developed new ways of infecting us.
We have had antibiotics for almost a century, ever since Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. In response, bacteria have responded by evolving antibiotic resistance. The battle is endless: because we spend so much time with pathogens, we sometimes develop a kind of natural stalemate.
However, what would happen if we were suddenly exposed to deadly bacteria and viruses that have been absent for thousands of years, or that we have never met before?
We may be about to find out. Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life.
In August 2016, in a remote corner of Siberian tundra called the Yamal Peninsula in the Arctic Circle, a 12-year-old boy died and at least twenty people were hospitalised after being infected by anthrax.
The theory is that, over 75 years ago, a reindeer infected with anthrax died and its frozen carcass became trapped under a layer of frozen soil, known as permafrost. There it stayed until a heatwave in the summer of 2016, when the permafrost thawed.
This exposed the reindeer corpse and released infectious anthrax into nearby water and soil, and then into the food supply. More than 2,000 reindeer grazing nearby became infected, which then led to the small number of human cases.
The fear is that this will not be an isolated case.
As the Earth warms, more permafrost will melt. Under normal circumstances, superficial permafrost layers about 50cm deep melt every summer. But now global warming is gradually exposing older permafrost layers.
Frozen permafrost soil is the perfect place for bacteria to remain alive for very long periods of time, perhaps as long as a million years. That means melting ice could potentially open a Pandora's box of diseases.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up
Long-dormant bacteria and viruses, trapped in ice and permafrost for centuries, are reviving as Earth's climate warms
By Jasmin Fox-Skelly
4 May 2017
Throughout history, humans have existed side-by-side with bacteria and viruses. From the bubonic plague to smallpox, we have evolved to resist them, and in response they have developed new ways of infecting us.
We have had antibiotics for almost a century, ever since Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. In response, bacteria have responded by evolving antibiotic resistance. The battle is endless: because we spend so much time with pathogens, we sometimes develop a kind of natural stalemate.
However, what would happen if we were suddenly exposed to deadly bacteria and viruses that have been absent for thousands of years, or that we have never met before?
We may be about to find out. Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life.
In August 2016, in a remote corner of Siberian tundra called the Yamal Peninsula in the Arctic Circle, a 12-year-old boy died and at least twenty people were hospitalised after being infected by anthrax.
The theory is that, over 75 years ago, a reindeer infected with anthrax died and its frozen carcass became trapped under a layer of frozen soil, known as permafrost. There it stayed until a heatwave in the summer of 2016, when the permafrost thawed.
This exposed the reindeer corpse and released infectious anthrax into nearby water and soil, and then into the food supply. More than 2,000 reindeer grazing nearby became infected, which then led to the small number of human cases.
The fear is that this will not be an isolated case.
As the Earth warms, more permafrost will melt. Under normal circumstances, superficial permafrost layers about 50cm deep melt every summer. But now global warming is gradually exposing older permafrost layers.
Frozen permafrost soil is the perfect place for bacteria to remain alive for very long periods of time, perhaps as long as a million years. That means melting ice could potentially open a Pandora's box of diseases.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up
Coastaljames
Justified & Ancient
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 4,044
- Location
- East Norfolk coast
I don't know about global warming.
I know the climate's changing though, just like it always has.
I know the climate's changing though, just like it always has.
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
Coastaljames
Justified & Ancient
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 4,044
- Location
- East Norfolk coast
Seeds stored in case of environmental disaster no longer safe from environmental disaster due to, erm, environmental disaster?
The winter was so warm the permafrost protecting them melted!
Guardian
The whole story was more than a little sensationalist and overblown...perhaps unsurprisingly.
http://www.popsci.com/seed-vault-flooding#page-3
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
It's not flooding, it's water intrusion!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Paris climate deal: EU and China rebuff Trump
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent
Chinese and EU leaders are to agree a joint statement on the Paris climate agreement saying it is "an imperative more important than ever".
A draft of the document, seen by the BBC, stresses the "highest political commitment" to implement the deal.
It will be widely seen as a rebuff to the US, as President Trump prepares to announce on Thursday if the US is withdrawing from the accord.
The joint statement will be published on Friday after a summit in Brussels.
For more than a year, Chinese and EU officials have been working behind the scenes to agree a joint statement on climate change and clean energy.
The document highlights the dangers posed by rising temperatures, "as a national security issue and multiplying factor of social and political fragility," while pointing out that the transition to clean energy creates jobs and economic growth.
"The EU and China consider the Paris agreement as an historic achievement further accelerating the irreversible global low greenhouse gas emission and climate resilient development," the draft document says. [?]
"The Paris Agreement is proof that with shared political will and mutual trust, multilateralism can succeed in building fair and effective solutions to the most critical global problems of our time. The EU and China underline their highest political commitment to the effective implementation of the Paris Agreement in all its aspects."
Both sides say they will step up action to and "forge ahead with further policies and measures" to implement their national plans on cutting carbon. Significantly, both the EU and China agree that they will outline their long term low carbon strategies by 2020.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40106281
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent
Chinese and EU leaders are to agree a joint statement on the Paris climate agreement saying it is "an imperative more important than ever".
A draft of the document, seen by the BBC, stresses the "highest political commitment" to implement the deal.
It will be widely seen as a rebuff to the US, as President Trump prepares to announce on Thursday if the US is withdrawing from the accord.
The joint statement will be published on Friday after a summit in Brussels.
For more than a year, Chinese and EU officials have been working behind the scenes to agree a joint statement on climate change and clean energy.
The document highlights the dangers posed by rising temperatures, "as a national security issue and multiplying factor of social and political fragility," while pointing out that the transition to clean energy creates jobs and economic growth.
"The EU and China consider the Paris agreement as an historic achievement further accelerating the irreversible global low greenhouse gas emission and climate resilient development," the draft document says. [?]
"The Paris Agreement is proof that with shared political will and mutual trust, multilateralism can succeed in building fair and effective solutions to the most critical global problems of our time. The EU and China underline their highest political commitment to the effective implementation of the Paris Agreement in all its aspects."
Both sides say they will step up action to and "forge ahead with further policies and measures" to implement their national plans on cutting carbon. Significantly, both the EU and China agree that they will outline their long term low carbon strategies by 2020.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40106281
Frasier Buddolph
CAUTION: May not know what he's talking about.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2016
- Messages
- 605
We can stop worrying. It will all be taken care of.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/335886-gop-rep-on-climate-change-god-will-take-care-of-it
That's such a load off my mind.
(We're doomed.)
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/335886-gop-rep-on-climate-change-god-will-take-care-of-it
That's such a load off my mind.
(We're doomed.)
Mythopoeika
I am a meat popsicle
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 51,919
- Location
- Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
God has an excellent track record for such things!
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Trump climate deal: US can fulfil pledges, says Michael Bloomberg
The US can still meet its commitments to fight climate change, despite President Donald Trump's withdrawal from the Paris accord, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said.
He argued this could be done "through partnerships among cities, states and businesses", saying Americans would not let Washington stand in their way.
Mr Bloomberg is the UN special envoy for cities and climate change.
Mr Trump said the 2015 Paris agreement would cost American jobs.
His decision, announced on Thursday, triggered widespread international condemnation.
China, the EU and India, which along with the US make up the four biggest emitters of carbon dioxide, restated their commitment to the accord.
It committed the US and 194 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C (3.6F) above pre-industrial levels and "endeavour to limit" them even more, to 1.5C.
The World Meteorological Organisation said that, in the worst scenario, the US pullout could add 0.3C to global temperatures by the end of the century.
"Americans don't need Washington to meet our Paris commitments, and Americans are not going to let Washington stand in the way of fulfilling it," Mr Bloomberg said following talks with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris.
"I want the world to know that the US will meet its Paris commitments and that through partnerships among cities, states and businesses we will seek to remain part of the Paris agreement process.
"We are already halfway there and we can accelerate our process further even without any support from Washington," he added.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40141411
The US can still meet its commitments to fight climate change, despite President Donald Trump's withdrawal from the Paris accord, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said.
He argued this could be done "through partnerships among cities, states and businesses", saying Americans would not let Washington stand in their way.
Mr Bloomberg is the UN special envoy for cities and climate change.
Mr Trump said the 2015 Paris agreement would cost American jobs.
His decision, announced on Thursday, triggered widespread international condemnation.
China, the EU and India, which along with the US make up the four biggest emitters of carbon dioxide, restated their commitment to the accord.
It committed the US and 194 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C (3.6F) above pre-industrial levels and "endeavour to limit" them even more, to 1.5C.
The World Meteorological Organisation said that, in the worst scenario, the US pullout could add 0.3C to global temperatures by the end of the century.
"Americans don't need Washington to meet our Paris commitments, and Americans are not going to let Washington stand in the way of fulfilling it," Mr Bloomberg said following talks with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris.
"I want the world to know that the US will meet its Paris commitments and that through partnerships among cities, states and businesses we will seek to remain part of the Paris agreement process.
"We are already halfway there and we can accelerate our process further even without any support from Washington," he added.
etc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40141411
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Does Trump still think climate change is a hoax?
Anthony Zurcher North America reporter
2 June 2017
For a speech about whether the US should remain a party to the Paris climate accord, Donald Trump's Rose Garden address on Thursday didn't have a whole lot of discussion about, you know, the climate.
There was plenty of talk about jobs and the US economy. He offered more than a few expressions of concern over whether other nations were being given an unfair advantage over the US. And then there was that lengthy opening plug for his presidential accomplishments that had nothing to do with the environment whatsoever.
At one point the president made a somewhat oblique reference to current climate science, asserting that even if all nations hit their self-set, non-mandatory greenhouse gas emissions targets under the Paris agreement, it would only result in a 0.2% reduction in average global temperatures by the year 2100. (The researchers who conducted the study said the number he cited was outdated and misrepresented.)
Mr Trump's relative silence on the matter has left reporters wondering whether the president still stands by earlier comments - and tweets - expressing serious scepticism about the whether climate change is real.
Does he still believe it's a Chinese plot to make the US less competitive, as he tweeted in November 2012? Or that it is a money-making "hoax", as he said during a December 2015 campaign rally?"
He's occasionally backed away from such sweeping denunciations. During the first presidential debate with Hillary Clinton, he denied having ever blamed the Chinese. In a New York Times interview shortly after his election victory, he said he thinks there's "some connectivity" between human activity and climate change.
After Mr Trump announced his Paris agreement withdrawal, reporters posed the almost-too-obvious question once again to White House aides tasked with selling the move to the public. Does the president believe human activity contributes to climate change?
They asked about it during an on-background session with two administration officials on Thursday afternoon. They asked White House advisor Kellyanne Conway during a television appearance Friday morning. They asked Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt during his press conference on Friday afternoon.
Time and time again the answer was some variation of "I don't know", "I can't say" or "that's not relevant".
"We focused on one key issue," Mr Pruitt said during one of the multiple times he was pressed on his boss's views. "Was Paris good or bad for the country?"
On Tuesday Press Secretary Sean Spicer had said he didn't know the president's thoughts about climate change because he hadn't asked him. On Friday he was asked whether he had since had a chance to speak to the president.
"I have not had the opportunity to do that," Spicer replied.
The rest of the press conference was an extended parlour game to try to get the press secretary to slip and perhaps inadvertently shed some light on Mr Trump's views - to no avail.
It's clear at this point that the administration has no interest in clarifying Mr Trump's position on climate change. But why?
Confusion can often be a politician's ally. The embattled president needs his core supporters to stick with him through what could be a rough road ahead. Those who don't believe climate change is real can look at the president's past comments as proof their man still stands with them without anyone having to explicitly say so.
That allows the president to insist that he is willing to do something to address climate change - "renegotiating" the Paris accord, perhaps - without saying climate change is a problem. It allows him tell the majority of Americans who believe climate change is a real global threat that he is trying to address their concerns.
It allows administration surrogates like Mr Pruitt to tout that the US has lowered its carbon output without acknowledging the only reason this would be a noteworthy accomplishment - human activity affects the global climate.
It's a fine line to walk for even the most dextrous of White House communications teams - let alone one that has to be concerned that the next time the president is asked the question, there's no telling what he might say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40128034
Anthony Zurcher North America reporter
2 June 2017
For a speech about whether the US should remain a party to the Paris climate accord, Donald Trump's Rose Garden address on Thursday didn't have a whole lot of discussion about, you know, the climate.
There was plenty of talk about jobs and the US economy. He offered more than a few expressions of concern over whether other nations were being given an unfair advantage over the US. And then there was that lengthy opening plug for his presidential accomplishments that had nothing to do with the environment whatsoever.
At one point the president made a somewhat oblique reference to current climate science, asserting that even if all nations hit their self-set, non-mandatory greenhouse gas emissions targets under the Paris agreement, it would only result in a 0.2% reduction in average global temperatures by the year 2100. (The researchers who conducted the study said the number he cited was outdated and misrepresented.)
Mr Trump's relative silence on the matter has left reporters wondering whether the president still stands by earlier comments - and tweets - expressing serious scepticism about the whether climate change is real.
Does he still believe it's a Chinese plot to make the US less competitive, as he tweeted in November 2012? Or that it is a money-making "hoax", as he said during a December 2015 campaign rally?"
He's occasionally backed away from such sweeping denunciations. During the first presidential debate with Hillary Clinton, he denied having ever blamed the Chinese. In a New York Times interview shortly after his election victory, he said he thinks there's "some connectivity" between human activity and climate change.
After Mr Trump announced his Paris agreement withdrawal, reporters posed the almost-too-obvious question once again to White House aides tasked with selling the move to the public. Does the president believe human activity contributes to climate change?
They asked about it during an on-background session with two administration officials on Thursday afternoon. They asked White House advisor Kellyanne Conway during a television appearance Friday morning. They asked Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt during his press conference on Friday afternoon.
Time and time again the answer was some variation of "I don't know", "I can't say" or "that's not relevant".
"We focused on one key issue," Mr Pruitt said during one of the multiple times he was pressed on his boss's views. "Was Paris good or bad for the country?"
On Tuesday Press Secretary Sean Spicer had said he didn't know the president's thoughts about climate change because he hadn't asked him. On Friday he was asked whether he had since had a chance to speak to the president.
"I have not had the opportunity to do that," Spicer replied.
The rest of the press conference was an extended parlour game to try to get the press secretary to slip and perhaps inadvertently shed some light on Mr Trump's views - to no avail.
It's clear at this point that the administration has no interest in clarifying Mr Trump's position on climate change. But why?
Confusion can often be a politician's ally. The embattled president needs his core supporters to stick with him through what could be a rough road ahead. Those who don't believe climate change is real can look at the president's past comments as proof their man still stands with them without anyone having to explicitly say so.
That allows the president to insist that he is willing to do something to address climate change - "renegotiating" the Paris accord, perhaps - without saying climate change is a problem. It allows him tell the majority of Americans who believe climate change is a real global threat that he is trying to address their concerns.
It allows administration surrogates like Mr Pruitt to tout that the US has lowered its carbon output without acknowledging the only reason this would be a noteworthy accomplishment - human activity affects the global climate.
It's a fine line to walk for even the most dextrous of White House communications teams - let alone one that has to be concerned that the next time the president is asked the question, there's no telling what he might say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40128034
OneWingedBird
Beloved of Ra
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 15,431
Mythopoeika
I am a meat popsicle
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 51,919
- Location
- Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Ice for our G & Ts.
Frasier Buddolph
CAUTION: May not know what he's talking about.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2016
- Messages
- 605
This is not looking encouraging at all . . .
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ng-climate-crisis_us_59829712e4b0396a95c874c5
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ng-climate-crisis_us_59829712e4b0396a95c874c5
tastyintestines
Justified & Ancient
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2002
- Messages
- 1,610
Some basic facts they missed. Cloud cover warms at night but cools during the day as the white reflects. The amount of co2 absorbed by trees is minimal compared to the oceans and they actually put out much more heat than grasslands or prairie. Not saying that melting permafrost is good or anything.
edit wow upon further reading the author states the dinosaurs died of an asteroid as fact. Problem is this done as an opinion piece and not by a science writer.
Also she is wrong about when our current warming trend started. She states the industrial age but it wasn't until more than a century later that we exited the little ice age.
Last edited:
Frasier Buddolph
CAUTION: May not know what he's talking about.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2016
- Messages
- 605
Some basic facts they missed. Cloud cover warms at night but cools during the day as the white reflects. The amount of co2 absorbed by trees is minimal compared to the oceans and they actually put out much more heat than grasslands or prairie. Not saying that melting permafrost is good or anything.
edit wow upon further reading the author states the dinosaurs died of an asteroid as fact. Problem is this done as an opinion piece and not by a science writer.
Also she is wrong about when our current warming trend started. She states the industrial age but it wasn't until more than a century later that we exited the little ice age.
Thanks, Tasty. You point out some significant omissions/errors, and your point is well taken. I realize the writer was trying to lay out the most pessimistic scenario and may have been a little fast and loose with her facts. The reason this article disturbed me, though, is that it reinforces the idea that radical climate changes can occur in the (geological) blink of an eye, and the release of methane from melting permafrost is a positive feedback mechanism that could speed things up dramatically.
If we had taken meaningful steps thirty or forty years ago, we might have been able to significantly mitigate global warming. As it is, I think we've passed the tipping point, and things are going to get much worse regardless of what we do now or in the future.
I believe that a lot of people are going to die before this all gets sorted out. Since most projections predict serious problems by the later half of this century, I took some comfort from the fact that I was likely to peg out before things got really dire. Articles like this make me think I may not be so lucky.
ramonmercado
CyberPunk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 58,467
- Location
- Eblana
They've kilt it.
Scotland's longest lasting patch of snow could melt away by the weekend.
Iain Cameron, who seeks out and records snow that survives on Scotland's highest mountains, believes the patch known as the Sphinx has days left.
Scientists say the patch at Garbh Choire Mor on Braeriach in the Cairngorms has disappeared only six times previously in the last 300 years.
According to records, the snow previously melted in 1933, 1953, 1959, 1996, 2003 and 2006.
In a post on Twitter following a visit to Garbh Choire Mor, Stirling-based Mr Cameron wrote: "Sphinx has a matter of days left. I'm displeased." ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-41305464
Scotland's longest lasting patch of snow could melt away by the weekend.
Iain Cameron, who seeks out and records snow that survives on Scotland's highest mountains, believes the patch known as the Sphinx has days left.
Scientists say the patch at Garbh Choire Mor on Braeriach in the Cairngorms has disappeared only six times previously in the last 300 years.
According to records, the snow previously melted in 1933, 1953, 1959, 1996, 2003 and 2006.
In a post on Twitter following a visit to Garbh Choire Mor, Stirling-based Mr Cameron wrote: "Sphinx has a matter of days left. I'm displeased." ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-41305464
Coal
Account Retired
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2015
- Messages
- 9,851
(This was on the Christmas 2017 thread I thought the answer was better off here.)
The paper itself look at the usual suspects, but for my money, succeeded only in showing the CO2 and global temperatures are correlated. Apart from any other considerations, water vapour is not considered, which varies from 0.1-1% of atmosphere and is considerably more potent that CO2 as a GHG. I agree average water vapour concentration might be hard to measure.
It still concerns me, as it did previously, that the effect of cloud cover is not well accounted for. We know that cloud cover caused by aircraft contrails for example, does have a significant warming effect, which we've discovered when planes are cancelled en mass, much like the cessation after 9/11.
The other factor which is regularly ignored is the flat out heating effect of generating power. If we use the figure of 30% for efficiency of (say) coal-fired power stations, still the predominant generation method, for every TW of electricity, we're knocking out 2 TW of heat and the plain fact is the electricity all (barring some tiny light emissions) becomes heating in the end. As well as CO2, we're pouring energy as heat into the global system at an extraordinary rate and I'm still not convinced CO2 is the hard driver, but that simply speaking, we're getting hot because we're heating the place up.
It's a better paper than many I've read, but given it's date (2015), a decade after people were shouting me down with "the science is settled" it still seems "not exactly proven" and "not exactly covering all the bases" for me.
I looked into Granger causality first. The name is misleading and while it can be used for inferring causality, by showing that (a) can predict (b) but that (b) cannot predict (a), it's an approach best suited to simple systems with few variables. With only a few linear variables causality can be inferred to a decent degree of probability, but I'd argue that is the technique is used for something as complex, chaotic and non-liner as the earths climate and potential drivers, then it's still only going to show correlation and as the wiki page of Granger points out, correlation is as likely to be a consequence of timing as causation.
The paper itself look at the usual suspects, but for my money, succeeded only in showing the CO2 and global temperatures are correlated. Apart from any other considerations, water vapour is not considered, which varies from 0.1-1% of atmosphere and is considerably more potent that CO2 as a GHG. I agree average water vapour concentration might be hard to measure.
It still concerns me, as it did previously, that the effect of cloud cover is not well accounted for. We know that cloud cover caused by aircraft contrails for example, does have a significant warming effect, which we've discovered when planes are cancelled en mass, much like the cessation after 9/11.
The other factor which is regularly ignored is the flat out heating effect of generating power. If we use the figure of 30% for efficiency of (say) coal-fired power stations, still the predominant generation method, for every TW of electricity, we're knocking out 2 TW of heat and the plain fact is the electricity all (barring some tiny light emissions) becomes heating in the end. As well as CO2, we're pouring energy as heat into the global system at an extraordinary rate and I'm still not convinced CO2 is the hard driver, but that simply speaking, we're getting hot because we're heating the place up.
It's a better paper than many I've read, but given it's date (2015), a decade after people were shouting me down with "the science is settled" it still seems "not exactly proven" and "not exactly covering all the bases" for me.
Mythopoeika
I am a meat popsicle
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 51,919
- Location
- Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Add to that the effect of methane, which has more effect than CO2. Nobody ever seems to mention methane's role in climate.
RaM
Shit Happens
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,834
- Location
- NW UK
Most people believe things are getting worse but just to remember
what things were really like in the good old days that some of us
are unfortunately old enough to remember, just watching this makes
me cough.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-42357608/death-by-smog-london-s-fatal-four-day-pea-souper
The river behind our house was so polluted nothing live within 6ft of it
we were told it would take 100 years if all pollution stopped for it to
clean up, it now has fish but is now filled with weeds that restrict flow
causing flooding nothing is without a down side.
The winge at the moment is plastic in the ocean, 90% of which comes down 3 rivers non
in the northern hemisphere but it will no doubt be used to frighten more eco tax out of us
that not a penny will be spent on anything remotely environmentally friendly.
what things were really like in the good old days that some of us
are unfortunately old enough to remember, just watching this makes
me cough.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-42357608/death-by-smog-london-s-fatal-four-day-pea-souper
The river behind our house was so polluted nothing live within 6ft of it
we were told it would take 100 years if all pollution stopped for it to
clean up, it now has fish but is now filled with weeds that restrict flow
causing flooding nothing is without a down side.
The winge at the moment is plastic in the ocean, 90% of which comes down 3 rivers non
in the northern hemisphere but it will no doubt be used to frighten more eco tax out of us
that not a penny will be spent on anything remotely environmentally friendly.
Naughty_Felid
kneesy earsy nosey
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 8,919
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...extreme-weather-can-only-be-blamed-on-humans/
Self explanatory although obviously there's a few on the board that think it's all a load of made up bollocks to frighten voters.
Self explanatory although obviously there's a few on the board that think it's all a load of made up bollocks to frighten voters.