UN Global Warming report is out

[dc.]

 

Backwards

Quite his point, Crav.

[Spen]

I dont really feel like playing, but I do have to ask. Who else should he be listening to?

Thats your problem Son, you focus on one group of people and everything they say is gospel, whereas i listen to all and their views, when I have time..As far as me growing up, I am all grown up, I have children older then you, I have raised and provided for our family..Iam now enjoying life to its fullest, I suggest you do the same because it is short..Lighten up Junior

[thundercleetz]

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-dire-climate-report-more-certain-ever-163437606.html

 

Once people thought global warming was more in the future and more of an issue in other parts of the world, but the National Climate Assessment will emphasize how the United States is already paying the multibillion-dollar price for man-made climate change, said study co-author Donald Wuebbles, a climate scientist at the University of Illinois.

 

 

I'm really interested to hear this part.

[RavenMad]

With the Climate change is coming more and more volatile weather. Last year we had some of the coldest temperatures ever recorded during our winter. This year we had one of the mildest and wettest winters on record. The temperature extremes in the weather have become worse.

 

That is all the result of a warming of the overall climate. You heat something up it becomes more volatile. It's chemistry.

 

Global Warming is not something new. The earth has gone through this cycle many times. This time it has been accelerated by man.

[cravnravn]

With the Climate change is coming more and more volatile weather. Last year we had some of the coldest temperatures ever recorded during our winter. This year we had one of the mildest and wettest winters on record. The temperature extremes in the weather have become worse.

 

That is all the result of a warming of the overall climate. You heat something up it becomes more volatile. It's chemistry.

 

Global Warming is not something new. The earth has gone through this cycle many times. This time it has been accelerated by man.

If we feel Man has caused this, then why hasnt hurricane season changed? Hurricane season is still June thru nov..And if we.ve warmed the waters that much, we should be dealing with Katrina or Sandy sized storms monthly..

[cravnravn]

I dont really feel like playing, but I do have to ask. Who else should he be listening to?

I dont care who he listens to, In my view, id rather listen to The Weather Channel, or any of the programs on the various channels..Blue Planet, Mother Earth etal..Unfortunately Direct Tv has dropped the Weather Channel..

Edited May 6, 2014 by cravnravn

[deeshopper]

If we feel Man has caused this, then why hasnt hurricane season changed? Hurricane season is still June thru nov..And if we.ve warmed the waters that much, we should be dealing with Katrina or Sandy sized storms monthly..

 

So, seasons would no longer exist if man had a hand in climate change? You just overlook the voltality of the seasons because the range is the same?

[cravnravn]

Considering hurricane season is solely relied upon water temps, then yes

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-climate-chickens-20140504-story.html#page=1

 

Scientists race to develop farm animals to survive climate change

When a team of researchers from the University of Delaware traveled to Africa two years ago to search for exemplary chickens, they weren't looking for plump thighs or delicious eggs.

They were seeking out birds that could survive a hotter planet.

The researchers were in the vanguard of food scientists, backed by millions of dollars from the federal government, racing to develop new breeds of farm animals that can stand up to the hazards of global warming.

Some climate-change activists dismiss the work, which is just getting underway, as a distraction and a concession to industrial-style agriculture, which they blame for compounding the world's environmental problems. Those leading the experiments, however, say new, heat-resistant breeds of farm animals will be essential to feeding the world as climate change takes hold.

The experiments reflect a continued shift in the federal government's response to climate change. With efforts to reduce carbon emissions lagging behind what most scientists believe will be needed to forestall further warming, the government increasingly is looking for ways to protect key industries from the impact.

In agriculture, "we are dealing with the challenge of difficult weather conditions at the same time we have to massively increase food production" to accommodate larger populations and a growing demand for meat, said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

That means efforts like the one here, in which Carl Schmidt and his colleagues are trying to map the genetic code of bizarre-looking African naked-neck chickens to see if their ability to withstand heat can be bred into flocks of U.S. broilers.

"The game is changing since the climate is changing," Schmidt said. "We have to start now to anticipate what changes we have to make in order to feed 9 billion people," citing global-population estimates for 2050.

Warmer temperatures can create huge problems for animals farmed for food. Turkeys are vulnerable to a condition that makes their breast meat mushy and unappetizing. Disease rips through chicken coops. Brutal weather can claim entire cattle herds.

"It's a big problem when it happens," said Gale Strasburg, a professor of food science and human nutrition at Michigan State University whose quest is to develop more robust turkeys. "Within a day or two after the heat wave hits, you will go from there being no problem at all on a farm to 40% of turkey breasts having a problem."

"If we start seeing a lot more shifts in summer temperature extremes, there is going to be more of this," he said.

Strasburg's research involves turning up the heat lamps several degrees on hundreds of turkey chicks, as well as on turkey eggs before they hatch. Researchers will then study the animals' muscles and attempt to parse out genes that could help the animals endure hotter environments. The hope is ultimately to enable the industry to breed turkeys resilient to heat waves.

"Even if you believe we should be conserving our resources and putting more emphasis on eating plants, the reality we deal with is that worldwide the demand is growing for meat," he said. "There will be more and more pressure to produce it more sustainably and of consistent quality."

Some climate experts, however, question the federal government's emphasis on keeping pace with a projected growing global appetite for meat. Because raising animals demands so many resources, the only viable way to hit global targets for greenhouse gas reduction may be to encourage people to eat less meat, they say.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture approach to climate change "is like trying to promote driver safety while helping the car industry make faster cars," said Alan Miller, who recently retired as a principal climate-change specialist at the World Bank.

The meat industry should be more radical in confronting climate change, Miller said, pointing to an approach backed by Microsoft founder Bill Gates that takes animals out the process altogether. The billionaire is bullish on technology that would use pea proteins to create replicas of beef and chicken that are indistinguishable from the real thing.

"There's no way to produce enough meat for 9 billion people," Gates wrote recently on his blog. "Yet we can't ask everyone to become vegetarians. We need more options for producing meat without depleting our resources."

The scientists working to craft breeds of animals that can cope with a warmer climate argue that they, too, are focused on depleting fewer resources.

At Oklahoma State University, scientist Megan Rolf says her efforts could result in herds of cattle that consume less water and feed.

"The idea is to create animals that are more efficient," Rolf said.

To that effect, the university just ordered, at auction, its first herd for her study, some 140 animals. Her team will keep close track of how they eat and behave, as well as what is in their DNA.

Finicky consumers complicate the work for researchers.

The Brahman breed of cattle, for example, a rugged specimen with roots in India, is undeterred by hot, harsh conditions. One place it doesn't do well, though, is in American taste tests. Rolf's goal is to create an uber-steer as resilient as a Brahman and tasty as an Angus.

Back in Delaware, Schmidt showed a reporter photos of a modern American poultry-industry chicken alongside one from the 1950s. The modern chicken is nearly twice the size of the "heritage" bird and completes its growth cycle more quickly.

Then he pulled up an image of the African bird. He pointed to the lack of feathers on its snaky, bare neck, which helps it keep cool.

"What the industry really wants is that in a meat producer," he said.

He pulled out a map of the U.S. that climatologists at NASA recently gave him. There are yellow dots where the temperature spikes above 100 degrees more than 10 days a year. Near the Mason-Dixon line, where poultry is a big part of the economy, 100-degree days are rare. But by 2060, projections show lots of yellow dots.

"It is not the two degrees" average temperature rise projected by climate scientists that Schmidt is focused on. "It's the increased number and duration of heat waves. The issue is helping these chickens or any animals survive in a state of increased heat stress."

A few buildings away, some of his graduate students delicately place drops of chicken blood into test tubes as part of the gene mapping. Nearby, another couple of students run computer analyses. Schmidt predicts the hardier chickens will start being mass produced in about 15 years.

But Schmidt says he hopes his work can be most beneficial in increasing survival for backyard flocks in impoverished areas of Africa and South America. As the University of Delaware team seeks birds that are more durable, that information can be used to create a more resilient food supply there, too.

"If the developing world runs into problems with food security," he said, "that affects everybody."

One way or another you are going to pay for this.

[papasmurfbell]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/30/3432601/147-million-air-pollution-ala/

 

 

The report found that particle pollution during 2010-2012 improved in most cities from 2009-2011. Ozone pollution, on the other hand, worsened in many areas — probably due to generally hotter temperatures over the latter time period. That led to higher ozone levels, and higher levels that occurred more frequently.

[RavenMad]

Considering hurricane season is solely relied upon water temps, then yes

 

That's only a small part of it: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/25/2013-slowest-hurricane-season-in-30-years/

 

 

The 2013 Atlantic hurricane season, which officially ends on Saturday, Nov. 30, had the fewest number of hurricanes since 1982, thanks in large part to persistent, unfavorable atmospheric conditions over the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Sea, and tropical Atlantic Ocean. This year is expected to rank as the sixth-least-active Atlantic hurricane season since 1950, in terms of the collective strength and duration of named storms and hurricanes.

 

“A combination of conditions acted to offset several climate patterns that historically have produced active hurricane seasons,” said Gerry Bell, Ph.D., lead seasonal hurricane forecaster at NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, a division of the National Weather Service. “As a result, we did not see the large numbers of hurricanes that typically accompany these climate patterns.”

 

Thirteen named storms formed in the Atlantic basin this year. Two, Ingrid and Humberto, became hurricanes, but neither became major hurricanes. Although the number of named storms was above the average of 12, the numbers of hurricanes and major hurricanes were well below their averages of six and three, respectively. Major hurricanes are categories 3 and above.

 

Again, weather patterns are going to become more volatile and not follow the normal patterns we have observed in the past. It wouldn't surprise me to see the worst Hurricane season in history in the next couple of years.

 

Lets just hope it doesn't happen in July when I'm in Orlando for 17 days

[papasmurfbell]

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/c0s4ec/edward-o--wilson

[vmax]

The US Climate change report is out and it's not good.

http://local.msn.com/us-climate-change-report-warns-of-regional-impacts

 

 

 

Northeast: Hot and Crowded

The Northeast is home to 64 million people, with most of them living in a densely populated corridor from Boston to Washington, D.C. That urban core makes the region particularly vulnerable to widespread impacts from extreme events like flooding and heat.

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., the five largest cities in the region, are all located on the coast. Tidal gauges near each of these cities have recorded sea level rise of 10-13 inches over the past century, which is higher than the global average of 8 inches.

That rise has made the odds of coastal flooding in New York similar to Sandy 20 times greater according to a recent study. It also helped Sandy’s storm surge overtop barriers and cause $60-$80 billion in damage across the region. Future projections indicate sea level could rise another 4 feet by the end of the century as oceans continue to warm and glaciers and ice sheets melt. That would put billions of dollars of infrastructure at risk and put millions of people in harm’s way of coastal flooding.

Built up cities contribute to the urban heat island effect, which will make them feel even hotter in a warming world. The urban heat island can increase temperatures by up to 10°F compared to surrounding areas with fewer buildings and paved surfaces. A large area from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C. could see the number of days above 95°F double by the 2050s under high emissions scenarios. That would pose a major public health threat, particularly

[dc.]

Katrina has to be a monthly event for you to believe?

 

I'm done.

 

Meanwhile- you should go research the trends in hurricanes the last 50 years and you'll see that the season has in fact gotten longer and more intense.

[cravnravn]

Atlantic tropical cyclone (hurricane) activity, as measured by both frequency and the Power Dissipation Index (which combines storm intensity, duration, and frequency) has increased. The increases are substantial since about 1970, and are likely substantial since the 1950s and 60s, in association with warming Atlantic sea surface temperatures. There is less confidence in data prior to about 1950.
There have been fluctuations in the number of tropical storms and hurricanes from decade to decade, and data uncertainty is larger in the early part of the record compared to the satellite era beginning in 1965. Even taking these factors into account, it is likely that the annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes in the North Atlantic have increased over the past 100 years, a time in which Atlantic sea surface temperatures also increased.
The evidence is less compelling for significant trends beginning in the late 1800s. The existing data for hurricane counts and one adjusted record of tropical storm counts both indicate no significant linear trends beginning from the mid- to late 1800s through 2005. In general, there is increasing uncertainty in the data as one proceeds back in time.
There is no evidence for a long-term increase in North American mainland land-falling hurricanes.
The hurricane Power Dissipation Index in the eastern Pacific, affecting the Mexican west coast and shipping lanes, has decreased since 1980, but rainfall from near-coastal hurricanes has increased since 1949.
It is very likely that the human-induced increase in greenhouse gases has contributed to the increase in sea surface temperatures in the hurricane formation regions. Over the past 50 years there has been a strong statistical connection between tropical Atlantic sea surface temperatures and Atlantic hurricane activity as measured by the Power Dissipation Index (which combines storm intensity, duration, and frequency). This evidence suggests a human contribution to recent hurricane activity. However, a confident assessment of human influence on hurricanes will require further studies using models and observations, with emphasis on distinguishing natural from human-induced changes in hurricane activity through their influence on factors such as historical sea surface temperatures, wind shear, and atmospheric vertical stability
It is likely that hurricane/typhoon wind speeds and core rainfall rates will increase in response to human-caused warming. Analyses of model simulations suggest that for each 1°C increase in tropical sea surface temperatures, hurricane surface wind speeds will increase by 1 to 8% and core rainfall rates by 6 to 18%.
Frequency changes are currently too uncertain for confident projections.
The spatial distribution of hurricanes/typhoons will likely change.
Storm surge levels are likely to increase due to projected sea level rise, though the degree of projected increase has not been adequately studied.

 

http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/links/hurricanes.htm

[dc.]

So... That says human contributions likely but not 100% certain. And your response is not good enough?

 

What I don't get us that I am hardly the greenest guy out there or even close. In fact I do nothing particularly green at all - in part because of cost and in part because of laziness. So I'm not exactly a prude yelling, "no driving and no fun!" I don't even use recyclable bags and stuff at the grocery.

 

But becoming aware and accepting reality is a nice first step anyone can take without actually doing anything

[cravnravn]

So... That says human contributions likely but not 100% certain. And your response is not good enough?

 

What I don't get us that I am hardly the greenest guy out there or even close. In fact I do nothing particularly green at all - in part because of cost and in part because of laziness. So I'm not exactly a prude yelling, "no driving and no fun!" I don't even use recyclable bags and stuff at the grocery.

 

But becoming aware and accepting reality is a nice first step anyone can take without actually doing anything

 

This is the first time in my life that I actually am, I recycle and the Mrs has her own bags from various stores..And if the initial cost of solar was cheaper, I wouldnt mind my hot water heater being solar, and I wouldnt mind solar heating my pool.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBEF40B354EAE928E

If costs are the issue then take a look at their vids. Also there are the tax credits on renewables.

[thundercleetz]

Sounds like I'll be long gone before anything becomes too terrible. I'm still banking on technological innovation. Someone is going to figure out how to harness electricity from a lightning bolts one day. In the meantime, I really keep meaning to start recycling in my household. I'll start small with my goals.

[papasmurfbell]

The problem is it will really be to late. CO2 takes a long time for the atmosphere to break it down to being inert. We pump it up and it slowly breaks down but until then it helps to hold in heat. Also with rising temps there is a fear that a Siberian methane reserve is going to thaw and release. Methane is like 80 times worse than CO2. That could really send us over the edge. Also a mechanical way to stop it would have to be like scrubbing CO2 out of the air or something and then depositing it somewhere like underground.

[thundercleetz]

The problem is it will really be to late. CO2 takes a long time for the atmosphere to break it down to being inert. We pump it up and it slowly breaks down but until then it helps to hold in heat. Also with rising temps there is a fear that a Siberian methane reserve is going to thaw and release. Methane is like 80 times worse than CO2. That could really send us over the edge. Also a mechanical way to stop it would have to be like scrubbing CO2 out of the air or something and then depositing it somewhere like underground.

Interesting sounds like a no win situation really. Even if we as a country go balls to wall green, India, China and even Canada to the north with their black gold tar deserts will do more than their fair share of damage to the environment. Might as well party it up! Obviously kidding.

 

I'm still betting on technology bailing us out of this problem. Deadlines spur action and innovation. Something none of us have even fathomed will be invented. As many times worse the environment has gotten the past century, science has advanced many more times better. Either way I'll probably be dead.

[papasmurfbell]

China seems to be leaning towards wanting to do something. I think they realize they have been so destructive that they are now scaring off investment from outside countries because those executives don't want to get sick from the polution there. Canada is negligible but should get better. India is the one I am not sure about. They are emerging quickly and may have no desire to pull back. They are just getting started on the empire building phase.

[cravnravn]

Sounds like I'll be long gone before anything becomes too terrible. I'm still banking on technological innovation. Someone is going to figure out how to harness electricity from a lightning bolts one day. In the meantime, I really keep meaning to start recycling in my household. I'll start small with my goals.

 

Sounds like I'll be long gone before anything becomes too terrible. I'm still banking on technological innovation. Someone is going to figure out how to harness electricity from a lightning bolts one day. In the meantime, I really keep meaning to start recycling in my household. I'll start small with my goals.

 

Its pretty amazing the cut back on your trash going to the landfill when you recycle.

[dc.]

Cleetz... I think the problem is what papa said about really not knowing the deadline until it passes. I mean, unless we want to be in a situation like the movies where a manned space mission has to save us... Or the world ends.

 

It takes us years if not decades to notice trends and environmental changes... Even when we identify a species as endangered we are rarely able to save it. What happens when it's a species we care about? What happens when a decade after the black rhino goes extinct (it just did), we realize it was critical to the sustaining of its ecosystem and the survival of other species?

 

I think part of that is a moral question.

 

But I think part is a tremendous economic question that you can't just put off forever. It is entirely possible that we destroy the world as we know it so that it not only hurts other living things but also ourselves. And I buy that tech will help us in many ways, but is a barren earth and human life surviving on aqua culture and genetically created synthetic beef the happy outcome?

[RavenMad]

Don't sleep on Brazil either. They have a quickly developing economy with the double edged sword of polluting more and cutting down the rain forests more to provide for the expansion of their economy.

 

Everyone needs to buy in or it won't work.