[TheClimate.Vote] September 17, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Mon Sep 17 10:13:23 EDT 2018
/September 17, 2018/
[New Paul McCartney song (2:44) has an anthem quality]
*Despite Repeated Warnings
<https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/genius.com/amp/Paul-mccartney-despite-repeated-warnings-lyrics>*
Paul McCartney - Album Egypt Station
Produced by Greg Kurstin
https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/genius.com/amp/Paul-mccartney-despite-repeated-warnings-lyrics
https://youtu.be/UQKfUKPouuQ
[Really? this on a Monday?]
*2100, and the Fundamental Fallacy of Climate Change Predictions
<https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/16/2100-and-fundamental-fallacy-climate-change-predictions>*
The only moment we have to act is now.
by Gordon Clark
As a new global-warming charged hurricane dumps historic amounts of rain
over the Carolinas, reporting on climate change is seeing another
uptick. However varied the predictions, there is one number that will
always be included in the article: 2100 - as in the year 2100. Or
sometimes just "by the end of the century."
Whatever level of frightful climate impacts are being envisioned,
journalists, and the scientists they are reporting on, always feel
compelled to tell us where things will be by 2100. Of course one year
(or 100) is an arbitrary measure when it comes to the proceedings of
nature - the planet is not punching a time clock, after all - but the
problem with "2100" as a guidepost for climate change predictions goes
well beyond that, and you don't have to be a scientist to understand it.
- # # #
When we put carbon (and other greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere, it
causes the atmosphere to retain more heat. Scientists can do the math on
how much carbon we're generating and calculate (approximately) the
amount of warming that will result.
But as we warm the atmosphere we also trigger natural processes on our
planet that contribute even further to warming. They are called feedback
loops, and they are very straightforward.
For instance, as the atmosphere warms up, the ice caps melt, and smaller
ice caps mean less sunlight reflected back into space and more absorbed
by blue water, as well as more methane (a greenhouse gas much more
potent than carbon) released from the thawing seabed - all of which
contribute to more warming. Warmer and drier conditions have also led to
larger forest fires and a longer forest fire season - just ask anyone in
California - and all that smoke leads to more global warming.
However, unlike manmade production of carbon and methane that can - in
theory, anyway - be controlled, reduced or even eliminated, these
natural processes, once triggered, reinforce themselves. A smaller ice
cap means more warming… which means an even smaller ice cap than before,
which means even more warming than before leading to even faster
shrinking of the ice caps - and so on. The smoke from massive forest
fires leads to even drier and hotter conditions, which creates even
larger forest fires than before creating even more smoke than before -
and so on.
Melting ice caps and growing forest fires are just the two most obvious
feedback loops, but scientists have identified more. And they are now
all in motion, reinforcing themselves and adding to global warming in
ways we can only begin to imagine.
Global warming is not a linear process, it's a geometric one. It's an
accelerating process. And science, for all its wisdom, has no way to
measure that.
Scientists tell us what the planet will be like in 2100 based on their
understanding of the linear process of adding X amount of carbon to the
atmosphere. But have they figured in an Arctic ice cap that could easily
be gone in five years, and the extra heating that will result? How about
the methane rising from permafrost melting around the world? Do they
estimate how much larger forest fires will be in 10 years, and the
effect of all that extra carbon rising into the atmosphere?
Worse yet, how can one calculate the results of a process that is
accelerating at an unknown rate - and that will be accelerating even
faster next year as it continues to reinforce itself? The simple answer
is you can't.
- # # #
The challenge of making accurate predictions of climate change is not a
secret. In 2012 Scientific America published an article noting of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): "Across two decades
and thousands of pages of reports, the world's most authoritative voice
on climate science has consistently understated the rate and intensity
of climate change and the danger those impacts represent." ("Climate
Science Predictions Prove Too Conservative" December 6, 2012)
Yet most climate scientists, and the reporters that cover them, still
have a hard time coming to terms with the existence of feedback loops,
or including them in their discussions and predictions. A good example
is David Wallace-Wells, who wrote a meticulously researched and much
discussed climate change cover story for New York magazine last summer
entitled "The Uninhabitable Earth," in which he outlined "worst case
scenarios" for advancing climate change...
- - - -
However, unlike manmade production of carbon and methane that can - in
theory, anyway - be controlled, reduced or even eliminated, these
natural processes, once triggered, reinforce themselves. A smaller ice
cap means more warming… which means an even smaller ice cap than before,
which means even more warming than before leading to even faster
shrinking of the ice caps - and so on. The smoke from massive forest
fires leads to even drier and hotter conditions, which creates even
larger forest fires than before creating even more smoke than before -
and so on.
Melting ice caps and growing forest fires are just the two most obvious
feedback loops, but scientists have identified more. And they are now
all in motion, reinforcing themselves and adding to global warming in
ways we can only begin to imagine.
Global warming is not a linear process, it's a geometric one. It's an
accelerating process. And science, for all its wisdom, has no way to
measure that.
Scientists tell us what the planet will be like in 2100 based on their
understanding of the linear process of adding X amount of carbon to the
atmosphere. But have they figured in an Arctic ice cap that could easily
be gone in five years, and the extra heating that will result? How about
the methane rising from permafrost melting around the world? Do they
estimate how much larger forest fires will be in 10 years, and the
effect of all that extra carbon rising into the atmosphere?
Worse yet, how can one calculate the results of a process that is
accelerating at an unknown rate - and that will be accelerating even
faster next year as it continues to reinforce itself? The simple answer
is you can't...
- - - -
Whatever the reason for most people's lack of response to - or outright
denial of -climate change, we will unfortunately have to continue this
experiment in human behavior, because terrible climate news and equally
dire warnings from scientists aren't about to stop. In the wake the
ground-breaking study on the impact of feedback loops came another new
report, "What Lies Beneath: The Understatement of Existential Climate
Risk," by researchers with the National Centre for Climate Restoration
in Australia; it argued that the existential threats posed by the
climate crisis have still not penetrated the collective psyche of
humanity and that nothing short of a war-time mobilization can stop
climate change now. It was also reported in August that the oldest and
thickest sea ice in the Arctic has started to break up - something that
has never happened in recorded history. And now we more than a million
people evacuated for Hurricane Florence.
It is reasonable to assume that the millions of people fleeing fire,
flood, and other climate change-induced extreme weather around the world
are not thinking much about the end of the century. Neither should you.
What befell them could happen to any of us next.
And whether you think climate change is already a runaway train, or that
it can still be "halted in its tracks," and whatever you believe you
should do as a result of what you believe, you can stop worrying about
2100. The only moment we have to act is now.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/16/2100-and-fundamental-fallacy-climate-change-predictions
[Sponsorware video - a new way to deliver educational messages on climate]
*How Big Do Hurricanes Get? <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfXiqAAb1HE>*
RealLifeLore 8 minutes Sept 16, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfXiqAAb1HE
[local resilience activism]
Monday, September 17, 2018
*Build Supportive Neighborhoods in NYC--Prepare for Increasing Climate
Disruption
<https://www.meetup.com/NYC-Grassroots-Alliance/events/252945564/>*
Susan Spieler
Details
LET'S CREATE SUPPORTIVE NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT NYC:
Prepare for Increasing Climate Disruptions
NYC Grassroots Alliance is planning a series of monthly events to
highlight ways people can prepare to take care of themselves, their
families, friends and neighbors with the help of others, near home,
during climate emergencies. As we have learned from the massive damage
from the Hurricanes of 2017, including Harvey in Houston and Maria in
Puerto Rico, that were associated with large-scale flooding, the
government cannot be everywhere and, most often, neighbors are the ones
who come to the rescue.
Should the grid go down and cell phone communications cease in an
emergency, neighbors can arrange to check on the elderly or disabled and
those with small children and/or pets. Neighborhoods can develop
coordinated knowledge in advance of crises about local places to find
shelter, secure depots to obtain food and supplies, locations of rafts,
bikes, power generators and people with crucial skills such as
firefighters, doctors and nurses, etc. and ways to find them amid crises.
We are inviting speakers from city agencies including the NYC Office of
Emergency Management, and the Mayor's Office of Sustainability and
Resilience, as well as from neighborhood organizations where plans are
already being put in place, such as Lower East Side (LES) Ready, and
existing groups that need to put plans in place including CSAs, block
associations, community gardens, churches, synagogues and faith-based
groups, Y's, the organizers of bike rescues and other groups with
creative ideas that should be more widely known.
We encourage attendees to meet with neighbors and think together about
how to coordinate and collaborate within their own neighborhoods so that
they are ready for increasing climate disruptions. Each event will
include Q & A with the presenters.
The first event will take place on Monday September 17 at 6:30PM at the
NYC Society for Ethical Culture at 2 W. 64th St. The other events in
this series will take place on Mondays October 1, November 5 and may
continue in additional months.
-----
Please RSVP to our meetup:
https://www.meetup.com/nyc-grassroots-alliance/events/252945564/
https://www.meetup.com/NYC-Grassroots-Alliance/events/252945564/
[room temp, slightly warm]
*One of world's oldest beer varieties 'at risk from climate change'
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/10/belgium-sour-lambic-beer-climate-change-risk>*
Rising temperatures threaten survival of Belgium's sour lambic beer,
study warns
Daniel Boffey in Brussels
Mon 10 Sep 2018 06.27 EDT Last modified on Mon 10 Sep 2018 18.50 EDT
A brewery worker pours a glass of lambic beer
The brewing season for lambic beer has shortened by 25 days since the
early 1900s. Photograph: Keystone USA/Zuma/Rex/Shutterstock
Climate change is putting one of the world's oldest beer varieties at
risk, environmental scientists and one of Belgium's leading artisan
brewers have said.
A study into temperatures in Brussels and the Pajottenland region
south-west of the Belgian capital has raised doubts over the future of
the sour lambic beer produced exclusively in the region.
Lambic is fermented in the open air through exposure to wild yeasts and
airborne native bacteria. It relies on night-time temperatures of
between -8C and 8C (18F-46F) for cooling and inoculation.
The traditional brewing season runs from October to April, with bezomerd
- Brussels dialect for a beer that has had "too much summer" - a
possibility if it is produced any later.
After cooling, the lambic is placed in wooden barrels where it is
exposed to microbes living on the wood. The perfect temperature for
ageing lambic is below 25C, above which the risk of unwelcome bacteria
spoiling the beer rises.
A joint project between the climate scientists Mark and Asa Stone, Adam
Harbaugh from the beer research site Lambic.info and the Brussels
brewery Cantillon found this limited brewing window has shortened from
165 days in the early 1900s to about 140, as temperatures have pushed it
later into the autumn and brought the season prematurely to an end in
early spring.
It is feared the number of brewing days will shrink further, bringing
the risk of a similar disaster to 2015, when beer had to be thrown away
due to excessive temperatures.
Dr Mark Stone, a director at the University of New Mexico's Resilience
Institute, said: "The impacts of climate change are often gradual until
a tipping point is crossed. Our results show that Cantillon is
experiencing shifting brewing conditions, and that adaptation to avoid
crossing a threshold will require changes in brewing operations that are
outside of their traditional methods.
"The threat of climate change on traditional lambic production at
Cantillon is indicative of the broader issue. That is, the impacts are
not fully recognised until a threshold has been crossed, and adaptation
strategies often exacerbate the problem while delaying the inevitable."
Cantillon, which produces 400,000 bottles of the sour beer a year, has
warned its ability to produce the beer could be under threat in the long
term.
Jean Van Roy, Cantillon's owner, told the Brussels Beer City blog that
he believed if he artificially cooled the wort - a liquid extracted
during the mashing process - it would change the taste of the beer.
"If tomorrow I would have this problem every season, financially it
could be a bit difficult, so we would have to change something," he said.
"[But] I would hate to do that … Or we move the brewery to go up north
to begin to brew in Denmark, in Sweden, I don't know."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/10/belgium-sour-lambic-beer-climate-change-risk
[cough, I got mine in Arizona]
*Climate Change, Ag Practices Expand Histoplasmosis Range
<https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/75119>*
Fungal lung pathogen now endemic in Missouri River basin
by Salynn Boyles, Contributing Writer
September 15, 2018
Largely confined to the Ohio and Mississippi River valleys just a half
century ago, the soil-dwelling fungus that causes the lung infection
histoplasmosis has migrated west into the upper Missouri River basin due
to a combination of climate change and changing land use patterns.
The infection, caused by exposure to airborne spores from the
soil-dwelling fungus Histoplasma capsulatum, is generally asymptomatic
in healthy people, but can cause significant disease and even death in
people who are immunocompromised due to illness or drug treatments.
Recent outbreaks of the infection in Montana and Nebraska led the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to suggest that
histoplasmosis is now endemic in these regions....
more: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/75119
[Opinion - widely shared - but "On the Media" is silent about global
warming issues]
*The New York Times Should Hire Climate Scientist Michael Mann as Op-Ed
Columnist on Global Warming
<https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/15/new-york-times-should-hire-climate-scientist-michael-mann-op-ed-columnist-global>*
It would help the Times make amends to its readers and everyone else for
its short coverage of global warming over the years.
by Howard Friel
Last Tuesday, September 11, while watching Democracy Now!, I listened to
the lucid, conversational way in which Penn State climatologist Michael
E. Mann explained the looming amplifying impacts of human-induced global
warming on Hurricane Florence and its grim triple-header threat to the
Carolinas: severe storm surge and coastal flooding, powerful/damaging
winds, and "perhaps most significant of all, [the hurricane] is
predicted to stall when it makes landfall, and so that will lead to very
large amounts of flooding rainfall, perhaps rivaling what we saw with
Hurricane Harvey last year, which was the worst flooding event on record."
Mann's easily articulated assessments of the influence of global warming
on Hurricane Florence reminded me of what I had mentioned to some
friends a year or so ago--that the New York Times should hire a climate
scientist, in particular, Michael Mann, to write a full-time column on
climate change. Mann, a superb scientist, is also a recipient of the
2017 Stephen H. Schneider Award for Outstanding Climate Science
Communication, which is given "to a natural or social scientist who has
made extraordinary scientific contributions and communicated that
knowledge to a broad public in a clear and compelling fashion."
A good precedent for hiring Mann as a full-time climate-change columnist
is the successful decision by the Times to employ Paul Krugman as an
op-ed page columnist on economics. There is also an urgent need for
mainstream news organizations to upgrade their reporting on climate
science and its implications without the now-tattered and torn baggage
of journalistic balance.
Mann's most recent published research in leading journals also speaks
authoritatively to major current climate concerns: "Climate change and
California drought in the 21st century" (Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 2015); "Increased threat of tropical cyclones and
coastal flooding to New York City during the anthropogenic era"
(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2015); "The Likelihood
of Recent Record Warmth" (Scientific Reports, 2016); "Influence of
Anthropogenic Climate Change on Planetary Wave Resonance and Extreme
Weather Events" (Scientific Reports, 2017); "Impact of climate change on
New York City's coast flood hazard" (Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 2017); "Assessing climate change impacts on extreme weather
events" (Climatic Change, 2017); and "Record temperature streak bears
anthropogenic fingerprint" (Geophysical Research Letters, 2017).
His scientific expertise and communication skills make him almost
uniquely well-suited to elevate the Times' coverage of climate change in
response to the existential threat of global warming and its
now-emerging extreme impacts.
Assuming that Mann or another such climate scientist would be willing to
change occupations as suggested here, in effect as a public service,
another question involves whether the publisher and top editors at the
Times would be willing to depart from their longstanding uninspired
coverage of climate change.
In fall 2007, I began reading published material on climate science for
a book that I was preparing to write about the New York Times coverage
of climate change. At that time, I read the just-published book by the
climate skeptic Bjorn Lomborg, Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's
Guide to Global Warming (Knopf, 2007). Lomborg's book so thoroughly
embodied what the late Stephen Schneider once referred to as the
"chronic mistake-making" of another climate denier, that I switched my
focus from the Times' coverage of climate change to writing a book about
Lomborg's Cool It.
I often regret, however, not returning to the Times coverage of climate
change. This occurs, for example, when I recall the favorable review in
November 2007 by Andrew Revkin, editor of the Dot Earth blog on climate
change at the Times, of Lomborg's Cool It. In that review, Revkin placed
Lomborg at "the pragmatic center" among commentators on global warming.
Revkin's review was called "Challenges to Both Left and Right in U.S. on
Global Warming," with Lomborg situated in the middle.
Oddly, this followed the favorable review of Cool It in the Wall Street
Journal by Kimberly Strassel, titled "A Calm Voice in a Heated Debate,"
in which she likewise positioned Lomborg in "the practical middle" among
climate commentators.
Revkin also followed Lomborg's own review of Cool It in the Washington
Post, called "Chill Out," in which Lomborg wrote that his book staked
out "the middle ground, where we can have a sensible discussion" about
whether climate change was a looming global catastrophe; Lomborg argued
that it was not.
Although he worked hard and included a multitude of expert opinion on
climate change, Revkin's excessively "balanced" and "middle-ground"
editorial overlay was the dominant theme of his long tenure as the
Times' principal interlocutor on climate change, which departed from the
climate-related worst-case scenarios that were bubbling up to the
surface of the published scientific literature in the early 2000s. Add
to this the long-standing disinterest in climate change at the science
desk at the Times, the thin reporting in its news pages, the occasional
editorial, and the absence of a climate-change expert among its
full-time columnists.
Engaging the likes of a Michael Mann as a regular columnist to report,
translate, and comment on the extreme dangers of human-induced climate
change would help the Times make amends to its readers and everyone else
for its short coverage of global warming over the years, given the
extent of the threat that it obviously now presents.
Howard Friel is author of Chomsky and Dershowitz: On Endless War and the
End of Civil Liberties (Olive Branch Press).
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/15/new-york-times-should-hire-climate-scientist-michael-mann-op-ed-columnist-global
*This Day in Climate History - September 17, 2011
<http://youtu.be/MJ8CoxnjjZg> - from D.R. Tucker*
September 17, 2011:
[video] The Occupy Wall Street movement begins in New York City. Writer
Naomi Klein would later credit OWS for prompting a delay of the Obama
administration's final decision on the Keystone XL pipeline.
http://youtu.be/MJ8CoxnjjZg
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//Archive of Daily Global Warming News
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html>
//
/https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote//
///
///To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request>
/to news digest. /
*** Privacy and Security: * This is a text-only mailing that
carries no images which may originate from remote servers.
Text-only messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender.
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
commercial purposes.
To subscribe, email: contact at theclimate.vote with subject:
subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe
Also youmay subscribe/unsubscribe at
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Paulifor
http://TheClimate.Vote delivering succinct information for
citizens and responsible governments of all levels. List
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
restricted to this mailing list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20180917/f9fb1a00/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list