[TheClimate.Vote] May 21, 2020 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/*May 21, 2020*/

[water warning]
*Aging Dams, Changing Climate: A Dangerous Mix...*
One of the recurring messages in decades of projections of 
human-produced climate change is that precipitation will tend to 
decrease in the subtropics and increase at northern midlatitudes. That's 
exactly what is happening in central Michigan. What's more, the 
intensity of multi-day downpours is rising in many parts of the world, 
including the United States, and the most-affected U.S. regions are the 
Midwest and Northeast, as noted by Climate Central.
"Storm water management systems and other critical infrastructure in the 
Midwest are already experiencing impacts from changing precipitation 
patterns and elevated flood risks," said the 2018 U.S. National Climate 
Assessment. In a message that rings out, the assessment added: 
"Infrastructure currently designed for historical climate conditions is 
more vulnerable to future weather extremes and climate change."
https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/aging-dams-changing-climate-a-dangerous-mix 




[heat and drought tipping points]
*Increased Threat of Fierce Fires and Accelerated Global Warming From 
Water Loss in Northern Peatlands*
A group of 59 international scientists, led by researchers at Canada's 
McMaster University, has uncovered new information about the distinct 
effects of climate change on boreal forests and peatlands, which 
threaten to worsen wildfires and accelerate global warming.

Manuel Helbig and Mike Waddington from McMaster's School of Geography 
and Earth Sciences gathered observational data from collaborators in 
countries across the boreal biome. Their study of how ecosystems lose 
water to the atmosphere appears was recently published in the journal 
Nature Climate Change.

The unprecedented detail of their work has highlighted dramatic 
differences in the ways forests and peatlands regulate water loss to the 
atmosphere in a warming climate, and how those differences could in turn 
accelerate the pace of warming.

Most current global climate models assume the biome is all forest, an 
omission that could seriously compromise their projections, Helbig says.

"We need to account for the specific behavior of peatlands if we want to 
understand the boreal climate, precipitation, water availability and the 
whole carbon cycle," he says.

"Peatlands are so important for storing carbon, and they are so vulnerable."

Until now, Helbig says, it had not been possible to capture such a 
comprehensive view of these water-cycle dynamics, but with the support 
of the Global Water Futures Initiative and participation from so many 
research partners in Canada, Russia, the US, Germany and Scandinavia, 
new understanding is emerging.

As the climate warms, air gets drier and can take up more water. In 
response to the drying of the air, forest ecosystems - which make up 
most of the world's natural boreal regions - retain more water. Their 
trees, shrubs and grasses are vascular plants that typically take up 
carbon dioxide and release water and oxygen through microscopic pores in 
their leaves. In warmer, dryer weather, though, those pores close, 
slowing the exchange to conserve water.

Together with lakes, the spongy bogs and fens called peatlands make up 
the remainder of the boreal landscape. Peatlands store vast amounts of 
water and carbon in layers of living and dead moss. They serve as 
natural firebreaks between sections of forest, as long as they remain wet.

Peatland mosses are not vascular plants, so as warming continues, they 
are more prone to drying out. Unlike forests, they have no active 
mechanism to protect themselves from losing water to the atmosphere. 
Dehydration exposes their dense carbon stores to accelerated 
decomposition, and turns them from firebreaks into fire propagators, as 
shown in previous research from Waddington's ecohydrology lab.

Drier peatlands mean bigger, more intense fires that can release vast 
amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, accelerating global warming, 
Helbig says.

"It's crucial to consider the accelerated water loss of peatlands in a 
warming climate as we project what will happen to the boreal landscape 
in the next 100 to 200 years," he says.
https://scitechdaily.com/increased-threat-of-fierce-fires-and-accelerated-global-warming-from-water-loss-in-northern-peatlands/


[Heavy rains cause flooding]
*Dam Failure Threatens a Dow Chemical Complex and Superfund Cleanup*
Floodwaters from two breached dams in Michigan on Wednesday flowed into 
a sprawling Dow chemical complex and threatened a vast Superfund 
toxic-cleanup site downriver, raising concerns of wider environmental 
fallout from the dam disaster and historic flooding...
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/20/climate/michigan-dam-dow-chemical-superfund.html



[YouTube view 2 mins of Green Snow]
*Green Antarctica*
Premiered May 21
Cambridge University
Scientists have created the first ever large-scale map of microscopic 
algae as they bloomed across the surface of snow along the Antarctic 
Peninsula coast. Results indicate that this 'green snow' is likely to 
spread as global temperatures increase.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty7Y9srqPB0



[predicted]
*Global warming now pushing heat into territory humans cannot tolerate*
The normal temperature you see reported on weather forecasts is called 
the "drybulb" temperature. Once that rises above about 35C, the body 
must rely on evaporating water (mainly through sweating) to dissipate 
heat. The "wetbulb" temperature is a measure that includes the chilling 
effect from evaporation on a thermometer, so it is normally much lower 
than the drybulb temperature. It indicates how efficiently our 
sweat-based cooling system can work.

Once the wetbulb temperature crosses about 35C, the air is so hot and 
humid that not even sweating can lower your body temperature to a safe 
level. With continued exposure above this threshold, death by 
overheating can follow.
A 35C limit may sound modest, but it isn't. When the UK sweltered with a 
record drybulb temperature of 38.7C in July 2019, the wetbulb 
temperature in Cambridge was no more than 24C. Even in Karachi's killer 
heatwave of 2015, the wetbulb temperature stayed below 30C. In fact, 
outside a steam room, few people have encountered anything close to 35C. 
It has mostly been beyond Earth's climate envelope as human society has 
developed.

But our recent research shows that the 35C limit is drawing closer, 
leaving an ever-shrinking safety margin for the hottest and most humid 
places on Earth...
- -
Our analysis of wetbulb temperatures from 1979-2017 did not disagree 
with these warnings about what may be to come. But whereas past studies 
had looked at relatively large regions (on the scale of major 
metropolitan areas), we also examined thousands of weather station 
records worldwide and saw that, at this more local scale, many sites 
were closing in much more rapidly on the 35C limit. The frequency of 
punishing wetbulb temperatures (above 31C, for example) has more than 
doubled worldwide since 1979, and in some of the hottest and most humid 
places on Earth, like the coastal United Arab Emirates, wetbulb 
temperatures have already flickered past 35C. The climate envelope is 
pushing into territory where our physiology cannot follow.

The consequences of crossing 35C, however brief, have perhaps been 
mainly symbolic so far, as residents of the hottest places are used to 
riding out extreme heat by sheltering in air-conditioned spaces. But 
relying on artificial cooling to cope with the growing heat would 
supercharge energy demand and leave many people dangerously exposed to 
power failures. It would also abandon the most vulnerable members of 
society and doesn't help those who have to venture outside.
The only way to avoid being carried further and more frequently into 
uncharted heat territory is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net 
zero. The economic slowdown during the coronavirus pandemic is expected 
to slash emissions by 4-7% in 2020, bringing them close to where global 
emissions were in 2010. But concentrations of greenhouse gases are still 
rising rapidly in the atmosphere. We must also adapt where possible, by 
encouraging simple behavioural changes (like avoiding outdoor daytime 
activity) and by ramping up emergency response plans when heat extremes 
are imminent. Such steps will help to buy time against the inexorable 
forward march of the Earth's climate envelope.

We hope that our research illuminates some of the challenges that may 
await us as global temperatures rise. The emergence of unprecedented 
heat and humidity - beyond what our physiology can tolerate - is just a 
portion of what could be in store. An even warmer and wetter world risks 
generating climate extremes beyond any human experience, including the 
potential for a whole host of "unknown unknowns".
https://theconversation.com/global-warming-now-pushing-heat-into-territory-humans-cannot-tolerate-138343



[classic talk about Climate Models]
*No COVID-19 Models Are Perfect, But Some Are Useful*
BY PETER H. GLEICK
MAY 19, 2020
Peter H. Gleick is an environmental scientist, a MacArthur Fellow, and a 
member of the US National Academy of Sciences.

The global coronavirus pandemic has brought renewed interest and focus 
on scientific models as we try to get a handle on what the future will 
bring, how many people will fall sick and die, what the economic impacts 
will be, and what actions politicians should take. But confusion abounds 
about what these "models" say and how to reconcile their often seemingly 
conflicting visions of the future. Recent political attacks on these 
models reflect a lack of understanding about what models are, how they 
work, and their usefulness and limitations. Conservative Fox News 
commentator Laura Ingraham attacked models on her show. Senator John 
Cornyn, a Republican from Texas tweeted "After #COVID-19 crisis passes, 
could we have a good faith discussion about the uses and abuses of 
'modeling' to predict the future?"

Models are all around us. Without knowing it, we all use models all the 
time to try to understand outcomes of complex situations. The decisions 
you make on how to spend your monthly paycheck or save for retirement 
are financial models. The car you drive and the toaster in your kitchen 
were both designed with engineering models. Advertisers make models of 
consumer behavior, preference, and consumption of media when they design 
and buy ads. These models depend on science, but also on human behavior 
and actions that are far less predictable.

Even a recipe for bran muffins is a model--and a good example of the 
kind of models we use every day without thinking about it. Cooks combine 
centuries of knowledge about the chemical behavior of different 
ingredients with their personal experiences to create a model--a 
recipe--for what they hope is a delicious bran muffin. But whether the 
"bran muffin model" actually produces a good muffin or a burned hockey 
puck depends not just on the recipe but on factors completely out of the 
control of the recipe designer. When you set your oven for 400F, does it 
heat to only 350? Will you mistake a teaspoon of salt for a tablespoon 
of baking soda? Will you fall asleep and burn the muffins? Will the 
recipe maker's tastes match your own?

Because of these uncertainties and unknowns, scientists who work with 
models try not to call the outcomes "predictions"--rather we call them 
"projections" or "scenarios." A prediction implies more accuracy and 
certainty than many models provide. For all these reasons, scientists 
often repeat the classic aphorism "All models are wrong, but some are 
useful," by which we mean models are only as good as our understanding 
of the scientific knowledge that goes into them. But useful models help 
us understand how science and human choices interact, providing valuable 
insight for policymakers.

Think about human-caused climate change: projections of climate change 
are based on some of the most complex models run on some of the fastest 
computers in the world. The climate is the most complicated 
biogeophysical system on the planet, affected by factors as varied as 
the output of the sun and tilt of the earth; the composition of the 
atmosphere; the behavior of winds, clouds, and ocean currents; 
interactions between the oceans, land, and atmosphere; and the behavior 
of plants and animals. Despite this complexity, global climate models 
are remarkably accurate, able to reproduce in tremendous detail the 
behavior of past and present climates. But their ability to produce 
accurate projections depends on not just getting the science right, but 
on assumptions about the future behavior of politicians and individuals; 
the role new technologies could play in altering greenhouse gas 
emissions; and the implications of investment, energy policies, and 
land-use decisions. We know that humans are already influencing and 
altering the climate, but the wide range of future climate projections 
largely depends on social and political uncertainties, not scientific ones.

Scientists are now building models to try to understand and project the 
path of the pandemic. How many people will get sick or die? What will be 
the consequences for society and the economy? How will different public 
policies, medical choices, and personal decisions influence the outcomes?

The models will continue to improve based on our developing scientific 
understanding of the infectiousness of the virus, the survival rate of 
the virus in different environments, the reaction of individuals to 
infection, the role of pre-existing conditions, the effectiveness of 
medical interventions, and much more. Less predictable inputs are those 
that attempt to understand the behavior of individuals: questions like 
will we stay home or go out; will we wear masks and maintain social 
distancing if we do go out;, or will we ignore medical advice and 
accelerate the "reopening" of the economy.

The takeaway here is that we shouldn't dismiss one model just because it 
offers a widely different picture of the future than another. Don't look 
at the divergent projections from these models and conclude the models 
are bad. These models are critical to help us explore the most effective 
actions to take to minimize what we care about: deaths, illnesses, and a 
damaged economy. The ultimate outcomes of the pandemic will depend on 
how we take the projections from the models and change our own behavior 
to avoid the bad futures we can see but desperately hope to avoid.
https://time.com/5838335/covid-19-prediction-models/



[Digging back into the internet news archive]
*On this day in the history of global warming - May 21, 2010 *
In the New Republic, Al Gore notes:

    "During the last 22 years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
    Change has produced four massive studies warning the world of the
    looming catastrophe that is being caused by the massive dumping of
    global-warming pollution into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, this
    process has been vulnerable to disruption and paralysis by a cynical
    and lavishly funded disinformation campaign. A number of large
    carbon polluters, whose business plans rely on their continued
    ability to freely dump their gaseous waste products into the global
    atmospheric commons--as if it is an open sewer--have chosen to
    pursue a determined and highly organized campaign aimed at
    undermining public confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the
    global scientific community. They have attacked the scientific
    community by financing pseudo-studies aimed at creating public doubt
    about peer-reviewed science. They have also manipulated the
    political and regulatory process with outsized campaign
    contributions and legions of lobbyists (there are now four
    anti-climate lobbyists for every single member of the House and Senate).

    "This epic public contest between the broad public interest and a
    small but powerful special interest has taken place during a time
    when American democracy has grown sclerotic. The role of money in
    our politics has exploded to a dangerous level. Our democratic
    conversation is now dominated by expensive 30-second television
    commercials, which consume two-thirds of the campaign budgets of
    candidates in both political parties. The only reliable source of
    such large sums of campaign cash is business lobbies. Most members
    of the House and Senate facing competitive election contests are
    forced to spend several hours each day asking special interests for
    money to finance their campaigns. Instead of participating in
    committee hearings, floor debates, and Burkean reflection on the
    impact of the questions being considered, they spend their time as
    supplicants. Though many struggle to resist the influence their
    donors intend to have on their decision-making process, all too
    frequently human nature takes its course.

    "Their constituents now spend an average of five hours per day
    watching television--which is, of course, why campaigns in both
    political parties spend most of their money on TV advertising.
    Viewers also absorb political messages from the same special
    interests that are wining and dining and contributing to their
    elected officials. The largest carbon polluters have, for the last
    17 years, sought to manipulate public opinion with a massive and
    continuing propaganda campaign, using TV advertisements and all
    other forms of mass persuasion. It is a game plan spelled out in one
    of their internal documents, which was leaked to an enterprising
    reporter, that stated: 'reposition global warming as theory rather
    than fact.' In other words, they have mimicked the strategy
    pioneered by the tobacco industry, which undermined the scientific
    consensus linking the smoking of cigarettes with diseases of the
    lung and heart--successfully delaying appropriate health measures
    for almost 40 years after the landmark surgeon general's report of
    1964."

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/the-crisis-comes-ashore

/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/

/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 
<mailto:contact at theclimate.vote> with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, 
subject: unsubscribe
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at 
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for 
http://TheClimate.Vote <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/20200521/463fef0d/attachment.html>