<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><i><font size="+1"><b>October 7, 2020</b></font></i></p>
[aleatory means chance]<br>
<b>Trillions of extra economic damages predicted in new study of
climate change effects</b><br>
by Peter Thorley, University of Warwick<br>
OCTOBER 6, 2020<br>
The world is underestimating the economic effects of climate change
by trillions of dollars, according to a new study co-authored by
scientists from the University of Warwick..<br>
The study, led by Georgetown University and published in Nature
Communications today (6 October), shows that current economic
forecasting models fail to account for unpredictable variations in
global temperatures, rather than the more predictable rising
temperatures themselves.<br>
<br>
Co-author Professor Sandra Chapman, of the University of Warwick
Department of Physics, said: "When we cause a system like the
Earth's climate to warm, it does not warm smoothly and uniformly.
Changes in the Earth's temperature translate into economic damages
and our work estimates the additional economic damage that we can
expect due to these fluctuations in earth's global mean temperature
on top of the smooth gradual increase due to increasing CO2 in the
atmosphere."<br>
<br>
"Our study identifies a new category of economic costs--those
arising from the unpredictable, but unavoidable fluctuations in
global climate that we're bound to face," says Georgetown's McCourt
School of Public Policy Professor Raphael Calel, an economist who
co-authored the study with three scientists from the United Kingdom.
"To prevent these losses, we need a more diverse set of policy
responses with increased investment in adaptation and resilience."<br>
<br>
<b>Cost of Inaction</b><br>
The United States, for example, relies on a forecasting model
developed by Yale economist William Nordhaus, for which he was
awarded the Nobel Prize in 2018, as well two other forecasting
models that descended from Nordhaus' work.<br>
<br>
But Calel says that these models fail to take into account the
unpredictable fluctuations in global temperatures observed year
after year.<br>
<br>
"This may seem like a small oversight, but our study shows these
fluctuations will create trillions of dollars of additional economic
damages," Calel says. "Previous work uses a well-known procedure for
estimating global mean temperature changes, and the economic damages
that follow. In our study, we amend this procedure to capture the
variability in global temperatures as well.<br>
<br>
The extra damages--anywhere from $10 trillion to $50 trillion over
the next 200 years when measured in today's dollars, according to
the study--show us that the cost of inaction is substantially higher
than previously believed, he says.<br>
<br>
Calel also notes that whilst there is a clear need to reduce
emissions at a faster rate to avoid predictable climate change, we
also need to prepare to mitigate the effects and costs of these
fluctuations, which are significant.<br>
<br>
<b>Making New Policies</b><br>
Among the policy changes the professor recommends are a shift of
food supplies toward a more resilient and low-impact model;
investments in infrastructure that will better withstand future
weather extremes; and the creation of agencies and social supports
to help the millions of people who will be displaced from their
homes.<br>
<br>
"The benefits that these investments will provide are much greater
than previously believed," he says.<br>
<br>
The McCourt School professor authored the study with Sandra C.
Chapman from the University of Warwick; David A. Stainforth of the
same department and also the London School of Economics and
Political Science; and Nicholas W. Watkins from the London School of
Economics and Warwick University as well as Open University in the
UK.<br>
<br>
"We knew that the coupled climate-economy models had omitted global
temperature variability, and we wanted to understand and quantify
the consequences of this," Calel says.<br>
<br>
"Temperature variability implies greater economic damages from
climate change" is published in Nature Communications.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://phys.org/news/2020-10-trillions-extra-economic-climate-effects.html">https://phys.org/news/2020-10-trillions-extra-economic-climate-effects.html</a><br>
- - <br>
[source]<br>
<b>Temperature variability implies greater economic damages from
climate change</b><br>
Nature Communications volume 11, Article number: 5028 (2020) <br>
Abstract<br>
<blockquote>A number of influential assessments of the economic cost
of climate change rely on just a small number of coupled
climate-economy models. A central feature of these assessments is
their accounting of the economic cost of epistemic
uncertainty--that part of our uncertainty stemming from our
inability to precisely estimate key model parameters, such as the
Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity. However, these models fail to
account for the cost of aleatory uncertainty--the irreducible
uncertainty that remains even when the true parameter values are
known. We show how to account for this second source of
uncertainty in a physically well-founded and tractable way, and we
demonstrate that even modest variability implies trillions of
dollars of previously unaccounted for economic damages.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8/figures/2">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8/figures/2</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8/figures/3">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8/figures/3</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18797-8</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[red and blue on the history of a propaganda battle - video]<br>
<b>Ben Santer on the Climate Red Team</b><br>
Oct 5, 2020<br>
greenmanbucket<br>
Given another term, the Trump administration will double down on
climate denial, and is considering appointing a "Red Team" of
climate deniers to evaluate (read distort) climate science.<br>
But this already happened. <br>
The American Physical Society staged a "Red team, blue team"
exercise in 2014, in evaluating and updating the Society's statement
on climate change. <br>
Ben Santer of Livermore Labs was a member of the "Blue" team, in
support of consensus, science, and reason.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgDoYNNNf98">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgDoYNNNf98</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[of course]<br>
<b>More coverage of climate wanted</b><br>
Major news audiences think the media should do more to address
climate change, says study led by UC researcher Abel Gustafson<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.newswise.com/articles/more-coverage-of-climate-wanted">https://www.newswise.com/articles/more-coverage-of-climate-wanted</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[Yale study]<br>
<b>Climate Change in the Minds of </b><b>U.S. News Audiences</b><br>
<b>This report is an analysis of public opinion about climate change
among the regular U.S. audience</b><br>
(American adults who frequently watch, read, or listen to the
content) of each of six major U.S.<br>
news sources: CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NPR, the Weather Channel, and
the national nightly<br>
network news (on CBS, ABC, or NBC). The findings in this report are
based on data from three<br>
nationally representative surveys conducted by the Yale Program on
Climate Change<br>
Communication and the George Mason University<br>
Executive Summary<br>
Desire for More Information<br>
<blockquote>- Large majorities in most news audiences are interested
in news stories about a wide range<br>
of global warming topics (p. 11-13).<br>
- However, majorities in all news audiences feel they are not very
well informed about<br>
global warming (p. 10). Fewer than 20% in any news audience feel
“very well informed.”<br>
- Majorities in the CNN, NPR, MSNBC, and the nightly network news
audiences think the<br>
media should be doing more to address global warming, as do about
half of those in the<br>
Weather Channel (51%) audience. In the Fox News audience, only one
in three viewers<br>
(34%) think the media should be doing more (p. 10). <br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Climate-Change-in-the-Minds-of-US-News-Audiences.pdf">https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Climate-Change-in-the-Minds-of-US-News-Audiences.pdf</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Digging back into the internet news archive]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming -
October 7, 2003 </b></font><br>
<p>Arnold Schwarzenegger succeeds Gray Davis as the governor of
California after a highly controversial "recall election."
Schwarzenegger--who had been demonized by talk radio host Rush
Limbaugh in the weeks prior to the election as not being a "real"
conservative--would become one of the very few prominent elected
Republican officials urging action on climate change.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.c-span.org/video/?178547-2/california-recall-acceptance-consession">http://www.c-span.org/video/?178547-2/california-recall-acceptance-consession</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<br>
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html"><https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html></a>
/<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a><br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
*** Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not
carry images or attachments which may originate from remote
servers. A text-only message can provide greater privacy to the
receiver and sender.<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>