skierinvermont Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 According to many, we have already seen a rapidly changing climate over the past century - unprecedented warming. And yet, technology advances have far outpaced climate change. It is not climate change and it is not lack of technology that has led to all the deaths you allude to. It is mainly corrupt political systems, economic failure and lack of access to technology/medicine in many third world countries. However, actual weather disasters represent only a small fraction of those deaths, most come from diseases and starvation. Which again, are mostly due to corrupt political systems and wars. Trying to lump climate change in with these greater problems which have been around forever is much too broad a stroke, in my opinion. I'm not saying climate change has much to do with any of those problems at the moment. But in the future, it will make all of those problems much worse. Climate is going to change much faster in the next century (2-4X as much as it did last century = 1.6-3.2C) and there are certain problems only associated with exceeding the historical normal variation of climate. IE threshold effects such as rising sea level, shifting agricultural productivity, species extinctions, ecosystem disruption etc. which do not occur or occur on a very limited scale when you stay near the range of variability over the last 1000-10,000 years. Thus far we've stayed within or near that range, as we exceed it more and more, and at a faster and faster rate, the effects will increase dramatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 I'm not saying climate change has much to do with any of those problems at the moment. But in the future, it will make all of those problems much worse. Climate is going to change much faster in the next century (2-4X as much as it did last century = 1.6-3.2C) and there are certain problems only associated with exceeding the historical normal variation of climate. IE threshold effects such as rising sea level, shifting agricultural productivity, species extinctions, ecosystem disruption etc. which do not occur or occur on a very limited scale when you stay near the range of variability over the last 1000-10,000 years. Thus far we've stayed within or near that range, as we exceed it more and more, and at a faster and faster rate, the effects will increase dramatically. Not necessarily. Warming acceleration has been quite slow so far, as has sea level rise. We can say that might change in the future, but I have no confidence that will be the case based on the evidence so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Not necessarily. Warming acceleration has been quite slow so far, as has sea level rise. We can say that might change in the future, but I have no confidence that will be the case based on the evidence so far. I think you are confused.. there has been no acceleration from the 1975-2000 rate of warming. But the 1975-2000 rate was much greater than the rate of the century as a whole. The century long rate was .07-.08C/decade... the last decade or two we have been warming at .2C/decade. Sustained warming at that rate will likely be much more costly than sustained warming at .08C/decade. Even more so if we accelerate to .25 or .3C/decade. Warming at .2C+/decade has only just begun. No acceleration has been evident over the last 30 years, but the last 30 years are a dramatic acceleration over the previous 70. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 I would think the warming would have slowed considering the AMO gas fallen since 2005. Save 2010, Petsistant La Nina, long duration solar min that we havent seen in a long time, methane flat lines, -PDO. It's not exactly like its been el niño, +PDO, solar max, +AMO. All of this and the Sats with the 1981-2010 climo are still above normal all of 2011 so far. I'd bet that when el niño comes back we are going to be setting records again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 I think you are confused.. there has been no acceleration from the 1975-2000 rate of warming. But the 1975-2000 rate was much greater than the rate of the century as a whole. The century long rate was .07-.08C/decade... the last decade or two we have been warming at .2C/decade. Sustained warming at that rate will likely be much more costly than sustained warming at .08C/decade. Even more so if we accelerate to .25 or .3C/decade. Warming at .2C+/decade has only just begun. No acceleration has been evident over the last 30 years, but the last 30 years are a dramatic acceleration over the previous 70. Actually, it was more like dramatic acceleration from the 1946-75 -PDO period, which basically saw flatlining temps despite rapidly rising GHG emissions. The 1925-1945 +PDO period also saw temps climb dramatically from the period before, despite the fact that CO2 concentrations were considerably lower then. The previous 70 years before the last 30 saw two -PDO periods and one +PDO period, so it is not surprising at all that the rate of warming was faster. If we see a .2C/decade rise from the 2000s to 2010s, then I will be more concerned. No evidence that will happen at this point, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 I would think the warming would have slowed considering the AMO gas fallen since 2005. Save 2010, Petsistant La Nina, long duration solar min that we havent seen in a long time, methane flat lines, -PDO. It's not exactly like its been el niño, +PDO, solar max, +AMO. All of this and the Sats with the 1981-2010 climo are still above normal all of 2011 so far. I'd bet that when el niño comes back we are going to be setting records again. That has been Hansen's mantra since 1998. But of the four major global temp sources, only GISS has seen a record warm year since then, despite several El Ninos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Just wanted to point out this example is type of thing on how technology can help in the fututre. http://www.scienceda...20104115100.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipS Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Just wanted to point out this example is type of thing on how technology can help in the fututre. http://www.scienceda...20104115100.htm Interesting article but, sadly, the research paper is behind a paywall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergent Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Interesting article but, sadly, the research paper is behind a paywall. Its available here; http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/ja2100005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipS Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Its available here; http://pubs.acs.org/....1021/ja2100005 Many thanks! I'll read it this evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.