Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Yet, one of the most disturbing stories to emerge around the reports was the New York Times report that language about the need for $100 billion in crisis funds to aid poor nations was removed from the Working Group III executive summary for policymakers during the final round of editing. The action neatly encapsulated the yawning gap between the growing danger of climate change — and growing maturity of climate scientists — on the one hand, and the utter lack of political will on the other."
RE IPCC AR5 Workgroup 3 report:
"For the first time, a detailed analysis was performed of how the 2-degree limit can be kept, based on over 1200 future projections (scenarios) by a variety of different energy-economy computer models. The analysis is not just about the 2-degree guardrail in the strict sense but evaluates the entire space between 1.5 degrees Celsius, a limit demanded by small island states, and a 4-degree world. The scenarios show a variety of pathways, characterized by different costs, risks and co-benefits. The result is a table with about 60 entries that translates the requirements for limiting global warming to below 2-degrees into concrete numbers for cumulative emissions and emission reductions required by 2050 and 2100. This is accompanied by a detailed table showing the costs for these future pathways." - See more at:
Here is, in full, the 2nd comment posted on site after this article:
"It’s not exactly that the monetary costs will be ‘quite low’ (0.06% Growth per year, etc.), and I think this point was made, but it’s that beneath that aggregate is a substantial– HUGE transfer of investment and wealth across all sorts of entrenched business sectors and interests, with lots of nested localized economies beneath the “country” level whose very survival is on the line (can a deep valley coal-mining town become an efficient solar hub?) As with what you said, these policy decisions necessarily transcend climate realities. When reading this report, I can’t help but think only the most shrill communist/monarchical government structures can pull off these kinds of feats. In America, the local representative system might make it impossible since it takes as few as five states to kill any program idea if its elected representatives find it a loser for them at home. And speaking of ‘home’, it needs to be said again– another huge killer of policy possibilities are environmentalists themselves who deny the reality that their backyard must also be a candidate for the large-scale deployment of energy installations in order to pull off what is said to be necessary — even more-so without Nuclear or Fracking, etc. Every wind-energy and biomass installation projects I’ve been around has faced opposition, and the most successful of the opposers have been, without fail, an environmentalist. They are the ones armed with the knowledge, can manipulate the liabilities, and are a master of appeals for further impact study/review. Given that it now can take up to 10 years to get a new large-scale energy plant installed and online, hitting those 2029 targets are going to require those who want to stand up for reducing/eliminating fossile fuels to also stand up to having lagre scale installations beyond-solar within their own eye-sight. "
Monday, April 21, 2014
My last post raised the future-as-stone-age dystopian vision, which at least amongst those condemned to live outside Short Attention Span Theatre, a more common view than you might think.
I mean, given the current biogeophysical realities, taking past and present human behavior as a guide, it is actually a conservative view of the future. It is at least one of a group of the probable world lines.
We tend to forget that during our rise to our current prominence, most of our time was in a "stone age". If you count our hominid ancestors, That stone age (using stone tools) was close to 2 million years long. We forget that the gather-scavenger, then gather-hunter strategies are a very solid niche. That is illustrated very well in the book Pandora's Seed, by Spencer Wells.
I think the "stone age" I mean, is the Neolithic. This time, if we do simplify to that point, it won't be our first trip to the rodeo, and agriculture and other stuff would make it through the difficulties.
With a drastically reduced population a neolitic style life could go on for a very long time. To quote from the article linked in my last post, "...because we've already stripped away the surface copper and the surface iron. If we knock ourselves out of the first world, we're not going to be able to rebuild a first world."
It is uncomfortable for those of us that have become accustomed to "modern", 1st world lifestyles, to think about this at all. It seems so strange and horrific, that you get mind-freeze then get out of that by dismissing the idea.
For the folks on the cusp, during the later stages of the slide down the slope of complexity, it would be rather unpleasant of an experience. But for later generations, a "neo-neolithic" (or Neolithic II the sequel) would simply be normality. Our emotions are still on that landscape anyway. After a few centuries, the times and lifestyles we have now would be some sort of mythic past.
* A line from one of my favorite films
Monday, April 14, 2014
I take a prudent, conservative approach. By this i mean i base my view of future human mitigation of CO2 emissions is based on the only observable, measurable data. That is, human behavior past and present.
This leads to my view that mitigation will not be a major factor, or should not be, in projecting average planetary temperature in 2100. So i am assuming an 8-12 degree C higher average in 2100, which is the range scientists posit if we simply do what we are doing now.
Summary for "policy makers". (cough):
The full Workgroup 3 report:
Discussion this a.m. on On Point:
The whole 15 years to do something reminded me of one of my favorite old songs
Friday, April 11, 2014
Tuesday, April 08, 2014
"Harrison Ford, Jessica Alba, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mark Bittman and other mega-celebs lend a hand to the new Showtime series, Years of Living Dangerously—where Hollywood meets wake-up call."
First episode, complete:
Educator's Page: http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/educators/
May be on Hulu Plus
Friday, April 04, 2014
Wisconsin’s communities are at risk from our changing climate. Extension is able to assist communities in identifying vulnerabilities to those risks, and evaluating strategies to prepare for them. UW-Extension’s Climate Ready Communities initiative provides training and support for county and campus faculty looking to work with local government, business, agriculture, forestry and other decision makers to: ..."
From the folks at RealClimate:
"The second part of the new IPCC Report has been approved – as usual after lengthy debates – by government delegations in Yokohama (Japan) and is now public. Perhaps the biggest news is this: ..."
Wednesday, April 02, 2014
What drives The Department of Defense, CIA , and NSA towards “sustainability”, is primarily a matter of two things:
The current and future impact of rapid climate Change
The current and future impact of rapid climate Change
Trends and Implications of Climate Change for National and International Security (2011) READ THIS in ENTIRETY http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/climate.pdf
RE National Security & Climate change (slow download, but a good 16 overview)
American Security Project
The Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC®), The search "climate change" results:
General USMC Topic Links:
USMC Publications Electronic Library
USMC Doctrinal Publications
Rapid Climate Change Links, Generally
Rapid Climate Change Strategy (especially the materials in the bibliography)
Energy (fuels and electricity) are crucial to any military endeavor, and an abundance of energy is crucial to the U.S. conception of full spectrum dominance of the battlespace.
The adoption and transition to renewable energy will increase strategic and operational flexibility. It is also deemed necessary to preserve in this century the key concept in Marine warfighting, maneuver warfare. This is the incapacitating enemy decision-making through shock and disruption
Energy as a Tactical Advantage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjdYM7uSWhQ
"Does global warming make extreme weather events worse? Here is the #1 flawed reasoning you will have seen about this question: it is the classic confusion between absence of evidence and evidence for absence of an effect of global warming on extreme weather events. Sounds complicated? It isn’t. I’ll first explain it in simple terms and then give some real-life examples. ... "
Marine base coastal adaptation project
"Deforestation may have far greater consequences for climate change in some soils than in others, according to new research led by Yale University scientists..."
Monday, March 31, 2014
Monday, March 17, 2014
Climate Change: Evidence & CausesThe Royal Society and the U. S. National Academy of Sciences (2014)
Guidance Note 1: "Twelve reasons why climate change adaptation M&E is challenging".
Webinar re these:
Friday, March 14, 2014
He's referring to WAVE — Walmart Advanced Vehicle Experience — which is just beginning formal testing. The first truck to be built from carbon fiber, it is 20 percent more aerodynamic than current trucks, and its micro-turbine hybrid powertrain can run on a variety of fuels. In addition to Capstone's microturbine there's an electric motor and battery storage system..."
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
The search "climate change" results at The Defense Technical Information Center as of a.m. on date of this post. re-search using space provided at top.
This map depicts land surface temperature anomalies in Alaska for January 23–30, 2014. Based on data..."
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology
Monday, February 10, 2014
Thursday, February 06, 2014
Tuesday, February 04, 2014
"This website provides visualization and access to global and regional (downscaled) climate data. We also provide access to data, figures and other information associated with our climate change research publications. We currently are serving fine scale present and future climate data obtained from dynamical and statistical downscaling efforts. In the near future we will be adding global and regional scale paleoclimate data sets. Data related to publications will be added and updated as available."
USGS Regional Climate Downloader
Friday, January 31, 2014
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
178 OXFAM BRIEFING PAPER 20 JANUARY 2014
Working for the Few
"Economic inequality is rapidly increasing in the majority of countries. The wealth of the world is divided in two: almost half going to the richest one percent; the other half to the remaining 99 percent. The World Economic Forum has identified this as a major risk to human progress. Extreme economic inequality and political capture are too often interdependent. Left unchecked, political institutions become undermined and governments overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites to the detriment of ordinary people. Extreme inequality is not inevitable, and it can and must be reversed quickly. "
Thursday, January 16, 2014
Does that mean impossible in Second Life? More likely there i would wager.
Monday, December 16, 2013
A copy of the video on YouTube:
"This site's information helps people understand global warming's scientific mechanism." (5 videos, from 1 to 5 minutes )
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
From the folks at the Center for Climate and Security
"The Vermont Journal of Environmental Law hosted a symposium on October, 25th titled ”Rising Temps and Emerging Threats: The Intersection of Climate Change and National Security in the 21st Century.” The symposium included an outstanding group of speakers and covered some very pertinent topics. All of the panels have also been uploaded to their YouTube station."
Videos of panels and presentations:
Food Security, Food Prices and Climate Change
Center for Food Security & the Environment
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Monday, November 11, 2013
Jelly Fish Numbers Rising:
A bit more humor:
Q: How many climate sceptics does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None. It's too early to say if the lightbulb needs changing
Thursday, November 07, 2013
A cool tool about a hot topic. Thanks to Dave Liebl & Bill Klase, for the heads up on this one.
"Scientists tell us that the global average temperatures over land have warmed 1.4 degrees F since 1880. But how have temperatures changed here in the US, in my state, in my congressional district? This site compares the global warming with temperature trends at local levels. Find your state …"
Who does this site?
For my local peeps, here is the 8th Congressional District:
A good addition for this post, on what is "variability and trend":
Wednesday, November 06, 2013
Region 5: http://epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/impacts-adaptation/region-5-plan.pdf
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Monday, October 28, 2013
It is amusing how people use low to moderate emission models when trying to gauge future impacts of rapid climate change, or adaptation strategies. They are based on something never yet observed; human efforts globally on mitigation. I suggest being conservative, or better, being prudent. Base your planning and strategies of high emission scenarios. They actually are based on past and current, observable human behavior. That is no global effort on mitigation.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
BTW: his latest book is:
Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age
Monday, October 21, 2013
The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability
Camilo Mora1, Abby G. Frazier1, Ryan J. Longman1, Rachel S. Dacks2, Maya M.Walton2,3, Eric J. Tong3,4, Joseph J. Sanchez1, Lauren R. Kaiser1, Yuko O. Stender1,3, James M. Anderson2,3, Christine M. Ambrosino2,3, Iria Fernandez-Silva3,5, Louise M. Giuseffi1 & Thomas W. Giambelluca1
"Ecological and societal disruptions by modern climate change are critically determined by the time frame over which climates shift beyond historical analogues. Here we present a new index of the year when the projected mean climate of a given locationmoves to a state continuously outside the bounds of historical variability under alternative greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. Using 1860 to 2005 as the historical period, this index has a global mean of 2069 (618 years s.d.) for near-surface air temperatureunderanemissions stabilizationscenario and2047 (614 years s.d.)undera ‘business-as-usual’scenario. Unprecedented climates will occur earliest in the tropics and among low-income countries, highlighting the vulnerability of global biodiversity and the limited governmental capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change. Our findings shed light on the urgency of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions if climates potentially harmful to biodiversity
and society are to be prevented."
1Department of Geography, University of Hawai‘i at Ma¯noa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822, USA. 2Department of Biology, University of Hawai‘i at Ma¯noa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822, USA. 3Hawai‘i Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai‘i at Ma¯noa, Ka¯ne‘ohe, Hawai‘i 96744, USA. 4Department of Oceanography, University of Hawai‘i at Ma¯noa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822, USA. 5Trans-disciplinary Organization for Subtropical Island Studies (TRO-SIS), University of the Ryukyus, Senbaru, Nishihara, Okinawa 903-0213, Japan.
A website re the paper with good interpretive material.
Note: I got the heads up on this on the CLN listserv. Discussion there is;
"... the timing question is"In essence, when will the extreme coolest January/etc. be warmer than the historical extreme hottest January/etc." or, to put it another way, "In essence, when will the extreme coolest [Insert month here] be warmer than the historical extreme hottest [insert same month here]."
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
" Global Warming: The Science of Climate Change within the far slicker Coursera platform. Beginning on October 21, the class is free and runs for 8 weeks..."