Climate Change, Deux

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by scoobert

I was going to reply again, but forge the earth, i don't care.
if it gets warmer, then i will sail the new tropics above 30 degrees. we will adapt.

Again an example of the intellectual dishonesty of the argument that AGW is false, but if you show me evidence, I will switch to "... and anyway, it's good for us."

And that is why I contend that "denier" is indeed the most appropriate label.

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

It’s true that much of the general populace is uninterested, oblivious or even hostile. However, more and more, people in positions of responsibility are starting to plan how to cope with serious climate problems.

In my next few posts I will give example of how serious governmental, civic and business leaders are attempting to prepare for climate-related troubles ahead. Clearly, it’s the Deniers who are asleep at the tiller and should be charged with dereliction of duty.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #1

Goodbye, Miami | ROLLING STONE

… You would never know it from looking at Miami today. Rivers of money are flowing in from Latin America, Europe and beyond, new upscale shopping malls are opening, and the skyline is crowded with construction cranes. But the unavoidable truth is that sea levels are rising and Miami is on its way to becoming an American Atlantis. It may be another century before the city is completely underwater (though some more-pessimistic scientists predict it could be much sooner), but life in the vibrant metropolis of 5.5 million people will begin to dissolve much quicker, most likely within a few decades. The rising waters will destroy Miami slowly, by seeping into wiring, roads, building foundations and drinking-water supplies – and quickly, by increasing the destructive power of hurricanes. "Miami, as we know it today, is doomed," says Harold Wanless, the chairman of the department of geological sciences at the University of Miami. "It's not a question of if. It's a question of when…"

The latest research, including an assessment by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, suggests that sea level could rise more than six feet by the end of the century. James Hansen, the godfather of global-warming science, has argued that it could increase as high as 16 feet by then – and Wanless believes that it could continue rising a foot each decade after that. "With six feet of sea-level rise, South Florida is toast," says Tom Gustafson, a former Florida speaker of the House and a climate-change-policy advocate. Even if we cut carbon pollution overnight, it won't save us. Ohio State glaciologist Jason Box has said he believes we already have 70 feet of sea-level rise baked into the system…

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development lists Miami as the number-one most vulnerable city worldwide in terms of property damage, with more than $416 billion in assets at risk to storm-related flooding and sea-level rise…

South Florida has two big problems. The first is its remarkably flat topography…

Even worse, South Florida sits above a vast and porous limestone plateau. "Imagine Swiss cheese, and you'll have a pretty good idea what the rock under southern Florida looks like," …Conventional sea walls and barriers are not effective here …"

One of the first consequences of rising seas will be loss of drinking water. In fact, it's already starting to happen… The conventional solution to this was simple: Drill new drinking wells farther west, away from the salty water. The trouble is, engineers have done that already and can't move any farther west without running into the Everglades. Instead, engineers are now turning to more radical solutions, such as trying to capture storm water and store it underground, or reuse water from sewage-treatment plants. This will help, but ultimately South Florida is likely to rely more and more on desalination, a complex industrial-scale process that eliminates the salt from the sea water…

Truth be told, it's hard to live on a thin barrier island seven miles long like Miami Beach and be a climate-change denier…Whenever there is a full moon and a high tide, the sea water comes up through the old storm drains and flows into the streets. In some places, it bubbles up between the street and the sidewalk.

But no Dutch engineering firm I talked to had any concrete ideas about how to save Miami… Miami is different. It is also a low-lying city but far more complicated because of issues about water quality, the porousness of the limestone the city sits on, as well as water coming in from the west, through the Everglades..."

But in the end, Saltrick believes the only long-term way to protect Miami Beach from sea-level rise is to raise the city itself: the roads, the buildings, everything…

Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, which sits on the edge of the Biscayne Bay just south of Miami, is completely exposed to hurricanes and rising seas. "It is impossible to imagine a stupider place to build a nuclear plant than Turkey Point," says Philip Stoddard, the mayor of South Miami and an outspoken critic of the plant…

the situation at Turkey Point underscores the backwardness of how we calculate the risks of nuclear power. The Nuclear Regulatory Committee, which oversees the safety of nukes in America, demands that operators take into account past natural hazards such as storms and earthquakes, "but they are silent about future hazards like sea-level rise and increasing storm surges," Lochbaum says… Florida Power and Light thinks Turkey Point is such a great place for nukes that they are proposing to build two more reactors out there…

The financial catastrophe could play out like this: As insurance rates climb, fewer are able to afford homes. Housing prices fall, which slows development, which decreases the tax base, which makes cities and towns even less able to afford the infrastructure upgrades necessary to adapt to rising seas. The spiral continues downward. Beaches deteriorate, hotels sit empty, restaurants close. Because Miami's largest economies are development and tourism, it's a deadly tailspin. The threat of sea-level rise bankrupts the state even before it is wiped out by a killer storm…

Americans will also have to face up to the fact that Everglades National Park, home to one of the most remarkable ecosystems in the world, is a goner. More than half the park will be inundated with just three feet of sea-level rise, and the rest of it will vanish shortly thereafter. "We are going to have to change the name to Everglades National Marine Sanctuary,"…

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #2

Preliminary Flood Zones for New York City | NEW YORK TIMES

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #3

GAO: Climate change poses big financial risk to US government | NBC News

The federal government is facing significant financial risks related to extreme weather events, and states and cities can no longer depend on it for extra help after such events occur, the Republican chairman of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said Friday.

The warning from Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., came at a press conference about the release of a new report by the Government Accountability Office, which identified “climate change” on its 2013 list of items presenting high risk to the federal government…

“These events are primarily the responsibilities of the cities and states,” Issa said at the news conference. “And I will point out that we can no longer assume that the federal government will come in with an emergency supplemental [funding] every time there is an [extreme weather] occurrence. We have a responsibility to be proactive: Proactive in asking the states and the cities to be prepared to meet more of these requirements. Proactive in making sure that we withhold the funds, either through insurance funds or through actual appropriations, that are appropriate for the real anticipated events.”

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #4

Commander of U.S. Forces Pacific: Climate change is top threat | CLIMATE SCIENCE WATCH

According to Navy Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III, the Commander of U.S. Forces Pacific: Significant upheaval related to the warming planet "is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about." Admiral Locklear focuses on risk management and preparedness: "While resilience in the security environment is traditionally understood as the ability to recover from a crisis, using the term in the context of national security expands its meaning to include crisis prevention…"

And, Admiral Locklear is now — almost certainly with Joint Chiefs of Staff and Office of Secretary of Defense knowledge and support — taking this up seriously with other nations…

This interview is not an isolated comment by Admiral Locklear but an indication of increasing concern about and focus on climate change. In December 2012, he raised climate change in a speech to the Asia Society…

Admiral Locklear spoke a month ago to the U.S. Indonesia Society. In the speech, he linked climate change to the military, the need for resiliency and the ability for coping with mounting disaster relief requirements…

Admiral Locklear has mentioned climate change before, such as commenting that it would be a stress factor in Europe (where he commanded Operation Odyssey Dawn, the attack on Qaddafi’s Libya during the Arab Spring)…

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #5

Sweeping intel report sounds alarm on climate threats | THE HILL

12/10/12 -- The federal National Intelligence Council’s Global Trends 2030” report issued Monday follows Defense Department analyses that have similarly called climate change an emerging security risk.

“Demand for food, water, and energy will grow by approximately 35, 40, and 50 percent respectively owing to an increase in the global population and the consumption patterns of an expanding middle class. Climate change will worsen the outlook for the availability of these critical resources,” the report states…

Climate change will also drive migration patterns, analysts say…

It also lists the possibility of much more rapid climate change among eight potential “black swan” events that could have the greatest “disruptive” effect…

It projects that the U.S. will remain the world’s biggest power but that no nation will dominate as the “unipolar moment” ends…

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

…This is why no one is listening anymore, but carry on if you like.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #6

Limiting the Federal Government's Fiscal Exposure by Better Managing Climate Change Risks | GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICE

Climate change is a complex, crosscutting issue that poses risks to many environmental and economic systems—including agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and human health—and presents a significant financial risk to the federal government. Among other impacts, climate change could threaten coastal areas with rising sea levels, alter agricultural productivity, and increase the intensity and frequency of severe weather events. As observed by the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the impacts and costliness of weather disasters—resulting from floods, drought, and other events such as tropical cyclones—will increase in significance as what are considered “rare” events become more common and intense due to climate change.[1] In addition, less acute changes in the climate, such as sea level rise, could also result in significant long-term impacts. According to the National Research Council (NRC)—the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering—although the exact details cannot be predicted with certainty, there is a clear scientific understanding that climate change poses serious risks to human society and many of the physical and ecological systems upon which society depends, with the specific impacts of concern, and the relative likelihood of those impacts, varying significantly from place to place and over time.[2]

These impacts will result in increased fiscal exposure for the federal government in many areas, including, but not limited to its role as (1) the owner or operator of extensive infrastructure such as defense facilities and federal property vulnerable to climate impacts, (2) the insurer of property and crops vulnerable to climate impacts, (3) the provider of data and technical assistance to state and local governments responsible for managing the impacts of climate change on their activities, and (4) the provider of aid in response to disasters. For example, disaster declarations have increased over recent decades, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has obligated over $80 billion in federal assistance for disasters declared during fiscal years 2004 through 2011.[3] In addition, on December 7, 2012, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) within the Executive Office of the President requested $60.4 billion in federal resources for Superstorm Sandy recovery efforts to “build a more resilient Nation prepared to face both current and future challenges, including a changing climate.” To prepare adequately in the event of such a disaster, federal agencies need to work with state and local governments and volunteer agencies to produce and evaluate information so that they can fully assess risk and make appropriate response and recovery decisions.

Climate change adaptation—defined as adjustments to natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate change—is a risk-management strategy to help protect vulnerable sectors and communities that might be affected by changes in the climate. Adaptation measures to protect infrastructure, for example, include raising river or coastal dikes to protect infrastructure from sea level rise, building higher bridges, and increasing the capacity of storm water systems. State and local authorities are responsible for the planning and implementation of many types of infrastructure projects, and decisions at these levels of government can drive the federal government’s fiscal exposure. While implementing adaptive measures may be costly, there is a growing recognition that the cost of inaction could be greater and—given the government’s precarious fiscal position—increasingly difficult to manage given expected budget pressures which will constrain not just future ad hoc responses but other federal programs as well. As stated in a 2010 NRC report, increasing the nation’s ability to respond to a changing climate can be viewed as an insurance policy against climate change risks.[4]

Furthermore, according to NRC and USGCRP the nation’s vulnerability can be reduced by limiting the magnitude of climate change through actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions.[5] GAO recognizes that (1) the federal government has a number of efforts underway to decrease domestic greenhouse gas emissions and (2) the success of greenhouse gas emissions reduction efforts depends in large part on cooperative international efforts. However, limiting the federal government’s fiscal exposure to climate change risks will present a challenge no matter the outcome of domestic and international efforts to reduce emissions, in part because greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere will continue altering the climate system for many decades, according to NRC and USGCRP.[6]

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by SailOar

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #4

Commander of U.S. Forces Pacific: Climate change is top threat | CLIMATE SCIENCE WATCH

well, the insurers and reinsurers, already reeling from a massive upsurge in disaster-related payouts in the last decade, are taking it all rather seriously:

Insurers for Insurers Calling for Climate Action | Southwest Climate Change Network

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has identified climate change as a developing source of international tension:

Climate Change Threat to National Security Says Pentagon / Public News Service
Climate Change and National Security - Council on Foreign Relations

These are traditionally CONSERVATIVE interests, but even they acknowledge that climate change is a serious threat.

[S/V Illusion]

Noteworthy through this discussion is the complete absence of any credible evidence from deniers.

What does that tell us about these people?


For any deniers who read this, before you try, I said "credible".

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by conachair

Does equilibrium not mean anything to you? The extra from human activities isn't immune, there's just more going into the atmosphere than ggetting removed.

By 4%.

Which is a lot.

Isn't it obvious?

Trees love C02... they need it to survive. So if we all plant a few more trees, the problem will be solved. Isn't it obvious?

[zeehag]

ok guys is something you can do to stop the rise in waters that has been predicted since 1958 and in what way you gonna stop it and how are you going to punish the humans and others on earth to do this deed...

from th looks of the nyc map showing places of higher water, it looks as if mebbe we are right on schedule, as have stated scientists since 1958...good-those neighborhoods needed to be cleaned up a tad..as i remember the area was a lil dirty.
why not just sit back on your boat and watch the waters slowly rise so that when 2025 comes we can measure to see if this exact science bs is real or imaginary.

humans are the only species to resist evolutionary changes...rodlmao-- but this is a mindset problem.. worrying about stuff you can do nothing to control is a cause of heart attacks and strokes and ulcers.
we have known and laughed at the alleged future high water predicament since it was first dreamed up---- NOW someone wants to do something about the earths normal variance???? wtf..... is there yet another taxation you would also enjoy suffering????? are you not yet taxed enough ???? how are you going to find souls to help you change earths climate patterns.....they have tried with seeding of clouds--ohboy did that go awry...lol...storms were larger and wetter for a while..yet no one complained.lol not like now. allow one poly tishun to scream the sky is falling and folk go out and buy stock in the bs.....
population control comes from earth doing its thing. folks die. has been this way since the world began and homo sapiens was originated. whether the cause of our existence is evolutionary, as is a sensible creation, or from holy cows, who knows. we are here.
our planet is still young and forming. we do not yet know all of its secrets.
evolution of species happens so each one can exist in its environment. we are changing even as we write this bs.
so--i ask again-
how do you suggest we go about trying to place a control on our -planets cyclic changes.
why not just buy a bottle of sublingual or spray nitro so you can take it when you start having chest pains and some pepto for your ulcer and some aspirin for your severe headache caused by the stroke you work yourself up to by worrying about things we have known about since 1958 and can do nothing to control, short of changing the earths axis and other logical stuff.... mebbe a shop vac for the air and a good watering of the desert plants so they can be green more than just a few days of the year, while you are at it.
oh yes and while you are busy changing the environment back to what you consider appropriate for this planet, why dont you eliminate some of the damnable tropical insects......
you can leave the snakes--some are cute.

btw--if you havent already figgered it out---insurance is a scam requiring you pay money to get nothing..is a just in a case that wont deliver when you need it most...after the destruction of what you have insured.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Climate models are based on the proposition that 4% of total atmospheric annual CO2 emissions cause global warming. Since these models predict things that haven't happened, they can't be taken seriously. When you use the term 'denier', you are regurgitating a slur first put out by the odious Al Gore, who likened, and continues to liken AGW skeptics as deniers just like Holocaust deniers. As such, it is a simple ad hominem advanced only because you don't have a good scientific argument. If you did, the models would predict climate. They don't. So you resort to attacking the character of your opponents. If calling people who reject science that produces a model that doesn't work deniers, then you won't mind if I call you a fool. After all a denier rejects that which is true and a fool believes that which is false. Since you believe in a climate model that doesn't work, I guess the label of fool is a fair one.

100% correct.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by scoobert

No significant warming for 17 years 4 months | Watts Up With That?

Scoobert, I'm afraid you don't understand how this game is played. While climate models all predicted accelerating temperatures, by readjusting the models retrospectively, those models now demonstrate that no warming is in fact, caused by warming. Simple really.

A great example of how whatever happens climatically, AGW enthusiasts will claim it is a result of global warming is snowfall.

Here is what the IPCC said about snowfall in 2007: “The lowest winter temperatures are likely to increase more than average winter temperature in northern Europe. …The duration of the snow season is very likely to shorten in all of Europe, and snow depth is likely to decrease in at least most of Europe.”

With record snowfalls in Europe (Tragedy unfolding in Europe - Is U.S. media trying to ignore it?), here is what Skeptical Science (AGW fan club) has to say about snowfall and global warming:

What the science says...
To claim that record snowfall is inconsistent with a warming world betrays a lack of understanding of the link between global warming and extreme precipitation. Warming causes more moisture in the air which leads to more extreme precipitation events. This includes more heavy snowstorms in regions where snowfall conditions are favourable. Far from contradicting global warming, record snowfall is predicted by climate models and consistent with our expectation of more extreme precipitation events.

So you see, global warming causes more total winter snow, and also less total winter snow. So, whatever happens it is due to global warming, hence the touching confidence of so many on this thread of these model's veracity.

If it warms, it's because of global warming. If it doesn't warm, that also is because of global warming. When the next ice age begins, that will also be because of global warming. Wonderful model.

[Wrong]

Well. We know without a doubt that beyond what she's doing already - which is actually considerable - living a comparatively low impact lifestyle aboard a boat, Zee can give a hoot. She has lots of people in her camp who have lots of room for improvement in their life styles. And that's part of the problem. Not only in respect to reigning in human contributions to rising temperatures, but solving the multitude of other problems facing humanity. Too many just don't give a damn.

[Richard5]

Originally Posted by SailOar

It’s true that much of the general populace is uninterested, oblivious or even hostile. However, more and more, people in positions of responsibility are starting to plan how to cope with serious climate problems.

In my next few posts I will give example of how serious governmental, civic and business leaders are attempting to prepare for climate-related troubles ahead. Clearly, it’s the Deniers who are asleep at the tiller and should be charged with dereliction of duty.

THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING, #1

Goodbye, Miami | ROLLING STONE

Oh, good God. First it was the sky falling now it's the SL is rising. DOOOOOOOOOOM I say again, DOOOOOOOOOOM. Should I wear my parka or swim togs? Aldous Huxley anyone? Keep it up, I'm about to have a near religious experience.