Yes yes yes this! ^^ ...and, whether you subscribe to the cause/effect or not, it is EVER so easy to get an overview of how Global Warming affects us...as easy as doing research for some threads and questions for our ST...to be informed and not be ignorant...
The melting Arctic story is a bit premature. It's rebounding and set to cross above normal in about two or three months, and will probably return to heavy ice conditions just as it does about every 60 or 70 years. Judith Curry, chair of climate science at Georgia Tech, published a paper on what she termed a "stadium wave", which tries to unravel what drives what. The North Atlantic Oscillation does something, then later the Arctic Oscillation will follow suit, followed by some other oscillation, and so on, similar to how a wave moves around a stadium just by people copying what other people nearby are doing. This past week there have been several really important papers on the lack of synchronicity between Artic and Antarctic cycles, and the underlying causes (different basic drivers), along with a much better theoretical model of Dansgaard-Oeschger events which is a cyclic pattern during interglacials, which seem to be driven by the Arctic advance and collapse.
...concise and to the point, but that Mercator map under "Reason 2" really says it all, IMHO...thank you, Dennis, for sharing...
no no no...not at all...what I noticed was the 'hemispheric" and political and geographic areas affeted and not affected...very telling...
The poor will suffer most because God hates poor people. That's why they're poor. As for regional assessments, they're worthless. The IMF warns poor countries not to base any of their planning on climate assessments, because one climatology group will insist that future rainfall will drop by 30 percent, advising that scare dollars go towards conserving water, and another group will insist that rainfall will increase by 50 percent and that scare dollars should go to flood abatement. You're better off going to a palm reader or a psychic. But of course in the past century we've advanced past that stage of existence. Arrhenius' back-of-the-envelope 1800's calculation of climate sensitivity was 1 to 5 degree C, but he only had a slide rule and a very tiny data set, not the billions of dollars of supercomputer power we have now. Given the billionfold leap in data and analysis, the IPCC's AR5 puts it at 1.3 to 4.5 degrees C, very slightly narrower than Arrhenius SWAG. A century of research and tens of billions thrown at the problem, and they're still flinging sh*t at a wall.
...no worries about me coveting my neighbor's ass...NO worries... ...but I covet his house and deck...fuckers got a MAXimum crib with an outrageous deck...and a Star Trek Man Room, that if I could figure out how to Steal ( I know, the Eighth) I would do it in a heartbeat... ...but this is off-topic... ...or...maybe not...
This is the only time I have seena statement like this anywhere. Source? Also, winter Down Here is quite mild right now. Perhaps even too mild...
The National Snow and Ice Data Center. The Arctic retained a whole lot of ice this year. Heck, on Memorial Day people couldn't swim in parts of lake Michigan because of the floating ice. As I recall from the other day, in an addendum to XKCD's comic, he restated the change as 2C instead of 4.5 C. 2C is the change you get when you drive 180 miles closer to the tropics. Additionally, most of that change isn't an increase in high temperatures, it's an increase from the low temperatures. If you live in a big city, you've already probably got 1.2 to 1.6 C degrees of urban heat island effect, so you could move to the burbs and avoid 50 years of the catastrophic warming, or make arrangements for a suburban couple to take you in as a climate refugee till you retire and move to Cancun.
Coal gasification produces even more CO2 than burning coal? Does the reaction make little baby carbon atoms or something? C + H20 > CO + H2 CO + H2 + O2 > CO2 + H2O