Climate Change Study Finds U.s. Is Already Widely Affected

[4588686]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/07/science/earth/climate-change-report.html?hp&_r=0

 

The effects of human-induced climate change are being felt in every corner of the United States, scientists reported Tuesday, with water growing scarcer in dry regions, torrential rains increasing in wet regions, heat waves becoming more common and more severe, wildfires growing worse, and forests dying under assault from heat-loving insects.

Such sweeping changes have been caused by an average warming of less than 2 degrees Fahrenheit over most land areas of the country in the past century, the scientists found. If greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane continue to escalate at a rapid pace, they said, the warming could conceivably exceed 10 degrees by the end of this century.

“Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the present,” the scientists declared in a major new report assessing the situation in the United States.

“Summers are longer and hotter, and extended periods of unusual heat last longer than any living American has ever experienced,” the report continued. “Winters are generally shorter and warmer. Rain comes in heavier downpours. People are seeing changes in the length and severity of seasonal allergies, the plant varieties that thrive in their gardens, and the kinds of birds they see in any particular month in their neighborhoods.”

The report, the National Climate Assessment, was prepared by a large scientific panel overseen by the government, and received final approval at a meeting Tuesday morning in Washington. The report was unveiled at the White House, and President Obama planned to spend part of the day highlighting the findings in interviews with television weather forecasters around the country.

The administration hopes to use the report to shore up public support for the president’s climate policies as he attempts to put new regulations in place to limit emissions. A major political battle over the rules is expected this summer, with Republicans already accusing Mr. Obama of plotting a “war on coal.”

Some Republican members of Congress have contended that the science of global warming is a hoax perpetrated by a global conspiracy of climate scientists, a point of view Mr. Obama has mocked as comparable to belief in a flat earth. Other Republicans concede that climate change caused by human activity is real, but nonetheless fear — as do some Democrats — that the president’s policies will destroy jobs for miners and hurt the broader economy.

The report found some benefits from climate change in the short run, such as a longer growing season for crops and a longer shipping season on the Great Lakes. But it warned that these were likely to be countered by escalating damages. Food production may be hit hard by rising heat and water stress in coming decades, the report found.

“Yes, climate change is already here,” said Richard B. Alley, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who was not involved in writing the report but reviewed a late draft. “But the costs so far are still on the low side compared to what will be coming under business as usual by late in this century.”

The ominous findings of the report are likely to give Mr. Obama fresh ammunition as he seeks to tackle the problem in a significant way. However, scientists involved in the report said there had been no political interference in their work. In fact, they went beyond any language the president has used as they cataloged risks.

“Climate change presents a major challenge for society,” the report warned. “There is mounting evidence that harm to the nation will increase substantially in the future unless global emissions of heat-trapping gases are greatly reduced.”

The report was supervised and approved by a large committee representing a cross section of American society, including representatives of two oil companies. Congress ordered in 1990 that a major scientific assessment of climate change be compiled every four years, though the administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush were slow to comply with the law, and this is only the third report to have been produced.

One of the report’s most dramatic findings concerned the rising frequency of torrential rains. Scientists have expected this effect for decades because more water is evaporating from a warming ocean surface, and the warmer atmosphere can hold the excess vapor, which then falls as rain or snow. But even the leading experts have been surprised by the magnitude of the effect.

The report found that the eastern half of the country is receiving more precipitation in general. And over the past half-century, the proportion of precipitation that is falling in very heavy rain events has jumped by 71 percent in the Northeast, by 37 percent in the Midwest and by 27 percent in the South, the report found.

[Fidei Defensor]

We've gone and screwed ourselves over big time. I wish people would have paid attention earlier.

[GregorMendel]

We can still act individually to prevent even larger impacts of "climate change" by making reasonable adjustments to our daily routines, like effective forms of public transportation (light rail is much more efficient that most city bus systems), being aware of our own energy waste (shorter showers, more efficient light bulbs), or even being active against pollution in your community (water and arable land are valuable commodities).



If those behaviors dont sit well with you for some reason, we have also reached the point of "sustainable/renewable" forms of energy becoming economically viable for the individual consumer. My parents just installed panels from SolarCity, which has recently partnered with BestBuy, and with us kids no longer living at home, they effectively have no electric bill half the year.



Even if no other argument for man's responsibility to maintaining the health of the Earth appealed to me, I would still be excited at the thought of tinkering my way to the lowest power bill possible for my home one day :)

Edited May 7, 2014 by GregorMendel

[thessalonian]

Climate change is bs.  We have had two of the coldest winters I can remember here in North Dakota the last two years.  Man is doing nothing to cause this.  Don't be fooled by such nonsense.  

 

[Fidei Defensor]

Climate change is bs.  We have had two of the coldest winters I can remember here in North Dakota the last two years.  Man is doing nothing to cause this.  Don't be fooled by such nonsense.  

lol.

[chrysostom]

Climate change is bs.  We have had two of the coldest winters I can remember here in North Dakota the last two years.  Man is doing nothing to cause this.  Don't be fooled by such nonsense.  

 

The winter in my Antarctic research station was pretty cold too, therefore global warming is BS.

[arfink]

Well, BS or not, there are actually some serious upsides to phasing out the most idiotic energy production and consumption problems we have in the US.

 

Right now we get a very large percentage of our power from burning coal. That's about the dumbest thing I can imagine, and really needs to be phased out. Coal is dirtier than any other power production method, even nuclear. In a month a coal fired plant releases more radioactive waste than a typical light water nuclear reactor can make in a year (yes, because coal contains traces of radioactive cesium and other elements which is highly concentrated because it's the part that doesn't burn away in the plant) and instead of putting it into sealed casks that are buried and monitored for radiation leakage, the sludge is literally dumped on the ground or thrown into bodies of water. Coal mining is one of the most environmentally devastating things we do to our planet, second only perhaps to the ways we currently are mining heavy metals or copper. :P

 

Even light water nuclear reactors would be preferable to coal, producing more power for less cost and less pollution than coal currently does. Fortunately we have better options even than this for producing cheaper and cleaner power. Thorium comes to mind, as well as new low cost solar-panel manufacturing techniques currently being developed. I remember reading about one outfit that's making solar panels using commercial vapor deposition machines to deposit the panels electrodes onto plastic film. The same way we deposit metal onto mylar balloons or the potato chip bags we just throw away, and the cost is similar. If they could get that going nicely, I'd roof my house in it.

 

You don't have to be an earth-hugger to realize that kicking the fossil fuels would probably be a very smart idea.

 

Besides that, there is the problem of our existing power infrastructure. People say we can't adopt new power generation technologies because the grid can't handle it. But there is mounting evidence that the power grid is already too old in the US, and failure rates are increasing far faster than the grid is increasing in size and number of customers being served. If we don't upgrade the infrastructure, sooner or later, it's going to fall out from under us. Why wait for global warming to fix this problem?

Edited May 7, 2014 by arfink

[Winchester]

The solutions for anthropogenic climate change will not come from people in government. Dear Leader's carbon footprint on Earth Day was massive, because he simply must jet around in his super cool airplane.

 

They will use the information to give money to their buddies and exert control. The best thing we could do for the environment is take the pens away from politicians.

[Anomaly]

The solutions for anthropogenic climate change will not come from people in government. Dear Leader's carbon footprint on Earth Day was massive, because he simply must jet around in his super cool airplane.

They will use the information to give money to their buddies and exert control. The best thing we could do for the environment is take the pens away from politicians.

Son of a ........

Global warming is over and I'm no longer an atheist.

He'll is frozen over. I agree 100% with Win.

Dayummm.

[4588686]

The solutions for anthropogenic climate change will not come from people in government. Dear Leader's carbon footprint on Earth Day was massive, because he simply must jet around in his super cool airplane.

 

They will use the information to give money to their buddies and exert control. The best thing we could do for the environment is take the pens away from politicians.

 

 

How would an anarcho-capitalist society deal with this issue?  

[CrossCuT]

Climate change is bs.  We have had two of the coldest winters I can remember here in North Dakota the last two years.  Man is doing nothing to cause this.  Don't be fooled by such nonsense.  

Hank is funny

http://youtu.be/HF9LNuH3IpU

 

Even if no other argument for man's responsibility to maintaining the health of the Earth appealed to me, I would still be excited at the thought of tinkering my way to the lowest power bill possible for my home one day :)

Amen. God made us the keepers of this land and we ought to be responsible and take care of it. 

 

The solutions for anthropogenic climate change will not come from people in government. Dear Leader's carbon footprint on Earth Day was massive, because he simply must jet around in his super cool airplane.

 

They will use the information to give money to their buddies and exert control. The best thing we could do for the environment is take the pens away from politicians.

I agree with you mostly but from the standpoint that most politicians are just puppets for the oil companies.

[Winchester]

How would an anarcho-capitalist society deal with this issue?  

Rothbard provides the thought process: http://mises.org/daily/2120

 

 

 

 

We have established that everyone may do as he wishes provided he does not initiate an overt act of aggression against the person or property of anyone else. Anyone who initiates such aggression must be strictly liable for damages against the victim, even if the action is "reasonable" or accidental. Finally, such aggression may take the form of pollution of someone else's air, including his owned effective airspace, injury against his person, or a nuisance interfering with his possession or use of his land.

This is the case, provided that:

"In sum, no one has a right to clean air, but one does have a right to not have his air invaded by pollutants generated by an aggressor."

1. the polluter has not previously established a homestead easement;
2. while visible pollutants or noxious odors are per seaggression, in the case of invisible and insensible pollutants the plaintiff must prove actual harm;
3. the burden of proof of such aggression rests upon the plaintiff;
4. the plaintiff must prove strict causality from the actions of the defendant to the victimization of the plaintiff;
5. the plaintiff must prove such causality and aggression beyond a reasonable doubt; and
6. there is no vicarious liability, but only liability for those who actually commit the deed.

Currently, you put up with as much pollution as the EPA decides you put up with. That's not just the result (it's possible the results of an an-cap system would still be undesirable) that's also the theory.

 

There is no utopia, but I don't think that concentrating power in the hands of people proven to willfully and capriciously destroy the environment is going to end well. But it's complex. The massive capital that corporations have accrued thanks to the state could prove problematic if all regulations were suddenly gone overnight. I don't mean to discount the fact that regulations are frequently written by those in the employ of the companies they're allegedly restricting.

[Winchester]

 

 

I agree with you mostly but from the standpoint that most politicians are just puppets for the oil companies.

Partners is a better word. They're willing participants. I'd love to know which politicians actually believe in anthropogenic climate change, rather than just using it as a tool to gain power. I have a hard time believing that most of them have read the summary of the studies, much less the study itself. I've read a bit here and there. 

[CrossCuT]

Partners is a better word. They're willing participants. I'd love to know which politicians actually believe in anthropogenic climate change, rather than just using it as a tool to gain power. I have a hard time believing that most of them have read the summary of the studies, much less the study itself. I've read a bit here and there. 

 

Partners haha yeah! its easy to be willing when the big corporations are handing you checks the size of the moon. Its very depressing. And I am sure you are right about them not reading that summaries...Thats why I wish government was filled with people with more diverse backgrounds...people who actually have the smarts to realize this ish is happening and have the balls to do something about it. 

[Anomaly]

Partners haha yeah! its easy to be willing when the big corporations are handing you checks the size of the moon. Its very depressing. And I am sure you are right about them not reading that summaries...Thats why I wish government was filled with people with more diverse backgrounds...people who actually have the smarts to realize this ish is happening and have the balls to do something about it.

Is it just me, or does anyone else get the impression that CC comes off as a 15 yr old girl, who gets all her news from Facebook and Colbert on YouTube. Her parents named her Harmony Bliss, and her grandfather went to Canada to avoid the draft in the 70's. Edited May 7, 2014 by Anomaly