The Dust Bowl and Sea Level
The Dust Bowl and Sea Level
One of my favorite blogs in my portfolio is Science, Belief and the Volcano. In that blog I referenced The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great America Dust Bowl by Timothy Egan. I will use this later in this blog.
Several people brought me the news that some in North Carolina want to fight the predictions of sea-level rise. Likewise several have mentioned Colbert’s piece on this initiative. According to the news article several North Carolina local governments have “passed resolutions against sea-level rise policies.” Here is an interesting blog in Scientific American on the proposed law.
Here is a link to the proposed bill. There is a provision that if sea-level rise projections are needed then
“These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900. Rates of sea-level rise may be extrapolated linearly to estimate future rates of rise but shall not include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea-level rise.”
The bill also discusses, at length, a variety of programs related to building setbacks for coastal building. Obviously, perhaps, “accelerated rates of sea-level rise” are not good for new or old construction on the coast. Not good for the insurance companies either. (and here as well)
So back to the Dust Bowl. The Dust Bowl was comprised of the Oklahoma and Texas Panhandles, and the neighboring parts of Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nebraska. Three towns in the center of this region are Boise City and Guymon, Oklahoma and Dalhart, Texas. The following map from Spartacus Education sets the scene.
Figure 1: Map of the U.S. Dust Bowl Region in the 1930s, from Spartacus Education
It is hard to write in a paragraph the extremes of the degradation of the land; weather, hot and cold; dust drifts; mud falling from the sky; houses and villages buried in the dust; and a whole set of plagues and illnesses that killed and drove away people. The cause of the Dust Bowl was a convergence of many factors ranging from farm policy and farm practices; to overly ambitious civic and corporate growth; to extreme heat, drought, wind, and winter storms. From the perspective of the climate scientist, it becomes an interesting question of once the conditions of the Dust Bowl were realized, how much did the lack of vegetation and soil moisture contribute to the perpetuation of the extreme weather? (See, for instance, Schubert et al., Science, 2004)
There was also a certain element of fate. When there was a burst of development and expansion in the Dust Bowl region, there was also a period of above average rain. At some level this seemed to be known at the time, and there were those, including companies, who argued that the development of the land, the plowing, steam from the train, the disruption, was actually the cause of rain. This acceptance of the idea that people were having a positive impact on the weather, and essentially the climate, would ultimately stand in stark contrast to their denial and rejection of the notion that their behavior could be having a negative effect.
There are two points that I want to draw from the The Worst Hard Time. The first was the attempt to reframe the dust storms in support of building, development, and community. In Dalhart, Texas, the town paper, the Texan, started a campaign with a tribute to the sand storms as majestic events that should draw people in to see the wonder. There was outrage that the East Coast and national press was trying to slander the town and the region – trying to discredit the people of the region by blaming them for the degradation of the land and dust in air. There were those in the East saying that those in the Dust Bowl were exaggerating their situation trying to extort money from Washington.
There was in this campaign a quest to make the dust storms majestic and divinely positive events, a rejection of both the obvious collapse of people and towns and of the increasing scientific evidence that at the very core of the collapse was the behavior of people. From the Texan, John McCarty, wrote that people should
“view the majestic splendor and beauty of one of the great spectacles of nature, a panhandle dust storm, and smile even though we may be choking and our throats and nostrils so laden with dust that we cannot give voice to our feelings.” ( The Worst Hard Time, page 185)
There was something of boasting of bigger storms in other states. Then there was blame that dust of other states was the cause of their grief.
There was rejection of the growing scientific evidence that the breaking of the soil stabilizing root structure of the native grasses was at the foundation of the collapse. And while this science that challenged the will of the people was rejected, anecdotal evidence that was attributed with the strength of science was used when it matched their will or need. Of especial note was the observation that when there had been a rush of people to the Dust Bowl region, there had been both rain and a World War. For a hundred years people had associated rain with war. Therefore, towns would bring in experts with cannons and explosions. A literature developed on using dust as mulch for crops.
The second point I want to make is the depth of the denial or suspicion of the mounting scientific evidence that the behavior of humans was responsible for the degradation of the soil and the sky full of dirt. This was not only a position held by those with a belief that man could not, while working God’s will, cause such damage (see here, perhaps), or those with a vested interest in real estate and business, but also, President Roosevelt and many in Washington who did not want to believe that America’s destiny to make the whole country productive was challenged by pursuit of that destiny. Ultimately, however, Roosevelt accepted the scientific foundation and massive programs to stabilize and reclaim the land were initiated. Many would argue, I included, that even today we struggle to sustain this reclamation and recovery.
So I am asked about how I respond to those in North Carolina who want to reject the predictions of sea level rise – to prescribe, by law, how such predictions might be made. I start with saying I have more experience on the coast of North Carolina than most. I spent many years in Craven and Carteret County on the mouth of the Neuse River. My father had small pieces of land from Long Beach to Kitty Hawk. My job was to keep grass cut, deal with diamondbacks, and try to stop waves and water taking away land. We built cabins out of abandoned bridge trestles and telephone poles. I have built seawalls and seen these cabins moved by waves from hurricanes (They’re tough.) I can see in my mind exactly where 1 meter, 39 inches, of sea level rise will sit.
Figure 2: Cypress Knees on the shore of the Neuse River after Hurricane Floyd, 1999.
If I were standing next to the Neuse River talking to a neighbor, I would say that with the evidence and knowledge I have, that a 1 meter rise in sea level was a considered best estimate of a lot of information. If I were to conjecture, I would offer that I think that 1 meter is more likely an underestimate than an exaggeration. And as for the proposed law, I would think of previous efforts to legislate the numerical value of pi, and the people in the Dust Bowl trying to sell the idea that all of the scientific information was part of a fraud trying to advance some cultural agenda. I would dismiss the proposed law as an attempt to legislate away that which stands in the way of our desires to consume and build for our personal imperatives. I would dismiss it as politics and note the names of the un-serious politicians for the next election.
r
P.S. My last blog was reproduced at this site with the question posed to the reader:
“Is Rood being intentionally deceptive, or is he just not very bright?”
Now in my defense, I have stated a number of times over the years that I am not so smart (here for instance); hence, that question should be easy to answer. I always felt growing up that the only time I was the smartest in the room was when I was alone. So if you decide to answer that question, then the extended answer might use Form of Argument: Adventures in Rhetoric as a hint.
Just having fun,
r
Figure 3: Dinosaur sculpture in Boise City, OK – taken June 2005 on the road.
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 — Blog Index
That graph reminds me of tree rings except for the tree rings should be growing outward not inward. A healthy tree has outward growing rings a healthy North Arctic should have stable rings that are not diminishing into oblivion.........
I just had a few minutes to read some of the entries on Dr. Master's blog today. I'm proud of the regular posters on this blog who stood their ground in spite of the arrogance, apathy and ignorance they were competing against.
I probably won't be posting much for the next few weeks. My wife and I are off on a long overdue vacation. While we'll drag the laptop along, we'll be sharing it briefly, for just a few minutes each day. And if you think I'm going to spoil my wife's first trip to Niagara Falls and then the coast of Maine by saying something like this, "Honey, I think I'll stay in the room tonight pontificating on the Climate Blog", your crazy.
In the meantime, everyone have fun, learn a lot and try to be nice to the trolls!!
Enjoy your vacation, sir! And give my regards to the Mrs.
A firefighter watches a backfire set to protect a ranch along Grimes Canyon Road in Ventura County in 2009. (Los Angeles Times / June 12, 2012)
Global warming could lead to more wildfire in California: study
By Bettina Boxall
June 12, 2012, 11:24 a.m.
California and the West, which have experienced a surge in wildfire during the last decade, can expect more of the same with global warming, according to a study published Tuesday.
“A lot of the West, California included, really does look like it’s headed into a more fire-prone future,” said Max Moritz, a UC Cooperative Extension wildfire specialist and lead author of a new paper that examined climate change’s likely effects on global fire patterns.
The American West will not be alone, according to the research, published in the journal Ecosphere. While the forecast for the next few decades is less certain, by century’s end, much of the world will experience more wildfire than it does now, the study concluded.
That includes the tundra and forests of the Far North, temperate grasslands and regions with a Mediterranean climate such as Southern California. Notable exceptions include tropical rain forests, where increased rainfall could actually decrease wildfire.
The team of UC Berkeley scientists who led the study adapted an approach that has been used to evaluate the effect of climate change on plants and animals and applied it to wildfire. They gathered global wildfire and climate data for roughly the last decade and examined climate variables that affect fuel availability.
Using 16 different global climate models, they then developed forecasts for the future. "Most of the previous wildfire projection studies focused on specific regions of the world, or relied upon only a handful of climate models," said co-author Katherine Hayhoe, director of the Climate Science Center at Texas Tech University.
Rising temperatures lengthen the fire season and dry out vegetation, making it more flammable, especially in mountain forests. But the authors said that temperature is not the only, or necessarily even the dominant, factor in many landscapes where changing precipitation patterns will modify wildfire cycles.
More rain in the tropics could decrease fire. In other areas that are not so wet, it could increase plant growth, producing more fuel to burn. And while diminished rainfall dries out vegetation, it can also reduce fuel levels by stunting plant growth, cutting the potential for fire.
“Fire is not going anywhere,” Moritz said, adding that the study results emphasize the need “to rethink how we live with fire and take it more seriously.
One of the conclusions to come out of the seventh International Climate Change Conference sponsored by the Heartless Institute is: THE EARTH IS COOLING :)
NSIDC - Arctic Sea Ice Extent
Death Spiral into oblivion continues.......
Last year, I didn't search, I just went back to the same place because they had actually lowered the price slightly.
All winter, I've saved and used the bags from teh pellets because they make greate trash bags: really tough and strong. Finally I got around to reading the print on the bags: Made in Canada.
The pellets from two years ago were local, I checked at the time, admittedly as much for aesthetic reasons as ethical reasons (I liked the idea of burning local refuse as much as avoiding the ecological cost of transport).
So there you have: it is somehow cheaper to import wood pellets from Canada than it is to use trees grown on my mountain. I'm really not sure what I think about this. Is it good or bad from a green stand point? Is the Canadian process that efficient? (bearing in mind htey have to cut and transport from woods to sawmill, from sawmill to port, transatlantic, then port to store here). It seems somehow, there would be no way economically this would work - it's not like pellets are a hugely expensive item that can hide transport costs.
Anway, depressing and enlitening maybe.
So why aren't the culprits arrested for Arson?
Link
I live in an area that used to produce a lot of lumber. (Our logging industry was ruined by a corporate raider, but that's another story.)
The logs are going to get cut and hauled to market. The pellets, almost certainly, are made from the waste, the part of the logs that can't be used for lumber.
We used to have a couple of pulp mills which turned our wood waste into paper, but with the decrease in newspapers, etc. that market fell apart.
If demand for pulp is down around the world, I would imagine that the input for pellets is almost free in areas where a lot of wood waste is being produced. Sawmills have to find someplace to send their waste. That could mean that cheap input sourcing could offset shipping price.
It could be that in your area there are adequate other demands (paper, chipboard, etc.) using up the local waste, making local pellets more expensive than imported.
--
As far as green, local would be a lot better....
Congrats, NF! They'll be happy to know you didn't let them down.
Now: if the world was much warmer then, how come Arctic Sea ice wasn't anywhere near as thin as it is now? How come permafrost didn't melt? Why were glaciers everywhere growing and maintaining? How come sea levels stayed pretty much the same? Was it magic?
McIntyre is a fraud, not an idiot. It's the people who listen to him who are the dummies...
Vast stores of carbon in U.S. forest soils could be released by rising global temperatures, according to a study by UC Irvine and other researchers in a recent online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The scientists found that heating soil in Wisconsin and North Carolina woodlands by 10 and 20 degrees increased the release of carbon dioxide by up to eight times. They showed for the first time that most carbon in topsoil is vulnerable to this warming effect.
...
Forest lands, which contain about 104 billion tons of carbon reserves, have been one of the biggest unknowns in climate change predictions. Northeastern woodlands that were once farm fields are currently one of Earth's beneficial carbon sinks, holding nearly 26 billion tons. But climate scientists worry that trees and soils could become sources of greenhouse gas emissions rather than repositories.
Link
This will also lower the water retention ability of soil, creating more runoff and more flooding.
And it will lower the productivity of the soil.
--
Perhaps it's time to change how we fill our grid and vehicles?
Perhaps it's time to change how we fill our grid and vehicles?
Here's a novel idea.. We don't need to change the electrical grid it is already in place. How about instead we build about 40 miles of transmission lines to the grid and power all those electrical cars and homes with these instead of with fossil fuel GHGs???????? Imagine that....
It's all about this quarter's profit.
We've forgotten about longer term profits. And, especially, about longer term costs. Sort of a credit card spend now/worry later mentality.
All of that is according to Climate Central, a research and journalism non-profit that seeks to inform the public about climate and energy. The center looked at data from the National Climatic Data Center's U.S. Historical Climatology Network.
The scientists found that Arizona was the fastest warming state and that much of the warming was concentrated in Southwest and upper Midwest. Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, New Mexico, Utah, Maine, Texas and Massachusetts round out the top 10.
Alabama, Arkansas and Georgia didn't warm at all during the last century.
"The Southwest and North Central and Northeastern states are clearly warming faster than the rest of the country," report author Claudia Tebaldi said in a statement. "As warming continues, future droughts could be hotter and more severe, seasons will be altered, and the risk of wildfires will increase significantly, making summers like 2011 increasingly common."
Link
eta: Look for the cherry picking crew to start posting temperature records for Alabama, Arkansas and Georgia.
"Nope, planet ain't warming. Just look how it's flat in these states...."
BTW Claudia Tebaldi is a statistician.
+1000 Exactly!
I almost believe that there are too few left that have any capability of seeing over the horizon anymore. Sadly, the ones that are capable of "seeing down the road" are the very ones that do not have enough influence towards getting us there.
http://sheilaaliens.net/?p=810
"Young and old residents of the Chinese metropolis of Wuhan were advised to stay indoors on Monday after a thick haze blanketed the city of nine million people, official media said." physorg.com
And the official story is it's due to "straw burning".
"Severe air pollution in several provinces has triggered public outrage and prompted local governments to take action against the traditional burning of straw that has been pinpointed as the "arch-culprit."
Several cities in Hubei Province, including its capital Wuhan, were hit by heavy smoggy weather yesterday.
Figures from the Wuhan Environmental Monitoring Center showed that the PM concentrations quickly rose from 7 am and reached 0.574 micrograms per cubic meter at 2 pm, compared to the standard of 0.150.
The Hubei Provincial Environmental Protection Department released its initial investigation results yesterday afternoon, saying the possibility of industrial pollution being the cause had been eliminated, with the most likely culprit being the burning of straw in neighboring provinces." Read more: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/714341.shtml
Looks more like Saturn's moon Titan atmosphere to me... How good is that for your lungs skeptics?
The air gets very nasty in Thailand when the annual rice field burnings happen. You do not want to be out breathing the air.
Same thing used to happen around Sacramento where a lot of rice is grown. Now farmers flood their rice fields in the winter (migrating waterfowl love that) and plant over the stubble.
Among Chinese adults Gallup surveyed last year, 57 percent believe that protecting the environment should be their country’s priority, even if improving environmental standards slows the pace of economic growth.
Only 21 percent believe that economic growth is more important than environmental protection.
Link
re, #70, disney has 'pulled'/ barred video.
vanwx
I easily see why the people of China view pollution as more of a problem than any lack of economic growth. What good is economic growth when your health suffers from it? Perhaps we will now see if the Chinese Communist Government controls the environmental laws or if business interests have bought out the government concerning controls over their respective businesses. Yes, China has long had harsh rules against Chinese business managers that the government had issues with, but what about foreign business owners? One of the reasons outsourcing to China has been so successful is due to the lax environmental laws there. Will the people of China now be able to gain a say in as to what the environmental laws will be and how they are enforced? .... Probably not.
It's interesting to note that now the fellow who compiled the threats--Simon Hopkinson--seems to be a) downplaying the seriousness of the letters, calling some "funny", and b) claiming that if Jones felt suicidal, it wasn't from the threats he received but rather because of "guilt/shame over his actions".
It's also interesting to note that little Anthony Watts said yesterday that while the letters are vile and disgusting and nobody should have to endure them, they're no different than what he's received from alarmists, and at any rate Jones was still lying. (And some of his predictable and fawning minions immediately began posting comments stating that Jones deserved it, and the letters were
possiblyprobablyvery likelyalmost certainlyabsolutely fake, and besides there weren't that many of them anyway.)IOW, typical denialist blather. And so it goes, and so it goes...
China's leaders, as I understand things, are more engineers than the lawyer/military types who run other countries. I suspect that means they have a mindset of "see problem - fix problem".
Those leaders, while not elected, seem to understand that if they don't keep the general public somewhat happy then they will have to deal with challenges to their control.
We've seen some local examples of industries being required to clean up their waste stream. Based on the majority of Chinese putting environment ahead of rapid economic growth I expect we'll see changes in China.
Don't worry though, folks; The Great Global Cooldown And Impending Ice Age of
1997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 will kick in any second now...Silly denialists.
Greent - here an article you might find very interesting. It's about the manufacturing of wood pellets in the US and shipping them to Europe.
Link
A few selected bits...
If not for the largesse of European utilities required to meet government carbon emissions standards for their coal-burning plants, however, the U.S. pellet export industry would arguably not exist. Such emission standards have yet to reach the federal level here in the U.S.
If not for the largesse of European utilities required to meet government carbon emissions standards for their coal-burning plants, however, the U.S. pellet export industry would arguably not exist. Such emission standards have yet to reach the federal level here in the U.S.
When the wood is brought in it’s roughly 50 percent moisture, says McClure, so to meet its production capacity of 750,000 metric tons of pellets per year, Georgia Biomass needs almost double the amount in unprocessed wood chips or timber. McClure says most of that wood will come from thinning forests that have been planted with 500 to 700 trees per acre.
Lumber that arrives at pellet plants from these sustainable forests is first debarked and chipped. The chips are dried and hammer-milled to a fine, flour-like consistency. It is then pelletized before being shipped to Europe as dry bulk cargo in loads of 30 to 40,000 tons each.
When a log goes into a sawmill, McClure says that as much as half of that log ends up as saw chip residue, which is a readily available resource for wood pellet plants.
Strauss says that conventional white wood pellets have the potential energy density of some 19 gigajoules per metric ton. But torrefied pellets, black pellets baked in ovens to remove their water and sugars, are more energy dense and contain the equivalent of between 21 to 23 gigajoules per metric ton.
Black pellets also have the added advantage of being extremely water resistant. In contrast, conventional pellets tend to turn to sawdust mush when wet. But as yet, black pellets are not being produced on industrial scales. However, Strauss says the transition to a fully black pellet market of what he terms “bio-coal” is likely to happen within the next five years.
In three to five years, industry sources say, European pellet imports from Africa, South America, Russia and Asia are going to be cheaper than those from the American Southeast or Canada.
OK, a lot of selected bits. I found the article pretty interesting.
Sure would like to see someone cranking the numbers to see if it might make sense to remove excess fuel from our fire-threatened forests, turn it into pellets and burn it productively. We might take some more coal offline.
The recovering forests around here are often clogged with dead and dying trees. After harvesting there has been little thinning and dominate trees are taking up the sunlight/water and causing smaller trees to die.
All that dead stuff would eventually decay and feed the larger trees, but if fire gets loose before they have melted away those dead trees create a fire ladder that lets the fire get to the crowns of the more mature trees and kill them.
We might save the cost of fighting large fires + the cost of mining/hauling coal. We would create lots of jobs for people without a lot of marketable skills, thus saving on social programs and probably law enforcement.
Yes, I do agree with you that Chinese citizen complaints will need to be addressed by the government there. How and when they are addressed is another reality. Citizens have pushed for a greater voice and have met severe opposition to this. Tiananmen Square is not from the distant past and the results of the government response has kept such citizen vocalizations much more subdued since then. Still, I do agree with you. A few government leaders will not be able to hold back a swarm of over a billion strong. The government can delay with promises to be kept in the future. I am interested to see how swiftly the Chinese government will react concerning the overall pollution problems in China. I also wonder how much China can curtail its pollution problems before it has a negative impact on foreign investments there. Many companies did not relocate to China simply because of its cheap labor pool. Lax or non enforced environmental laws were also a big factor in the decision of companies relocating manufacturing jobs to China. How will the Chinese government try to find a balance? There is the question waiting to be answered.
China's state media has announced it will send three astronauts to its space station in mid-June. A Long March-2 rocket will lift off from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center with three astronauts on board the Shenzhou-9 spacecraft on the first manned space-flight to China's Tiangong space station. The mission is China's fourth manned space flight. SOURCES: BBC, Xinhua
Watch what happens in the Fram Straight, just above "80N". You can see massive amounts of ice moving out into the Atlantic and disappearing.
The light blue ice is 2 - 2.5 meters thick. The darker colored ice about 3 meters. There's even some ~4 meter red/yellow ice being squeezed out along the top edge of Greenland.
Then you can see the ice withdraw and melt along the northern edges of Europe and Asia. If this keeps up the Eastern Passage will open early this year.
More icebreakers and more ice-hardened tankers are being constructed. Look for shipping to start earlier and end later over the coming years.
Here's the link to the gif page... Link
In the following 20+ years China has move from under developed to (perhaps) the strongest economy in the world. The internet has happened, and while the net is controlled to some extent by the government, information gets out unlike anything possible a couple of decades ago.
I doubt China is as dependent on foreign companies as it once was. They have their own modern factories and hoards of well-trained engineers. They have created their own internal market.
The Chinese form of government has all the advantages (and very significant disadvantages) of a dictatorship. If a handful of leaders decide that a change is due they have the might to make it so. Only a couple of years ago China executed at least a couple of people over tainted milk.
By September, the Hudson Bay ice will be gone, as will most of that in the Eastern Hemisphere. That map is going to be pretty pathetic looking by then.That image can't possibly be right; just two months ago some were declaring a "recovery" weren't they? What is it now? 3 standard deviations off? 4? What manner of sorcery is this!?
To note--NSIDC image is from June 13.
IJIS shows data for today. While one day of data doesn't make a trend, 'century breaks' are considered a big deal on Neven's sea ice site. Century breaks are days when ice extent decreases by more than 100,000 square kilometers in a day.
Between June 13 and June 14 sea ice extent in the Arctic decreased by more than 229,000 square km. I have never seen a drop of more than 200,000 square km in a single day although there may well have been other days like that. The ice extent graph will drop like a rock when the latest data is incorporated tomorrow.
Sad history is being made. But then again, those of us watching this with eyes unhindered by ideological blinders are getting increasingly used to that these days.
Within the last few days I heard a report that the Arctic winter was not as severe as was commonly believed and that the ice formed was not overly thick.
I can't find a link to that report.
Does that ring a bell with anyone? A link possibly?
(Perhaps I heard wrong or it was pulled.)
As I had feared, we may be seeing water skiing events in the Arctic this summer. We all knew this was going to almost be a certainty, in about another 50 years! I dread to see what will happen to the climate should we get a strong and prolonged El Nino. Producing Coconut trees in Norfork, Virginia?
The Economist has an article about the changing Arctic from a more-or-less financial perspective. The article's not that great, but it does indicate that the polar situation is beginning to percolate into greater awareness. (But if you don't wish to be depressed, avoid the commentary section; it's filled with the ungrammatical bleating of WUWTian sheep we've all come to expect.)
Climate Central.org
(interactive map included)
Scientific American Link
I suspect that it will be quite similar to the "lake effect" snow storms we get now around the Great Lakes states. I also think that you are correct and that any severe snow storms will be seen as a cooling of the global climate and this will not be seen for what it actually is. The polar regions will still remain cold and winter will still happen. The difference now will be that winter will have its start over open Arctic waters instead of a more ice covered Arctic. A lot of heat and water vapor will be the start of the northern winters. The sale of snow plows is likely to increase.
How iconic. Texas, on the political front, has long been a "red" state. Texas, on the warming front, remains a red state. "We were red and now we are dead" could become the new state motto.
Texas could get a new state flower. The Bluebonnet could be replaced by the Prickly Pear cactus flower. This would make sense seeing that the Prickly Pear cactus plant is already the state plant. -
Texas could get a new state bird. The Mocking bird could be replaced by a member of the buzzard family -
The Texas Longhorn steer could be replaced as the state's large mammal by the camel. One lump or two? -
A new study provides evidence that climate change may be affecting the northern hemisphere jet stream. As a result of climate change, Arctic autumn temperatures have warmed by as much as 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees F), reducing the temperature gradient between the Arctic and temperate latitudes. In response the jet stream appears to be moving northward and its wind speed slowing. In turn, this may be slowing the westward progression of waves in the jet stream, which cause weather variation along their westward path as they fluctuate north and south.
The slowing of the jet stream, therefore, could cause weather patterns to remain in place for longer, resulting in prolonged heat waves or cold snaps.
Link
Warming the planet is causing climate change. A changing climate is bringing us wilder weather. We've talked so much about warming that the prolonged cold snaps part has been missed.
I suppose we're going to be spending the next few years playing whack-a-mole over winter cold spells. Best get a succinct reply ready.
"A warmer Arctic is slowing jet stream waves leading to prolonged heat waves and cold snaps."
Copy and paste.
Over and over and over...
People talkin 'bout solutions, over and over
'Bout how we need a revolution, over and over
I was talking 'bout ecology, over and over
'Bout how we'll be saved by technology, over and over
I said no, I said hang on a minute now
I set let me outta here
I said no, no, no
The MC5's somehow knew the feeling in 1971.
My grandma used to say "Be careful about frowning like that. Your face might get stuck."
The comments following the article are largely horrendous. I didn't realize that the high quality Economist had so many stupid readers.
Or did the article get listed on a denier-blog as something to spam?
Viewing: 51 - 101
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 — Blog Index