How Bad Is Global Warming?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:15 pm

In addition to the plethora of new stories about the papal encyclical on climate change, here's some new data:

Nasa data shows the world is running out of water

Image

Scientists had long suspected humans were taxing underground water supplies
Todd C. Frankel

Wednesday 17 June 2015

The world’s largest underground aquifers – a source of fresh water for hundreds of millions of people — are being depleted at alarming rates, according to new NASA satellite data that provides the most detailed picture yet of vital water reserves hidden under the Earth’s surface.
ADVERTISEMENT

Twenty-one of the world’s 37 largest aquifers — in locations from India and China to the United States and France — have passed their sustainability tipping points, meaning more water was removed than replaced during the decade-long study period, researchers announced Tuesday. Thirteen aquifers declined at rates that put them into the most troubled category. The researchers said this indicated a long-term problem that’s likely to worsen as reliance on aquifers grows.

Scientists had long suspected that humans were taxing the world’s underground water supply, but the NASA data was the first detailed assessment to demonstrate that major aquifers were indeed struggling to keep pace with demands from agriculture, growing populations, and industries such as mining.

Satellite system flags stressed aquifers

More than half of Earth's 37 largest aquifers are being depleted, according to gravitational data from the GRACE satellite system.

Image

“The situation is quite critical,” said Jay Famiglietti, senior water scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California and principal investigator of the University of California Irvine-led studies.

Underground aquifers supply 35 percent of the water used by humans worldwide. Demand is even greater in times of drought. Rain-starved California is currently tapping aquifers for 60 percent of its water use as its rivers and above-ground reservoirs dry up, a steep increase from the usual 40 percent. Some expect water from aquifers will account for virtually every drop of the state’s fresh water supply by year end.

The aquifers under the most stress are in poor, densely populated regions, such as northwest India, Pakistan and North Africa, where alternatives are limited and water shortages could quickly lead to instability.

The researchers used NASA’s GRACE satellites to take precise measurements of the world’s groundwater aquifers. The satellites detected subtle changes in the Earth’s gravitational pull, noting where the heavier weight of water exerted a greater pull on the orbiting spacecraft. Slight changes in aquifer water levels were charted over a decade, from 2003 to 2013.

“This has really been our first chance to see how these large reservoirs change over time,” said Gordon Grant, a research hydrologist at Oregon State University, who was not involved in the studies.

But the NASA satellites could not measure the total capacity of the aquifers. The size of these tucked-away water supplies remains something of a mystery. Still, the satellite data indicated that some aquifers may be much smaller than previously believed, and most estimates of aquifer reserves have “uncertainty ranges across orders of magnitude,” according to the research.

Aquifers can take thousands of years to fill up and only slowly recharge with water from snowmelt and rains. Now, as drilling for water has taken off across the globe, the hidden water reservoirs are being stressed.

“The water table is dropping all over the world,” Famiglietti said. “There’s not an infinite supply of water.”

The health of the world’s aquifers varied widely, mostly dependent on how they were used. In Australia, for example, the Canning Basin in the country’s western end had the third-highest rate of depletion in the world. But the Great Artesian Basin to the east was among the healthiest.

Image

The difference, the studies found, is likely attributable to heavy gold and iron ore mining and oil and gas exploration near the Canning Basin. Those are water-intensive activities.

The world’s most stressed aquifer — defined as suffering rapid depletion with little or no sign of recharging — was the Arabian Aquifer, a water source used by more than 60 million people. That was followed by the Indus Basin in India and Pakistan, then the Murzuk-Djado Basin in Libya and Niger.

California's Central Valley Aquifer was the most troubled in the United States. It is being drained to irrigate farm fields, where drought has led to an explosion in the number of water wells being drilled. California only last year passed its first extensive groundwater regulations. But the new law could take two decades to take full effect.
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: Gone baby gone
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby 82_28 » Sat Jun 20, 2015 8:23 am

My brother just packed up his family (lives in PHX and commutes to LV) to spend a few days in Flagstaff. He described it as a "thermal hell." I don't see it getting better anytime soon. He said when he left the temp was 119. Um, OK, won't be going to visit you anytime soon. Sorry, bro.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sat Jun 20, 2015 2:36 pm

After reading this Op Ed this morning in the NY Times, I'll have more to share about his wrong-minded commentary and the Pope's encyclical message, which I've not yet finished reading, but for now...

Let's recap:

This tiny sphere is all the world's water:

Image

"The sphere includes all the water in the oceans, ice caps, lakes, and rivers, as well as groundwater, atmospheric water, and even the water in you, your dog, and your tomato plant."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/05/14/this-tiny-sphere-is-all-the-worlds-water/

http://water.usgs.gov/edu/gallery/global-water-volume.html

And This very tiny globe (170 mi. dia.) is all the world's water “we can use"

Image

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/05/18/and-this-tiny-sphere-is-all-the-worlds-water-that-we-can-use/

All our world's water (left, green) and our finite atmosphere (right, pink):

Image

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/new-ways-to-gauge-the-finite-atmosphere/?_r=0

Think about it. Do something about it.
Make a friggin phone call.


*All Earth's water, liquid fresh water, and water in lakes and rivers

Image

*Spheres showing:
(1) All water (sphere over western U.S., 860 miles in diameter)
(2) Fresh liquid water in the ground, lakes, swamps, and rivers (sphere over Kentucky, 169.5 miles
(3) [b]Fresh-water lakes and rivers
(sphere over Georgia, 34.9 miles in diameter).
Credit: Howard Perlman, USGS; globe illustration by Jack Cook, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (©); Adam Nieman.

http://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby NeonLX » Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:58 pm

I walked over to the pharmacy a few minutes ago to get some non-recreational drugs. As I was walking along the street clogged with lunchtime traffic, I thunk what it would be like to be without petroleum. Well, for one thing, the plastic bottles my drugs came in wouldn't be, well...plastic. The drugs themselves might not even exist. And all of these vehicles with one person apiece plying the streets...hmmm...

Yeah, it's related to water's disappearance. Sort of. Big Ag relies heavily on petroleum AND water, and that's how most of us eats. Gotta truck the food from wherever to wherever for us to nab it at the grocery stores. And bring it home in plastic containers and bags, in our private automobile.

Gee whillikers.
America is a fucked society because there is no room for essential human dignity. Its all about what you have, not who you are.--Joe Hillshoist
User avatar
NeonLX
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Enemy Occupied Territory
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:08 pm

^^^^ My God, man! You are in enemy territory!

Retreat!
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby 82_28 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:46 pm

That's why I think this "banning" of plastic bags is stupid. I go to the store (walk) and can no longer carry anything I buy in a plastic bag and go with paper. Yet everything in the contents of what I bought is packaged in plastic of some sort. My computers, printer, TV etc is basically all plastic. Why ban only plastic shopping bags? Look around yourself. It's all plastic. Literally, where would we be as a society without plastic? Definitely not chatting here about it because the conversation could not exist.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Mon Jun 22, 2015 3:46 pm

We have some composting bags that feel like very soft plastic but are, of course, biodegradable. The alternatives are already available. Maybe at the moment they're too expensive; I just don't know.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Mon Jun 22, 2015 4:14 pm

Arctic Sea Ice Area Drops 340,000 Square Kilometers in Just One Day

Sea ice researchers like to talk a lot about what they call ‘Century Drops.’ Days when Arctic sea ice area or extent values fall more than 100,000 square kilometers. In the past, daily Century Drops were relatively rare — with steepest rates of loss occurring during late June through early August and featuring, perhaps, a handful of days in which 24 hour losses exceeded 100,000 square kilometers. But the record melt years of 2007 and 2012 showed a proliferation of daily drops that exceeded the 100,000 square kilometers daily threshold.

Well, a couple of days ago a three Century Drop showed up in the Cyrosphere Today measure. And it may just be something we’ve never seen before (UPDATE: actually the last time was 2008, see Neven’s comment below). At the least, it’s an event that’s pretty amazingly rare — or it should be, without the heat added to the Arctic by human fossil fuel emissions.

On Tuesday evening, the Cryosphere Today site showed Arctic sea ice at about 8,986,000 square kilometers. The next day the measure stood at about 8,646,000 square kilometers. That’s an extraordinary loss of 340,000 square kilometers in just one day.

Image
(Cryosphere Today sea ice graph shows that losses basically went vertical on Tuesday, June 16. Image source: Cryosphere Today.)

340,000 square kilometers gone in a single 24 hour period. That’s an area of sea ice the size of the state of New Mexico gone in a single day. In the above graph, you can see the drop as the vertical turn in the yellow line denoting 2015.

The massive single day drop temporarily brought sea ice area in the Cryosphere Today sea ice area chart into the range of second lowest on record for the date. Area losses of around 70,000 square kilometers for Wednesday resulted in a retreat to around 4th lowest on record. But any period in which drops of this size become frequent would easily transport the measure into new record low territory.

Image

(LANCE MODIS showing the tell-tale blue of melt ponds all over the Arctic Ocean and most concentrated in edge zone regions. Proliferation of melt ponds during early season, especially when combined with the impact of human caused global warming, can increase risk for new record lows by end season.)

The cause of such a large single day drop is likely due to a combination of factors. Lately, storms have been more prevalent in the Arctic Ocean proper and such storms have a tendency to spread the ice out more, opening gaps in the ice called polynyas which tends to push the sea ice area measure lower. In addition, there is melt pressure now in Baffin Bay, Hudson Bay, the Kara Sea, the Laptev Sea, the Beaufort Sea, the Chukchi Sea, The East Siberian Sea, the Canadian Archipelago waters, and in the Barents border region. This basically composes the entire border zone of the Arctic sea ice.

Finally, the NASA MODIS satellite composite for recent days has shown a marked shift toward a light blue coloration for the entire Arctic Ocean zone and especially for the border zones. Such a shift is indicative of a proliferation of melt ponds. Major snow cover losses over sea ice during the past two weeks have removed insulation to the sea ice pack and probably aided in the formation of these melt ponds. Melt ponds are a strong indicator for sea ice health throughout the melt season — so a proliferation of melt ponds at this time may be a sign of sea ice melt vulnerability (see more over at Neven’s Arctic Sea Ice blog where they do a bang-up job tracking seasonal melt ponds and their potential impacts).

Though a three Century drop occurred, melt overall still has some catching up to do to make 2012 levels. So though this massive daily drop occurred, we are not yet in the red zone for sea ice area. Sea ice extent measures, on the other hand, remain in the range of second to third lowest on record and are still very close to all time record low levels. So this particular melt season is certainly one to still keep watching.

Links:

Cryosphere Today

LANCE MODIS

The Arctic Sea Ice Blog

Hat Tip to Neven
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: Gone baby gone
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Jun 22, 2015 4:57 pm

82_28 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:46 pm wrote:That's why I think this "banning" of plastic bags is stupid. I go to the store (walk) and can no longer carry anything I buy in a plastic bag and go with paper. Yet everything in the contents of what I bought is packaged in plastic of some sort. My computers, printer, TV etc is basically all plastic. Why ban only plastic shopping bags? Look around yourself. It's all plastic. Literally, where would we be as a society without plastic? Definitely not chatting here about it because the conversation could not exist.


Plastic bags are a little more ubiquitous and prevalent than other common forms of packaging. There are over 1 trillion plastic bags used every year. It's almost 4 million tons of plastic. In America alone, 100 billion are thrown away (not reused or recycled) every year, and a vast majority finds their way into the oceanic trash gyres where they break down into tiny pieces over up to 500 years.

Few environmental phenomena carry statistics like plastic bags.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Mon Jun 22, 2015 5:42 pm

82_28 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:46 pm wrote:That's why I think this "banning" of plastic bags is stupid. I go to the store (walk) and can no longer carry anything I buy in a plastic bag and go with paper. Yet everything in the contents of what I bought is packaged in plastic of some sort. My computers, printer, TV etc is basically all plastic. Why ban only plastic shopping bags? Look around yourself. It's all plastic. Literally, where would we be as a society without plastic? Definitely not chatting here about it because the conversation could not exist.


I kind of feel the same way; this was the subject of a blog post I wrote last year. I feel it's just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It may feel good, productive even, but it's not going to reduce the carbon ppm in the atmosphere. I think only revolutionary action at this point will accomplish that.
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: Gone baby gone
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Jun 22, 2015 5:47 pm

82_28 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:46 pm wrote:That's why I think this "banning" of plastic bags is stupid. I go to the store (walk) and can no longer carry anything I buy in a plastic bag and go with paper. Yet everything in the contents of what I bought is packaged in plastic of some sort. My computers, printer, TV etc is basically all plastic. Why ban only plastic shopping bags? Look around yourself. It's all plastic. Literally, where would we be as a society without plastic? Definitely not chatting here about it because the conversation could not exist.


Far from stupid, 82. What was stupid was letting the American Chemistry Council's Plastic Division marketing flood the world with their forever problematic polymers. As far as I know, stores where bans have been enacted offer strong, durable, washable canvas bags. Spend a few bucks to buy one and do yourself and the world a favor.

You will also find this type bag being offered for free by environmental and conservation organizations when making a donation. I've gotten two this way, one from the Nature Conservancy and one from United Tenants of Albany.

Locally, we've not been able to overcome the American Chemistry Council's Plastic Division lobbying efforts opposing legislation seeking to tax the bags (10 cents had been suggested) after a proposal for an outright ban was quashed years ago. So we still have these awful things blowing around everywhere, eventually being caught by trees, bushes, ponds, plastic bags are completely useless for carrying anything with sharp or pointed edges.

But we do have recycling! although it's also inefficient and creates and adds its own problems to the overall plastic bag issue. Most still escape into nature. Our legislation included recycling plastic wrap and films.

We succeeded in seeing styrofoam "To Go" packaging disappear from our county which and be replaced with truly compostable products, just this past year.

The industry's organization spent $5 million to fight Seattle's proposal and still lost. Thank you Seattle!

Pele'sDaughter » Mon Jun 22, 2015 3:46 pm wrote:We have some composting bags that feel like very soft plastic but are, of course, biodegradable. The alternatives are already available. Maybe at the moment they're too expensive; I just don't know.


There is no such thing as compostable plastics. It is a marketing ploy to keep selling unnecessary and problematic polymers.

(Oh! be cautious when purchasing compost for your gardens, as many brands now being bagged and sold are blended or even 100% treated human waste processed from waste treatment facility sludge.)
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Luther Blissett » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:58 am

Risk of Extreme Weather From Climate Change to Rise Over Next Century, Report Says
By SABRINA TAVERNISE JUNE 22, 2015

WASHINGTON — More people will be exposed to floods, droughts, heat waves and other extreme weather associated with climate change over the next century than previously thought, according to a new report in the British medical journal The Lancet.

The report, published online Monday, analyzes the health effects of recent episodes of severe weather that scientists have linked to climate change. It provides estimates of the number of people who are likely to experience the effects of climate change in coming decades, based on projections of population and demographic changes.

The report estimates that the exposure of people to extreme rainfall will more than quadruple and the exposure of people to drought will triple compared to the 1990s. In the same time span, the exposure of the older people to heat waves is expected to go up by a factor of 12, according to Peter Cox, one of the authors, who is a professor of climate-system dynamics at the University of Exeter in Britain.

Climate projections typically are expressed as averages over large areas, including vast expanses, like oceans, where people do not live. The report calculates the risk to people by overlaying areas of the highest risk for climate events with expected human population increases. It also takes into account aging populations — for example, heat waves pose a greater health risk to old people.

The report is part of a series of efforts to analyze how climate change might affect human health. Other major climate reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a global document, and the National Climate Assessment in the United States, have addressed the issue. But Professor Cox said the new report was the first large-scale effort to quantify the effects that different types of extreme weather would have on people.

“We are saying, let’s look at climate change from the perspective of what people are going to experience, rather than as averages across the globe,” he said. “We have to move away from thinking of this as a problem in atmospheric physics. It is a problem for people.”

The Lancet first convened scientists on the topic in 2009, and produced a report that declared climate change was “the biggest global health threat of the 21st century.” Monday’s report notes that global carbon emission rates have risen above the worst-case scenarios used in 2009, and that in the absence of any major international agreement on cutting those rates, projections of mortality and illness and other effects, like famine, have worsened.

“Everything that was predicted in 2009 is already happening,” said Nick Watts, a public health expert at the Institute for Global Health at University College London, who led the team of more than 40 scientists from Europe, Africa and China that produced the report. “Now we need to take a further step forward. The science has substantially moved on.”

For years, climate change was presented in terms of natural habitats and the environment, but more recently, experts have been looking at how it might change life on earth for people. Scientists and some governments are trying to frame the dangers of climate change in health terms in order to persuade people that the topic is urgent, not simply a distant matter for scientists. Governments around the world are preparing for a United Nations summit meeting on climate change in Paris in December to discuss new policies to limit greenhouse-gas emissions.

The report measures the increase over time in “exposure events,” which it defines as the number of times people experience any given extreme weather event.

By the end of the century, the report estimates, the exposure to heat waves each year for older people around the world is expected to be around 3 billion more cases than in 1990. The number of times people of all ages are exposed to drought would increase by more than a billion a year. The rise in exposures to extreme rain would be around 2 billion a year by the end of the century, in part because populations are growing.

Even without climate change, the health problems that come along with economic development are significant, the authors note. About 1.2 million people died from illnesses related to air pollution in China in 2010, the report said.

Most broad climate reports do not go further than explaining the science, but much of the Lancet report is dedicated to policy prescriptions to slow or stop climate change and mute its effects on health. It notes that using fewer fossil fuels “is no longer primarily a technical or economic question — it is now a political one,” and urges governments to enact changes that would accomplish that.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby NeonLX » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:15 am

Oh, big deal. The end of the century. That's, like, 85 years off.

Whatev.

Now, if you were talking this August or sum'p'm, I might sit up and take notice.
America is a fucked society because there is no room for essential human dignity. Its all about what you have, not who you are.--Joe Hillshoist
User avatar
NeonLX
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Enemy Occupied Territory
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Luther Blissett » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:20 am

I've been considering starting a project with which I get people to tell stories of how their lives are affected by climate change - refugees of the Syrian Civil War, folks who have lost people in the current Indian heat wave, people for whom the Sahara encroaches on their livelihoods, people who can no longer afford water in California. An engineer friend who works at ExxonMobil believes that deaths from climate change will max out at 10,000, and doesn't believe me that far more have already died as a result. I want to make something that humanizes the current suffering.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How Bad Is Global Warming?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:54 am

Very wise to have a place where victims can simply share their stories, their travails. It's most important for preserving bits of history otherwise lost. Good luck.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 184 guests