We're going to have to change the calendar . . .

 . . . because plants in the UK are now flowering a full month earlier than before human-caused global heating.

You can find the details of the Cambridge study, which used records from 1793 to 2019 to track the flowering dates of 406 kinds of plants throughout the UK, here.

                                              Spring flowers are showing up a month too soon

Credit: UKgardenpbotos

Hmmm. Could it be that this climate change thing that we've been hearing about is real?

REA 2/3/22

How hot will it get later this century? So hot that we'll need new terms.

 A new study paints a grim climate picture for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). 

As reported in the prestigious, peer-reviewed journal NPJ/Climate and Atmospheric Science, first-of-their-kind regional climate models project prolonged, life-threatening heat waves impacting up to 600 million people in the MENA region if global warming is not brought under control. In a "business-as-usual" scenario, temperatures are projected to soar to 56 degrees Celsius (133 degrees Fahrenheit) and remain at such intolerable levels for days or weeks at a time in the second half of this century. 

We need new terms to categorize such intense, extended and deadly heat events. "Our results for a business-as-usual pathway indicate that especially in the second half of this century unprecedented super- and ultra-extreme heatwaves will emerge," says George Zittis, first author of the new study.

The authors point out that by mid-century, 90 percent of the population of the MENA region are expected to be living in cities. Cities act as "heat islands" that intensify and prolong extreme heat events. That means that a high percentage of the regions projected population of one billion will face such life-threatening conditions almost every year towards the end of the century.

"For the following decades and towards the end of the 21st century, thermal conditions in the region are projected to become particularly harsh as the so-far-unobserved and thus unprecedented "super-extreme" and "ultra-extreme" events are projected to become commonplace," the authors write.

Daily heat wave magnitude averages from 1980s projected through 2100

Credit: Zittis et al./NPJ/Climate and Atmospheric Science

If the world continues on its current business-as-usual path, the Middle East and North Africa will clearly be at risk, not just of increased human mortality, but of disruption of work, agriculture and daily life. Since the most extreme conditions this study foresees have not yet been experienced, how much personal, social, economic and political disruption they will cause remains to be seen. However, like the heat projections, those disruptions are likely to be extreme, super-extreme or ultra-extreme. And, as we know, problems that start in the Middle East do not stay in the Middle East.

If world leaders needed any more motivation to turn the looming climate catastrophe around now, here it is.

-----

REA/4-29-21

TURNING THE CLIMATE CLOCK BACK 3.3 MILLION YEARS

"BY 2025, CO2 LEVELS WILL BE HIGHER THAN THEY'VE BEEN FOR THE LAST 3.3 MILLION YEARS" [Nature Scientific Reports July 10, 2020]

Let's see. What was going on 3.3 million years ago?

--Humans like us were just a gleam in evolution's eye. The most promising potential ancestor around then was Australopithecus, an apelike creature living in southern Africa who may have been the first to use shaped stones to smash open bones for their marrow. 

--Earth wouldn't enter the current geologic epoch, the Holocene, for another 3,288,000 years. It was then in the middle Pliocene. 

--North and South America hadn't yet collided and connected. 

--North America sported two elephant-like species, hyenas, small, three-toed ancestors of modern horses, bone-crushing dogs, giant bears and three species of huge, saber-toothed cats. 

Smilodon populator--one of North America's

Pliocene saber-toothed cats

Credit: Charles Knight/American Museum of Natural History

--Humans wouldn't set foot on the continent for another 3.27 million years.

--Crucially, from our point of view, atmospheric CO2 levels were comparable to today's (somewhere between 381 and 427 parts per million), yet global temperatures were 2 to 3 degrees C (3.6 to 5.4 degrees F) higher than they are now, and sea levels were 25 meters (82 feet) higher. 

Equally crucially, because of those nearly equal CO2 levels, the period tells us what our world may look like all too soon.  "We studied this particular interval in unprecedented detail because it provides great contextual information for our current climate state," says Elwyn de la Vega, researcher at the University of Southampton's School of Ocean and Earth Science, in the UK, and lead author of the Nature Scientific Reports study.

The Southampton research team was able to pin down those ancient CO2 levels by studying the fossilized shells of foraminifera--millimeter-sized sea creatures protected by carbon-rich shells. The ratios of boron isotopes in the shells correlate with atmospheric CO2 levels at the time the shells formed.

Clearly, we're not going to see a return of saber-toothed cats or giant bears. But we, or our children or grandchildren, may well have to deal with a Pliocene climate--much hotter, lacking most of the Northern Hemisphere's ice cover, and with rapidly rising sea levels.

Why aren't we already living in mid-Pliocene conditions? Simply because there hasn't been time for the full impact of the greenhouse gases we've already pumped into the atmosphere to warm the oceans and melt most of Earth's ice. Geochemist Gavin Foster, also at the University of Southampton explains:

... it takes a while for Earth’s climate to fully equilibrate (catch up) to higher CO2 levels and, because of human emissions, CO2 levels are still climbing. Our results give us an idea of what is likely in store once the system has reached equilibrium.

To get a sense of what things will be like when Earth has reached that Pliocene-like equilibrium, picture your favorite coastal city under 80 feet of water. According to recent research, coastal flooding could displace hundreds of millions of people and cost the global economy trillions of dollars by the end of this century if we don't get a grip on climate change now.

Keeling curve--atmospheric CO2 1960-2020

Credit: Scripps Research Insitute

Right now we're at 413 parts per million of atmospheric CO2, and rising, and the curve is getting steeper. We're running as fast as we can towards a very inhospitable past.

--REA

GOING CORONAVIRAL-- A COMMENT ABOUT EXPONENTIAL GROWTH

We humans are pretty good at understanding linear change. It's all around us:

--eat more, gain some weight; eat less, lose some weight
--press on the gas pedal, speed up; press on the brake, slow down
--turn up the heat, feel warmer; turn down the heat, feel cooler
--someone can't hear you, talk louder; someone moves closer, talk more softly
--and thousands of other daily experiences in which a small change produces a small result and a larger change produces a larger result.

However, some events don't behave linearly. There are situations where a small change can quickly produce a big effect. We're living through at least two of them right now--climate change and the Covid-19 pandemic. We're failing miserably in understanding and dealing with both of them.

A sneeze--a few tiny droplets can cause massive disruption

Photo credit: CDC

Let's do a little math--please bear with me:

Step number     Linear growth (n x 2)     Exponential growth (2 to the n) 

         1                        2                                                    2                                       
         2                        4                                                    4                                         
         3                        6                                                    8                                         
         4                        8                                                   16                                       
         5                      10                                                   32                                       
         6                      12                                                   64                                       
         7                      14                                                 128                                       
         8                      16                                                 256                                         
         9                      18                                                 512                                         
       10                      20                                               1024 
       11                      22                                               2048                                     

Let's pretend that these numbers represent two different responses to the Covid-19 virus.

The steps might represent weeks. The first column might represent a situation where the virus is fairly well controlled (e.g. through some combination of social distancing, mask wearing, testing, tracing and isolating people likely to shed the virus). On average one infected person infects approximately one other person, with the result that the number of cases grows linearly. The third column represents exponential growth--where the virus truly is "going viral." All that takes is for one infected person to pass the virus on to more than one new victim.

Notice the enormous and rapidly expanding difference as the weeks tick by. At week three, exponential growth has infected just two more people than in the linear growth model, but at ten weeks the difference is more than 1,000, and one week later, more than 2,000.

So, our first takeaway is that when we're dealing with any situation involving exponential growth, at first it's hard to distinguish from a normal linear situation that we're used to, but sooner or later it takes off explosively.

Now let's examine that phrase "sooner or later."

      Week    Doubling stopped sooner           Doubling stopped later
         1                        2                                                    2                                     
         2                        4                                                    4                                       
         3                        8                                                    8                                       
         4                      16                                                   16                                       
         5                      18                                                   32                                       
         6                      20                                                   64                                       
         7                      22                                                 128                                       
         8                      24                                                 256                                         
         9                      26                                                 258                                         
       10                      28                                                 260 
       11                      30                                                 262
Total Cases:          198                                               1290

What a difference a delay makes.  This might represent two states, one of which sees the exponential handwriting on the wall after just four weeks, institutes effective controls and ends up with 198 cases, while the other delays control measures one month more and ends up with with 6.5 times as many cases. (Or these numbers could equally well represent deaths, in which case that one month delay would have caused over a thousand needless deaths.

Obviously the numbers above are meant to be an illustration; they don't match exactly with the real world. However, you can see this in the real world if you compare the impact of a one-week delay in responding to the pandemic in New York vs. California. Here's a zerospinzone.blogspot post from March 30:

In this comparison of coronavirus cases in New York vs California, you can see what difference even a few days lag in imposing strict stay-at-home orders makes. California--population 39.5 million, first state to impose strict controls: current # of cases 6358, deaths 132. New York--population 19.5 million, delayed a week before imposing controls: current # of cases 60,679, deaths 1063. The number of cases per population in NY is 19 times greater than in California, and the number of deaths per population 17 times greater. What a tragic difference a week's delay makes.

A lot has happened in New York and California in the subsequent three months, with start-and-stop openings and closings in both states. Through all that, however, California has managed to keep a tighter lid on the explosive potential of the coronavirus. As of today, June 28, New York has documented 416,769 cases and 31,483 deaths while Callifornia has had 215,575 cases and just 5,934 deaths. Adjusted for population, late-starting New York has suffered nearly four times as many cases and more than ten times as many deaths as California. Clamping down just one week earlier in California almost certainly saved tens of thousands of lives.

Our second takeaway, then, is that when dealing with the potential for exponential growth, getting control of the rate of growth as early as possible--before the number of cases explodes-- makes a huge difference.

It's pretty clear that we, as a species, aren't very good at dealing with things that have the potential for exponential growth, and so can blast out of control at any time.  We're seeing the results of this globally as we try to put a cap on the coronavirus. Similarly, experts have been warning us for decades that, because of a number of looming tipping points, climate change too has the potential to spin wildly out of control.

However, we don't have a good excuse for continued ignorance; it's not as though the potential for dangerous exponential growth has been a secret. Consider this old proverb, a version of which goes like this:

For want of a nail a horseshoe was lost,
for want of a horseshoe a horse went lame,
for want of a horse a rider never got through,
for want of a rider a message never arrived,
for want of a message an army was never sent,
for want of an army a battle was lost,
for want of a battle a war was lost,
for want of a war a kingdom fell,
and all for want of a nail.

Clearly we've had folk knowledge about exponentially large consequences from a small event for a lot time.

Even more ancient is a story from India about a chess-loving king who promised to reward a visitor with whatever he wanted. The visitor "modestly" asked for one grain of rice on the first square of a chessboard, 2 grains on the second square, 4 on the third, 8 on the fourth, etc. It didn't take the King many squares before he realized he'd taken on an impossible task. Sixty-four doublings would have required some 18,000,000,000,000,000,000 grains of rice, enough to cover all of India a meter deep.

That ancient king learned a striking and costly lesson about exponential growth. It seems as though we--and our current leaders--need to learn it all over again, and quickly. That is, if we don't want our kingdom to fall for want of an adequate response to this microscopic but immensely dangerous virus.

-----

REA

ANIMATED GRAPH OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 OVER THE LAST 800000 YEARS AND INTO THE FUTURE

The animated graph linked to below is well worth watching--several times, slowing it down at the end:

https://mobile.twitter.com/OceansClimateCU/status/1237069561364545537?s=20&utm_source=NSDAY&utm_campaign=19fa2fe1ef-NSDAY_110320&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1254aaab7a-19fa2fe1ef-373908631

Credit for the above goes to Kris Karnauskas, who leads the Oceans and Climate Lab at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

If we follow the steepest two curves, it really will be the end.

This graph credit: Wikimedia Commons

REA

CLIMATE CHANGE "FINGERPRINTS" NOW VISIBLE IN GLOBAL WEATHER EVERY DAY

Talk about thinking outside the box--

For decades now, climate scientists have worked to detect and measure the signal of human-caused climate change over time. They've revealed and warned us about changes in important variables such as atmospheric CO2, sea level and global average temperature; profound changes, but ones that take place over decades.

Climate change deniers, up to and including President Trump, have jumped on the fact that these incremental changes are swamped by much larger local daily and seasonal variability, making it difficult to link climate change to the weather people actually experience--with the fairly recent exception of super-storms or other extreme weather events that would have been extremely unlikely in the absence of global warming.

Now, a team of Swiss and Norweigian researchers has broken the mold. What would they see, they wondered, if they looked at variables such as temperature and humidity across space--the whole Earth--rather than over time. They were prompted to pursue this question by one of Trump's tweets using a major cold spell that hit much of the US to try to ridicule global warming.

"This lead to a lively debate about whether a single day could be informative at all about climate change," says climate scientist Reto Knutti, part of the Swiss-Norwegian research team. "Weather is not climate, yet we are seeing the imprint of climate change now in some single events, e.g. in the frequency of strong heatwaves. But what about the weather on an average day? Could we detect climate change in a single year, a month, a day?"

The answer they found is astonishing. Just by analyzing weather patterns across the globe they were able to detect the fingerprints of climate change on every day's weather since 2012.

Climate scientists can now detect signals of global warming in any day's weather

Image credit: NASA/MODIS

"Global weather is now in uncharted territory," says Knutti. "While locally of course we need a few decades for a signal to emerge from variability, the global information allows us to now detect climate change for any single day since early 2012."

The team used artificial intelligence (AI) to extract indicative patterns from the enormous mass of daily weather data around the globe. They could then test for the probability that the pattern for any given day could have appeared in the absence of climate change.

The daily weather patterns that most powerfully reveal the impact of climate change involve the global distribution of air temperature and humidity. Both variables were more pronounced over oceans than over land masses, and in the tropics compared to higher latitudes.

In retrospect, it may not be surprising that the cumulative heating effect of many decades of climate change is visible in the day-to-day distribution of temperatures across the globe. However, the researchers also found that they could still detect a strong climate change fingerprint in any given day's weather even without looking at temperature--simply from the pattern of atmospheric moisture around the world. "If we include humidity," says Knutti, "we can even detect climate change when we remove the global mean [temperature] signal for every single day, i.e. just by looking at the patterns."

If there was still any legitimate doubt that we humans have changed and are continuing to change the climate and the weather, this new way of charting the relationship between climate and weather should erase it.

Knutti writes, "In the last full IPCC report in 2013 we have shown that humans are the dominant cause of the long-term warming." We now demonstrate that since then we haven't had a single day of 'normal' weather globally. Yesterday was climate change, today is climate change, and tomorrow will be as well. We think this is a powerful message."

We couldn't agree more. The question is, is it powerful enough to get through to the deliberately deaf ears of our leaders?

-----

You can access the Nature Climate Change article describing this research here.

-----

REA

ONE MORE DEGREE COULD TRIGGER A COLLAPSE OF GREENLAND'S ICE SHEET

The latest and best reconstruction of temperatures near Greenland over that last 450,000 years shows that much of Greenland's vast ice sheet could melt from sustained warming of less than one degree. That means that the world risks triggering a devastating 7 meters (23 feet) of sea-level rise before the end of this century.

 Greenland Ice Sheet at Risk

Credit: cake@cake0

Writing in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), researchers at the University of Bergen, Norway, and at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, analyze 450,000 years of sea surface temperatures off the coast of Greenland. They were able to track four interglacial (warm) periods, during one of which Greenland's southern ice sheet completely disappeared. During that 30,000-year-long warm period centered around 400,000 years ago, temperatures were only slightly higher than they are today--within one degree C--and well within the projections of climate models for the end of this century--if we continue on a business-as-usual trajectory.

Comparing the four warm periods it became clear that the amount of warming was not the only factor impacting how much of Greenland's ice melted. The other key was the duration of the warming. Even with temperatures just 0.8 degrees C warmer than today, the longer duration of the warm period centered around 400,000 years ago led to almost complete melting of Greenland's southern ice sheet.

According to the authors, their findings support climate models that find a tipping point somewhere between 0.8 and 3.2 degrees C warmer than today, beyond which melting of Greenland's ice sheet is inevitable even if temperatures go back down. Paleoclimatologist Nil Irvali, at the University of Bergen, explains that the tipping point occurs when melting reduces the altitude of the ice surface to the point where the even-warmer temperatures at the lower elevation guarantees runaway melting. "The elevation effect becomes dominant over time," she says, "melting accelerates, and may even continue even though the climate cools again."

The risk, she clarifies, is not that the Greenland Ice Sheet will melt before the end of the century, but that by the end of the century atmospheric warming caused by a continuation of current policies and emissions could easily trigger irreversible melting and an eventual, and devastating, 7-meter sea-level rise.

Actually, Irvali points out, it's even worse than that, since both atmospheric carbon dioxide and warmer ocean waters have extremely long lifetimes. "It is also important to note that CO2 we put into the atmosphere will have a long lifetime even if we cut emissions, and as more and more heat accumulates in the ocean it commits us to a longer timescale of warming," she says, "So our current activities will impact climate for millennia to come."

The authors conclude, "Notably, the critical temperature threshold for past [Greenland Ice Sheet] decay will likely be surpassed this century. The duration for which this threshold is exceeded will determine Greenland's fate."

To which we must add, and the fate of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions of people worldwide.**

-----

**In case this paleo-historical study seems too theoretical, recent observations by a completely different set of researchers show that Greenland is losing ice 7 times faster than it was two decades ago, in line with the IPCC's worst-case scenario, putting some 400 million people at risk of coastal flooding by 2100.

REA

-----

If you liked the post, please use the links to the right to follow or subscribe for email alerts from zerospinzone.blogspot.com.

RENEWABLES BEAT COAL IN US FOR THE FIRST TIME

Every so often there's a bit of good news about the race to replace fossil fuels with renewables before time runs out for a habitable planet Earth. Today's ray of light is the news that renewable energy capacity--the amount of power that can be generated from solar, wind and water--beat out the combined capacity of all the coal-fired power plants in the US for the first time.

We need more windmills and less CO2!

This milestone appears in the latest Energy Infrastructure Update from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It was a photo finish, with renewable generating capacity now 21.56 percent of the total while coal dropped to 21.55 percent. Not a huge difference, but with renewables rapidly growing and coal shrinking, it's a moment worth noting.

Of course, if we are to maintain a livable climate, we need a lot more of such wins, and soon, and not just in the US, but worldwide.

REMARKABLE 15-YEAR-OLD GRETA THUNBERG SPEAKS TRUTH ABOUT CLIMATE

You may have heard about Greta Thunberg, the 15-year-old Swedish student who made headlines worldwide by skipping school for a month to demand action on climate change by camping out on the steps of the Swedish parliament.

Greta Thunberg and friends

on strike for climate action

Credit: Marc Fermenia

If you haven't heard her remarkable speech at the plenary session of the UN Climate Summit at Katowice, Poland, you need to. Every word rings true, and should make anyone who is not already acting to save the planet get moving now. What an amazing young person--she's like an old-testament prophet in the body of a 15-year-old girl.

You can see her speech here.  Please watch it. Every sentence hits home.

And here's a brief video she made to be played at the Davos meeting of the rich and powerful.

If you need more convincing, you can read more about the importance of her speech at Grist.

And to learn a bit more about this amazing young person, please view her TED talk here. 

And her talk to the British Houses of Parliament: You Did Not Act in Time.

-------

3/14/19: Just before tomorrow's global youth manifestation for climate action, Ms. Thunberg has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. What an amazing young person!

A MUST-READ ARTICLE ABOUT CLIMATE AND OUR FUTURE

A friend alerted me to a superb and extremely sobering article by Bill McKibben in the November 26, 2018 edition of the New Yorker. Entitled "How Extreme Weather is Shrinking the Planet," the piece lays out in detail the depth of the climate crisis we're in, and how we got here with the help of Exxon, the Koch brothers, Rex Tillerson and decades of dithering or deluded politicians. 

McKibben offers a ray of hope, if we the people, worldwide, can come together and fight against disinformation and special interests for our own survival and the survival of the biosphere that supports us.

The future is here--Southern California wildfire

Credit: FEMA

SOMETHING NEW TO WORRY ABOUT--QUASI-RESONANT AMPLIFICATION

Picture a river flowing down from the mountains to the plains. In the high country, where the river's descent is steep and hedged in by canyon walls, it's likely to follow a relatively straight path, basically tracing the shortest route down. Once it gets to the plains, however, there's no big difference between one path and another, and the river will begin to meander.

 Meandering river

Credit: Alana Whitman

Something similar is true for the jet streams, vast rivers of air that circle the globe from west to east, sometimes reaching speeds of 250 miles per hour. Like rivers, jet streams typically meander north and south. The size of those meanders and the speed with which they gradually drift eastward have major impacts on the weather. The UK, for example, was deluged by record floods in 2007 and again in 2012 when the jet stream looped far to the south and then stalled, unleashing extended periods of heavy rains.

Meandering polar jet stream

Credit: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center 

That, in turn, gets us to climate change and quasi-resonant amplification (QRA). 

One of the most dramatic impacts of global warming and climate change is that the far north and south are warming much faster than the mid-latitudes and the tropics, a phenomenon known as polar amplification. What this means is that the temperature difference between the poles and the tropics-- which is what creates and drives the jet streams--is reduced. And like a river crossing a plain, this reduced gradient lets the jet stream meander farther north and south, and also tends to make the individual loops, known as Rossby waves, drift more slowly from west to east.

At the extreme, the meanders in the jet stream can form a stable sequence of exaggerated loops around the planet that can stay in place for weeks or months. This is known as quasi-resonant amplification  (QRA) and its results can be devastating. Warm, sunny days can extend into deadly heat waves, droughts and wildfires; while cool, rainy weather can linger, drenching an unlucky region with unprecedented rains and floods.

Michael Mann, a distinguished professor of atmospheric science and Pennsylvania State University, says that as of 2018 this phenomenon has now passed from the theoretical to the all-too-real and threatening. "It played out in real time on our television screens and newspaper headlines in the form of an unprecedented hemisphere-wide pattern of extreme floods, droughts, heatwaves and wildfires," he says.

Unfortunately, Mann adds, climate models indicate that such QRA-caused weather extremes will grow more frequent and more severe unless we get a handle on global warming. Recent research reinforces the link between reduced Arctic sea ice and the meandering jet stream, along with equally dire predictions. We can hope that humanity (and the politicians and corporations who hold the reins) will get their act together. In the meantime, however, we can all expect more QRAs and the devastating weather extremes they bring coming to a region near us.

-----

You can read an earlier post on this subject here.

For more detail on arctic warming and its impacts on our weather click here.

And for a new study that shows that these destructive "blocking events" will cover greater areas as the world heats up, navigate to this URL.

(As-yet unpublished research shows that these stalled atmospheric waves have the potential to cut crop production across much of the northern hemisphere.)

-----

If you liked this post, please consider signing up to follow or receive email alerts from zerospinzone.blogspot.com.

-----

US AT ESPECIALLY HIGH RISK FROM UNCHECKED CARBON EMISSIONS

How much economic damage does a ton of carbon pumped into the atmosphere really do? That's the question an international team of climate scientists and economists set out to answer on a country-by-country basis. While previous studies have suggested that poor countries are more vulnerable to climate change, these new results reveal the opposite--a large and complex economy like that of the US magnifies the impacts of a destabilized climate. It turns out that the US is especially vulnerable.

Some of the most obvious impacts to the US of a changing climate 

Credit: Union of Concerned Scientists/NOAA

"It makes a lot of sense because the larger your economy is, the more you have to lose," says Kate Ricke, the study's lead author of the recent Nature Climate Change article. "Still, it's surprising just how consistently the U.S. is one of the biggest losers, even when compared to other large economies." 

Other countries who will take major hits due to climate change include India, China and Saudi Arabia.

Ricke and her colleagues estimate that current levels of carbon emissions are already costing the US economy around $250 billion per year. That's nearly $2000 per US household. Even more worrisome, they point out, climate change doesn't just hit us on a year-by-year basis, it's likely to take an increasing  chunk out of America's economic rate of growth. Like a ballooning interest rate on a mortgage, the costs don't just add up, they multiply.

When the researchers take this cumulative economic erosion into account, their estimates of the long-term impact of unchecked global warming and resulting climate change are up to ten times greater than current mainstream estimates, for example those of the US government.

The authors emphasize that these higher estimates of the economic costs of "business as usual" make it clear that it's in the selfish best interest of countries like the US with highly developed economies to take steps--such as a carbon tax--that would actually match the real-world costs and help rein in global warming and climate destabilization.

In an invited commentary,  Frances Moore, an environmental economist at the University of California, Davis, writes: 

"In other words, based on just their own self-interest, these countries should be acting unilaterally to dramatically cut GHG emissions. The fact that we do not see this yet suggests that damages are overestimated or costs are underestimated, that countries have not yet recognized the risk posed by climate change, or that sub-national political constituencies have been able to effectively block ambitious mitigation policies that would otherwise be in their national interest."

To those obstructionist political constituencies including, it appears, the entire Republican Party and our current president, this should be a clarion call to do what Kevin Conrad, representing Papua New Guinea, told the United States delegation to the Bali climate conference in 2008--"lead, follow, or get out of the way."

CALIFORNIA POWERS AHEAD IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE

We need all the good news we can find these days, and California has just handed us a climate-change bouquet.

On August 28, 2018, the legislature passed a bill that requires 100 percent carbon-free electricity in the state by 2045. This massive change in the way power is produced in or imported to California will keep 70 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from being spewed into the atmosphere every year, equivalent to taking 12 million cars off the road.

California Wind Farm
a rapidly growing source of clean power

Credit: Creative Commons Zero; Max Pixel

If Governor Brown signs the bill into law, as expected, California will become the largest economy in the world to commit to 100% carbon neutral electricity before mid-century. (Yes! Governor Brown signed the bill into law on September 10, 2018).

Of course, much more than this is needed for the world to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and keep global temperatures no more than 1.5 or at most 2.0 degrees C (2.7/3.6 degrees F) above pre-industrial levels. Still, it's a giant step in the right direction, and one that we hope many more states, cities, countries, companies and industries will follow--and the sooner the better.

----------

You can find the text of California Senate Bill 100 here.

SCIENTISTS CAN NOW LINK WEATHER EXTREMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE

Climatologists have traditionally been leery of linking a specific event--an extended drought, an exceptional run of hurricanes, massive flooding--to climate change. The most they could be coaxed to say was something along the lines that climate change might have increased the odds of the extreme event, often with a comparison to rolling loaded dice or to an athlete on steroids.

Recently, however, some researchers have started to be more specific. For example, Frederika Otto, a climate scientist at Oxford University, and her colleagues recently reported that South Africa's three-year mega-drought, during which Cape Town came nerve-wrackingly close to running out of water, was demonstrably three times as likely as it would have been without human-caused climate change.

This new capability goes beyond just pinning down the increased odds of an extreme event. In three cases recently, researchers have felt confident enough to say that certain events simply could not have happened without human climate forcing. These included devastating heatwaves in Asia in 2016, the global heat record set the same year, and shockingly high sea temperatures in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea between 2014 and 2016. 

A review of 170 similar attribution studies between 2004 and 2018 found that two-thirds of the extreme weather events studied were more likely or more intense because of human caused climate forcing.

 South Africa's Theewaterskloof Reservoir, nearly empty on March 11, 2018

Credit: Zaian

So the question is, what's changed? Why are climate scientists now able to make such specific attributions of the impacts of human-caused climate change?

In principle, the answer is remarkably simple. Researchers use multiple state-of-the-art computerized climate models to run thousands of simulations with slightly different initial conditions. Some of the simulations run with current levels of greenhouse gas levels while others use pre-industrial levels. The researchers can then see how many times a comparable event shows up in each scenario. A drought as long and intense as the one that drained Cape Town's reservoirs to the brink of catastrophe happened three times more often under current atmospheric greenhouse gas levels than in models using pre-industrial levels.

In practice, it's a bit more challenging. The multiple computer simulations that are needed are costly and need a lot of time even on the fastest supercomputers. Otto and her colleagues got around this by tapping into weather@home, a network of thousands of volunteers who offer up time on their computer to help perform these massive calculations. In addition, current climate models are not fine-grained enough to model smaller events, such as a crop-destroying hailstorm or an outburst of tornadoes.

Still, scientists now have what it takes to specify to what extent many extreme events, such as a drought, massive flooding or a killer heat wave, can reliably be attributed to human-caused climate change. We can expect much more frequent, accurate and meaningful reports of this kind in the near future.

These attribution studies are not likely to convince dyed-in-the-wool climate change deniers, but they are already proving helpful to planners at all levels. For example, Helen Davies, with the Western Cape's Department of Economic Development and Tourism, now knows that the devastating drought was not a once-in-a-lifetime event. "This is an incredibly strong message which we cannot afford to ignore. We may need to work on a radically new approach to water management."

Otto hopes that this approach will soon be fast and accurate enough to be linked to extreme weather events in real time. Germany may become one of the first countries to do this on a regular basis. 'It’s part of our mission to illuminate the links between climate and weather,” says Paul Becker, Vice President of the German Weather Agency. “There is demand for that information, there is science to provide it, and we are happy to spread it.”

One example of real-time attribution is the assessment by scientists at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory that Hurricane Florence is 50 miles wider and will inundate the Atlantic Coast with 50 percent more rain than a comparable hurricane before human-caused climate change.

And a new study using the supercomputers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory was able to detail the additional rainfall provoked by global warming in 15 hurricanes that took place in the last ten years, and predict even more rainfall and more intense winds if warming continues.

Let's hope that the entrenched climate change denial on the part of the current US president and congress does not keep this important emerging science from being used here at home.

---------------

The Nature article from which most of this information comes can be found here.

The article summarizing 170 different studies, including a useful interactive map, can be found at this URL.

------------

If you enjoyed this post, please sign up to follow or to receive email alerts from zerospinzone.

WILL CLIMATE-CHANGE DENIERS LEARN FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE?

Having followed and written about climate change and the science behind it for decades, I've also had to think a lot about climate-change denial. I've come to realize, ruefully, that science, starting with the most basic physics and including the most powerful supercomputer based climate models, has failed to convince many people who, for one reason or another, are wedded to climate-change denial. Neither have appeals to the health and safety of future generations, nor to the plight of the increasing millions of people whose lives are currently being disrupted by climate change (many of whom become the refugees and migrants whom many climate-change deniers fear).

 More of western US forests are burning every year

Credit: INICIWEB

Through all that I've clung to the idea that when climate change comes home, as it inevitably will, when residents of Florida find their homes flooded because of rising sea levels, when Midwest corn farmers lose ten percent of their crop to extreme heat, when Texas see-saws between drought and floods, or when, as happened to my home town of Santa Rosa, California last year, wildfire sweeps through like a blowtorch, it can no longer be denied. Surely, I've thought, first-hand, life-changing personal experience will break through those layers of denial.

But I'm starting to realize that my faith in personal experience to slap people awake, like my earlier faith in the persuasive effect of science and empathy, is simply naive.

What brought this home to me was an article in the Guardian based on interviews with people who have been impacted by the deadly Northern California Carr fire, which happened to hit a staunchly conservative, Republican, Trump-supporting and climate-change-denying area. The Guardian reporter had no trouble finding people, from politicians to men and women on the street, whose ideas were unchanged even in the midst of the smoke and embers of this deadly fire. "It's bull," said one respondent. And even the one respondent who accepted that climate change was real clung to the meme that we humans are too puny to deal with it, leaving how to fix the problem in the hands of "the good Lord."

There's more evidence in a Guardian story speaking to residents of North Carolina in the aftermath of Hurricane Florence, which climate scientists tell us was 50 miles wider and dropped 50 percent more rain than it would have under pre-industrial conditions. Once again, the reporter found plenty of people still in full climate-change-denial mode.

Scholars who study the history of science often point out that for a new paradigm such as plate tectonics or quantum dynamics to replace an older set of ideas, the old guard simply have to be replaced by a new generation. If scientists, who after all are committed to experiment, hard data and putting every idea to the test, are unwilling or unable to let go of outmoded ways of thinking, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if everyday people also refuse to learn, even if the lesson is right in front of their eyes.

 Perhaps young people will see more clearly than their elders

Credit: TAKVER

There's still room for hope, if younger generations realize that climate change is real, dangerous, and, can only be dealt with through concerted action. Perhaps Greta Thunberg can be the role model. She's a 15-year-old Swedish girl who is staying out of school and sitting in front of the Swedish Parliament to bring the urgency of the climate crisis home to her elders. Given the feeble steps we've managed to take to date, young people like her may be our last, best hope.

REA
-------------

Here's a related story involving people who have become committed to the idea that vaccination is some kind of dangerous, evil-minded plot. This couple almost lost their six-year-old son to tetanus, a terrible and potentially deadly disease to which most of us are immune because we've been inoculated against it. Doctors were able to save the boy's life, but only through radical interventions and weeks of intensive care, which racked up a bill of over $800,000. Despite this horrifying experience, the parents refused further vaccinations. It used to be said that there's no force on Earth more powerful than an idea whose time has come. Maybe we need to modify that to reflect that, for many people, there's no force on Earth more powerful than an idea that perfectly matches their preconceived view of the world.

-----

If you enjoyed this post, please sign up to follow or receive email alerts from zerospinzone.

-----

MOUNTAINTOP COAL MINING FROM SPACE

In case you believe or argue that we humans are too puny and insignificant to change the Earth--a position sometimes advocated by those who find it congenial for one reason or another to deny the reality of  human-caused climate disruption--please take a look at this video. In 30 seconds you can see the impact of 30 years of mountaintop coal mining over a 10,000-square-mile chunk of Appalachia. See for yourself:

Click here for video

Credit: Christian Thomas, Sky Truth

REA

WELCOME ABOARD THE TITANIC

I'm not sure which of Trump's never-ending stream of tweets, fiats, provocations, sadistic put-downs and flip-flopping decisions finally gave me that unmistakable sinking feeling. But I think it was the announcement in his National Security Speech of December 18, that he is cutting climate change out of America's national security strategy. This marks a major shift away from the Obama administration's security strategy, which recognized climate change as one of the major risks facing the nation and the world, and put international cooperation to minimize that threat high on the national security to-do list. As Trump said in his speech, “We are charting a new and very different course.”

 "Full speed ahead"--The RMS Titanic--the greatest ship of its day
Credit:  F.G.O. Stuart/Wikimedia Commons

It's been clear for a long time that climate-change denial has been the price of admission to the current Republican Party regardless of the real-world consequences. A saving grace, however, has been that the US Department of Defense and the intelligence agencies responsible for the security of the nation have generally resisted this politically convenient untruth and have made plans and deployed resources in response to such “risk or threat multipliers” as “livelihood devastation, state fragility, human displacement, and mass death,” not to mention extreme weather, coastal flooding, environmental degradation, threats to infrastructure, forced migration, and what James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence characterized as “unpredictable instability”caused by climate change.

Now, thanks to Trump, and as reflected in the accompanying 55-page document, National Security Strategy of the United States of America, by choice and design, climate change and its impacts are not to be found. Instead, there's a lot of focus on accelerated economic growth, bigger and better armaments, “fairer” trade and “energy dominance,” all of which, in the absence of a recognition of climate change and environmental degradation and destabilization, will only increase the threats and impacts we will be encountering.

This stance is all too reminiscent of the first (and last) voyage of the RMS Titanic, the greatest ship of its day, carrying the cream of international society as well as hundreds of ordinary people, and believed at the time to be unsinkable. Despite warnings from other ships about sea ice, Captain Edward Smith ordered the Titanic to steam full speed ahead through the north Atlantic night.

Everyone knows the result—nature in the form of an iceberg proved mightier than the great ship; the "unsinkable" vessel sank at 5:18 in the morning of April 15, 1912, and 1500 lives were lost, including that of Captain Smith himself. The Titanic, broken in two, is now slowly disintegrating 12,415 feet beneath the Atlantic.

The bow of the Titanic, in the depths of the North Atlantic
Credit: NOAA/ University of Rhode Island

Like the 2,224 souls aboard the Titanic on that ill-starred night, we are now shoveling on the coal and steaming full speed ahead across a treacherous sea with our captain and crew willfully blind to one of the gravest risks we face. That's making it a bit hard for me to just sit back and enjoy the glittering company, the fine food and drink, and theband's lovely music. I can't get the image of the dark, icy waters just ahead out of my mind.

---

If you enjoyed this post, please sign up to follow or receive email alerts from zerospinzone.blogspot.com.