PDA

View Full Version : Couple More Climate Change News.


mattsmith48
July 28th, 2017, 11:15 AM
The first one is about the science use in the Paris agreement being off and we are in a much bigger trouble we thought. The second article is about yet another record being much worst than what scientist expected.

I just check this is the 6th and 7th climate change related news I post on here this year, 9th and 10th if you count the Elon Musk converting the US to solar power, and France and the UK gasoline cars bans. Just to save time people who say this is not the most important issue just tell me how much more do you need.

The temperature baseline used in the Paris climate agreement may have discounted an entire century's worth of human-caused global warming, a new study has found.

Countries in the Paris climate agreement set a target of keeping warming below 2 degrees Celsius by curbing carbon emissions compared to their preindustrial levels. But a new study shows that the preindustrial level used in the agreement, based on temperature records from the late 19th century, doesn't account for a potential century of rising temperatures caused by carbon dioxide emissions. Accounting for those gases, released from about 1750 to 1875, would add another one-fifth of a degree to the baseline temperature, the study found.

Published yesterday in Nature Climate Change, the research suggests there's less time than previously believed to address global warming, said Michael Mann, a climatologist at Pennsylvania State University.

The study estimates that there may have already been 0.2 degree Celsius of warming, or 0.36 degree Fahrenheit, built into Earth, he said. That means the Paris Agreement would have to be more aggressive, according to the study, which was also written by researchers from the universities of Edinburgh and Reading in the United Kingdom.

“When you take that into account, it turns out we have 40 percent less carbon to burn than we thought we had,” Mann said.

When it comes to climate change science, researchers typically use atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from the late 19th century as a guideline, because that's when instrumentation was developed to accurately measure temperatures. Researchers use models that combined observed temperatures with simulated sea surface temperatures and surface air temperatures to determine temperatures from 1401 to 1800.

The new baseline casts doubt on humanity's ability to meet the Paris target of holding temperatures below 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.

“The probability of exceeding the thresholds and timing of exceedance is highly dependent on the pre-industrial baseline,” the authors wrote.

Mann cautioned that there is still time to stave off the worst effects of warming, and that the Paris Agreement is the best path to get there. Still, he said, the study suggests the world's carbon budget — the amount of carbon dioxide the world can burn while keeping global temperatures below 2 degrees — may be smaller than nations realize.

The advent of the internal-combustion engine sparked a major release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that has warmed the Earth. The Paris climate accord is the broadest attempt in human history to limit those emissions. Re-establishing a new baseline would put more pressure on countries around the world. The study came after Trump announced he was withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement in order to get a “better deal.”

Before the age of industrialization, the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide was about 280 parts per million (ppm), scientists have determined. They measured air bubbles frozen in Arctic ice to ascertain that number. The early decades of industrialization, fueled by economic growth in Europe, may have added 30 to 40 ppm of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, according to Mann.

Now, atmospheric CO2 is rising at a record pace and is already at 410 ppm. It's expected to climb for decades. A growing body of research suggests that the continuing rise in atmospheric CO2 could eventually make some places on the planet uninhabitable, cause sea levels to swamp coastal cities and lead to millions of refugees.

“The Paris commitments were seen as at least getting us on to the right path and putting in place a framework where we could tighten the framework in the years ahead,” Mann said. “Our studies suggest it's even more urgent than we might have thought, because Paris, at least by this measure, doesn't even get us halfway there. It gets us a third of the way there.”

The global pact is supposed to review the best available science every few years to inform progress toward limiting global temperature rise. The study released yesterday is exactly the type of research that could inform future negotiations, said Andrew Light, a distinguished fellow at the World Resources Institute and a former senior climate change adviser in the Obama administration.

“There has always been a strong tie between the scientific community and the negotiations process,” he said. “The forum where most of this stuff gets hashed out is the IPCC [the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] ... [and] there will be more of an ongoing opportunity for parties to think about whether or not they need to revise their targets in response to this.”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-may-have-less-time-to-address-climate-change-than-scientists-thought/

Normally, the hottest years on record occur when the underlying human-caused global warming trend gets a temporary boost from an El Niņo’s enhanced warming in the tropical Pacific.

So it’s been a surprise to climate scientists that 2017 has been so remarkably warm — because the last El Niņo ended a year ago. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported Tuesday that the first half of 2017 was the second-warmest January-June on record for Earth, topped only by 2016, which was boosted by one of the biggest El Niņos on record.

“As if it wasn’t shocking enough to see three consecutive record-breaking years, in 2014, 2015, and 2016, for the first time on record,” leading climatologist Michael Mann wrote in an email to ThinkProgress, “we’re now seeing near-record temperatures even in the absence of the El Nino ‘assist’ that the previous record year benefited from.”
How January-June temperatures globally rank compared to the 20th century average. CREDIT: NOAA

NOAA climatologist Ahira Sanchez-Lugo told Climate Central, “After the decline of the strong El Niņo, I was expecting the values to drop a bit…. This year has been extremely remarkable.”

Usually we see global records in years when the short-term El Niņo warming adds to the long-term global warming trend (see chart below). As NOAA noted in its March report, without an El Niņo, no month before March 2017 had ever exceeded the “normal” temperature (the 1981–2010 average) by a full 1.8°F (1.0°C).
Global monthly temperature departures (from 1981–2010 average) color-coded by whether the Pacific was experiencing an El Niņo (red), a La Niņa (blue) or neutral conditions (gray). CREDIT: NOAA

This matters because when a month — or six-month period — sees record high global temperatures in the absence of an El Niņo, that is a sign the underlying global warming trend is stronger than ever. The latest NOAA report is “a reminder that climate change has not, despite the insistence of climate contrarians ‘paused’ or even slowed down,” Mann said.

Bottom line: Human-caused global warming continues at a dangerous pace, and only human action to slash carbon pollution can stop it.

https://thinkprogress.org/no-el-nino-still-hot-39162a5cc5bc

PlasmaHam
July 28th, 2017, 03:58 PM
Just to save time people who say this is not the most important issue just tell me how much more do you need.
I'll need proof that every single "climate change is going to end the world" prediction was actually true. Then I may come around.

Flapjack
July 28th, 2017, 04:17 PM
I'll need proof that every single "climate change is going to end the world" prediction was actually true. Then I may come around.
Is it all or nothing with you? Climate change has already been causing problems and yet you seem determined to ignore it unless it is guaranteed to be an immediate threat to humanity?

PlasmaHam
July 28th, 2017, 04:32 PM
^ Yep.

If you want more info, please contact my associate, "the ice caps will be totally melted by 2012" Al Gore.

http://cdn.liberallogic101.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/18118696_1407291179309356_2126551984560384579_n-500x270.jpg

mattsmith48
July 28th, 2017, 06:01 PM
I'll need proof that every single "climate change is going to end the world" prediction was actually true. Then I may come around.

^ Yep.

If you want more info, please contact my associate, "the ice caps will be totally melted by 2012" Al Gore.

image (http://cdn.liberallogic101.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/18118696_1407291179309356_2126551984560384579_n-500x270.jpg)

Why does setting an exact date to when this planet will become inhabitable necessary for you to take this seriously? Isn't knowing what will happen and what causes it and what we can do to stop this more important than knowing the exact date when we will all be fucked?

PlasmaHam
July 28th, 2017, 06:19 PM
Why does setting an exact date to when this planet will become inhabitable necessary for you to take this seriously? Isn't knowing what will happen and what causes it and what we can do to stop this more important than knowing the exact date when we will all be fucked?

Nope. I will need exact dates and the exact time before I take it seriously.

mattsmith48
July 28th, 2017, 06:21 PM
Nope. I will need exact dates and the exact time before I take it seriously.

Why?

PlasmaHam
July 28th, 2017, 07:07 PM
Why?

Because unless the universe is aligned on that date and time, I cannot be sure.

Babs
July 28th, 2017, 10:04 PM
I'll need proof that every single "climate change is going to end the world" prediction was actually true. Then I may come around.

The greenhouse effect can be observed on other planets in our solar system. Even though Mercury is closer to the sun, Venus is hotter because of the greenhouse effect. I'm sure if you googled it, you would find some lovely literature that can better explain the science of it than I.

Dalcourt
July 28th, 2017, 11:38 PM
Nope. I will need exact dates and the exact time before I take it seriously.

Maybe you wanna start by asKing those people who were among the first to be affected when their world came to an end? (scientificamerican.com/article/sea-level-rise-swallows-5-whole-pacific-islands)

So maybe you should also start giving exact data and scientific proof to why climate change does not happen.
You could further start to give reason so why so many people gathered to make up this hoax.

Otherwise I sadly have to assume you are just trolling this thread.

Microcosm
August 6th, 2017, 12:48 AM
It's kind of a wonder that climate change is even still debated. The way I see it if 97% of climate scientists agree that it's real and that we're causing it, then that is enough evidence for me to get behind it.