Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) (uk.sci.weather) For the discussion of daily weather events, chiefly affecting the UK and adjacent parts of Europe, both past and predicted. The discussion is open to all, but contributions on a practical scientific level are encouraged. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14/08/2019 13:41, Norman Lynagh wrote:
Alastair B. McDonald wrote: So I will only post my take on the article. It is titled "Emission impossible? Harsh facts on climate change" and subtitled "How will the world cope as more extreme weather becomes the norm?" by Simon Kuper It begins " I live in France, where last Friday was the hottest day ever recorded. In Gallargues-le-Montueux in the south, the temperature hit 45.9C. In Paris, where it was only 37C, people around me with asthma and eye allergies suffered terribly. My doctor told me the heat was aggravating his older patients’ cardiovascular problems. But, he added, it was dangerous for them to come and see him because his waiting room was boiling. He plans to install air-conditioning. That will worsen the climate further." He then argues that the climate will become unbearable, but that the current politicians such as Trump, Boris and greenie Elizabeth Warren are incapable of solving the problem. They are proposing green growth. "Instead the world needs a new political class obsessed with climate and engineering. ... Once some engineering-savvy climate leaders emerge, we can finally start taking climate change seriously." As I am an engineer obsessed by climate change, you might think I would agree, but I don't. The scientists are using outdated science, and have not been trained in dynamical systems, yet that is what they are trying to analyse. As I see it the climate is not going to get incrementally worse. What will happen is an abrupt change to new climate system similar to that which happened 10,000 years ago when the Arctic sea ice, which had spread into the North Atlanic during the Younger Dryas interstadial, suddenly retreated and temperatures soared. It is too late to stop that happening now. I can certainly see that abrupt changes to the global climate are possible and perhaps likely. Exactly what these changes might be is a bit more speculative but I certainly agree with you, Alastair, that whatever is now locked into the system will happen and there's nothing we, the human race, can do about that. Mega disaster management looms for later this century. Forget Brexit, forget the NHS, forget everything that seems important today. IMHO managing the climate catastrophe will be the only thing that matters later this century. As I doubt it will be quite so catastrophic as that even in the very worst case scenarios. Parts of the middle eastern deserts may become so hot that it is impossible to go outside during the day and larger storms may be able to deposit more precipitation in a single event. I suspect the chaotic climate will at some point snap to another attractor in the parameter space and then it will have a lot of hysteresis needed to get it to jump back again the other way. It is too early to tell where or when exactly this tipping point has been reached. I reckon we will know it when we see it though since things may change quite radically when it happens. One perverse effect of a globally warming world is that some places may actually get colder. The UK presently benefits from the warming Atlantic conveyor current (aka Gulf stream) and if that were to shut down we would then have weather more appropriate to our rather high latitude. We are headed back to a climate more like the pliocene era 2-3My ago. https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-above-400ppm/ I once had a chance to torment a climate change simulation model and set out to boil the equatorial oceans with a large step injection of CO2. The amount required would make the atmosphere toxic to human life. I have said before, it won't be a case of 'save the planet'. It'll be 'save the human race'. The planet can look after itself and would probably do so much better without the meddling humans. The planet will take care of itself with or without the human race. However there will be a lot of people wanting to migrate from the parts that have become too hot and dry to grow crops or live without aircon. It has survived much worse CO2 excursions in the past and will doubtless do so again. However, our technological infrastructure is relatively fragile wrt sea level rise so the initial effects will initially be felt in low lying highly populated cities and farm land. These include many major ports and capital cities like London and Tokyo. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 14 August 2019 08:59:34 UTC+1, Spike wrote:
On 14/08/2019 11:06, Norman Lynagh wrote: An excellent article from the Financial Times. IMHO it tells it as it is. https://www.ft.com/content/d7ec60e6-...e-8b459ed04726 " Become an FT subscriber to read: Emission impossible? Harsh facts on climate change" No. thank you. I for one do not wish to subscribe to the FT. If one is going to refer to an article that is only available from behind a paywall, it might be polite to quote the key points from it (as well as give the link) , as not all readers will be able to access - or be willing to pay - to access the original. -- Spike Strange, I can read it and I certainly don't subscribe. Keith (Southend) |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 14 August 2019 13:29:06 UTC+1, Norman Lynagh wrote:
Norman Lynagh wrote: Spike wrote: On 14/08/2019 11:06, Norman Lynagh wrote: An excellent article from the Financial Times. IMHO it tells it as it is. https://www.ft.com/content/d7ec60e6-...e-8b459ed04726 " Become an FT subscriber to read: Emission impossible? Harsh facts on climate change" No. thank you. I for one do not wish to subscribe to the FT. If one is going to refer to an article that is only available from behind a paywall, it might be polite to quote the key points from it (as well as give the link) , as not all readers will be able to access - or be willing to pay - to access the original. Don't know the answer to that. I got into the article via a re-tweet from Paul Beckwith. There was no paywall. Since your post I have gone back to the re-tweet and tried again. This time I also get the paywall. Unfortunately, I didn't save the article so I can't display it elsewhere. I don't subscribe to the FT. I haven't given up! I tried doing a search on simon kuper emission impossible? harsh facts on climate change Clicking on the first link that came up took me directly to the article with no paywall. -- Norman Lynagh Tideswell, Derbyshire 303m a.s.l. https://peakdistrictweather.org twitter: @TideswellWeathr I saved the text to a word document he www.southendweather.net/Simon%20Kuper.docx You can download if you want to. Keith (Southend) |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14/08/2019 15:35, Martin Brown wrote:
One perverse effect of a globally warming world is that some places may actually get colder. The UK presently benefits from the warming Atlantic conveyor current (aka Gulf stream) and if that were to shut down we would then have weather more appropriate to our rather high latitude. The Gulf Stream can't stop but the North Atlantic Drift may do so. That would put us back to the Little Ice Age scenario but, considering we're running at 1.3C warmer than pre-industrial times - not the Early Industrial era favoured by the IPCC which had already warmed by 0.2C due to the Industrial Revolution - it will not be anywhere near as bad as alarmists have made out. It will probably mean we just slip back to temperatures experienced during the first half of the Twentieth Century. -- Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. Web-site: http://www.scarlet-jade.com/ “Understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, my side, and the truth.” [Ambassador Kosh] Posted via Mozilla Thunderbird on openSUSE Tumbleweed. |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 14 August 2019 16:13:10 UTC+1, Graham P Davis wrote:
On 14/08/2019 15:35, Martin Brown wrote: One perverse effect of a globally warming world is that some places may actually get colder. The UK presently benefits from the warming Atlantic conveyor current (aka Gulf stream) and if that were to shut down we would then have weather more appropriate to our rather high latitude. The Gulf Stream can't stop but the North Atlantic Drift may do so. That would put us back to the Little Ice Age scenario but, considering we're running at 1.3C warmer than pre-industrial times - not the Early Industrial era favoured by the IPCC which had already warmed by 0.2C due to the Industrial Revolution - it will not be anywhere near as bad as alarmists have made out. It will probably mean we just slip back to temperatures experienced during the first half of the Twentieth Century. -- Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. Web-site: http://www.scarlet-jade.com/ “Understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, my side, and the truth.” [Ambassador Kosh] Posted via Mozilla Thunderbird on openSUSE Tumbleweed. https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/a....8.12.2019.gif I would have expected the areas nearer the Arctic to be lower given the sea ice and Greenland melt. Anthen there'e the 'Greyhound' looking colder wedge. Keith (Southend) |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14/08/2019 16:33, Keith Harris wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 August 2019 16:13:10 UTC+1, Graham P Davis wrote: On 14/08/2019 15:35, Martin Brown wrote: One perverse effect of a globally warming world is that some places may actually get colder. The UK presently benefits from the warming Atlantic conveyor current (aka Gulf stream) and if that were to shut down we would then have weather more appropriate to our rather high latitude. The Gulf Stream can't stop but the North Atlantic Drift may do so. That would put us back to the Little Ice Age scenario but, considering we're running at 1.3C warmer than pre-industrial times - not the Early Industrial era favoured by the IPCC which had already warmed by 0.2C due to the Industrial Revolution - it will not be anywhere near as bad as alarmists have made out. It will probably mean we just slip back to temperatures experienced during the first half of the Twentieth Century. https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/a....8.12.2019.gif I would have expected the areas nearer the Arctic to be lower given the sea ice and Greenland melt. Anthen there'e the 'Greyhound' looking colder wedge. The mel****er may have made surface waters less saline but they have been warmed more than normal. Also, some of the areas that have been ice-free for a while would normally have been ice-covered. The greyhound is probably an extension of the Labrador Current. This _may_ be a sign that it is overriding the NAD due to the Labrador Current being less dense than normal so that it, or some of it, no longer sinks beneath the Gulf Stream. The anomalies from that source are pretty dodgy. For instance, the cold anomalies in the Arctic Ocean cannot be real. The normals are very short-term and correct use of the normal sea-ice distribution has not been made. The following link gives somewhat better values - at least it does when it's up and working which, unfortunately, is not the case at the moment. https://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/sst/rtg_high_res/ -- Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. Web-site: http://www.scarlet-jade.com/ “Understanding is a three-edged sword. Your side, my side, and the truth.” [Ambassador Kosh] Posted via Mozilla Thunderbird on openSUSE Tumbleweed. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
[OT] The effects of climate change | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Climate change and effects on weather | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
A balanced view on the effects of climate change? | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Climate Scientist Issues Climate Change Warning | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Climate Scientist Issues Climate Change Warning | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) |