What do I think, What can I do?

Archive for the ‘Interesting Consequences’ Category

Are top world companies fighting against Climate Change?

img_5015These news explains some reports and surveys that state the increased compromise of World’s Top Corporations in this sense. Just three fast thoughts:

  • It shows that the economic establishment does not follow the skeptics ideas. As overwhelming amount of scientific work shows climate change is happening, it is happening because of our greenhouse gas emissions and international agencies, governments and top companies believe it. Skeptics are less than it seems from mass media and even blogs, internet,…
  • The real commitment of all this institutions has not been enough to even start decreasing CO2 emissions. So are really top companies committed to change the emission path. I would like too and I suppose that some are but not all, for example the companies that obtain great revenue from fossil fuels, or the ones worried by electricity costs. In  fact, skeptic blogs and media have many private financial sources.
  • It would be great that companies really committed to change their emissions path to obtain a prize from the worldwide customers to compensate their effort. But in that case good and reliable evaluation methods would be required, to ensure the mechanism is really working.. This way the normal citizen would have another instrument to fight against climate change.

Ice Cube, a very strange telescope in the south pole

ice cubes

ice cubes

Recently I read some news about IceCube neutrino observatory in the south pole. It is an amazing installation looking for the secrets of those elusive particles and by extension to the secrets of distant galaxies, a kind of telescope really. It is not the only installation looking for neutrinos, but this is very special as it is built in the great ice desert of Antarctica. In fact, is uses the 3 Km of ice depth in this continent to find neutrinos.

I was amazed by the technology and imagination involved in this great telescope. Will it last when the climate changes?

I suppose so, I hope so, but did the scientific in charge consider this aspect? Too many times is not considered for medium to  long-term forecasts even in groups that do not deny it in any way

 

News about costs of climate change and vulnerability

image

I was gladly surprised to read this news in a local newspaper. It is also in the Guardian for example, but not in every important media. It mentions a report by DARA about climate vulnerabilities for all countries and continents in the world. After a quick read I am convinced it deserves more time and analysis from my part. However, the headlines in the newspapers is enough for a first opinion. It mentions the 1.6 drop in GDP that is caused currently by climate change. It would be enough to counteract the crisis in many countries where many fossil fuel supporters are blaming renewables energy costs for their costly electricity. And the most important issue, this economic effect is happening now, not in the unpredictable future of next generation, so what can we expect for our children? Are the renewables so expensive or climate change makes the fossil fuel far more costly? Many climate change hawks emphasize the economic balance, is not a bad strategy as counteracts the main problem of the main solution: the renewable energy.

Venecia and Climate Change

Venice collage from Wikipedia

Venice collage from Wikipedia

Some places are more worried about climate change than others, or at least shout be. It is normal as some enjoy a wonderful weather that can only be worsened, or depend a lot on their current climate or sea level. This is the case for Venice This study shows (link in Spanish)the flood frequency will increase in this wonderful city. And floods in Venice affect 75% of the city old town, it is one of the hefty prices of being so special.
Will this be definitive for Venice’s sustainability? I do not know but certainly they will have to be very aware of Greenlands melting to think about clever mitigating measurements if they do not want to become the most beautiful diving center in the world. Anyway, they will not be alone, the rest of us will suffer many other consequences of climate change some of them unpleasantly unexpected, and many will not have resources for the most basic mitigation.

Extreme heat is here too

Yesterday a new temperature record was established in Basque Country, a very unusual 44.8ª for a mild temperature region. This summer extreme weather events are one of the hot issues in climate blogosphere, Climate Progress describes the hot summer and widespread drought in USA, skeptical science displays the last research results connecting extreme events and climate change, … At the same time, in the other side of the ocean the temperatures are getting extreme too as yesterda here or the three summer heat waves in the very mild Canary Islands where I was in hollydays. I am not very fond of talking too much of weather as skeptics usually do because our weather memories are weak and it is very easy to play a tennis match: today I believe, tomorrow not at all. Climate is not just weather, it is more global and in more time length. However, extreme events are important, for these reasons in my opinion:

1 If they are frequent enough, they show that temperature distribution is changing as explained in mentioned skeptical science post and many others. Many researchers are working in this link as that post shows.

2 More important than that is that they affect our everyday life, they are one of the first effects we are going to suffer from climate change.

3 They help increase most people awareness about climate change and could convince us to start making the difficult decisions we must make. Although this can be a dangerous weapon following the tennis match model and getting many people tired. For this reason it has to be explained well.

1ºC is 20 m, sea level rise

I read this post recently and found it a terrific explanation of one of the most direct and frightening consequences of climate change: sea level rise. (I also bought his book High Tide on Main Street but I will try have to read it later).

One of the figures he gives is the best summary for me: Roughly sea level raises 20 m for each ºC, based on historic data. It does not happen immediately, the huge ice sheets need time to thaw but once the temperature is fixed it is unstoppable. Considering a moderate target of 2 ºC for our future warming if we do things relatively well and stop current business as usual in a reasonable time, this would lead to a terrifying figure of 40 m sea level rise. Others sources mention basically 21st century predictions as this article ( Antonio Zecca, Luca Chiari, Global and Planetary Change.). It calculates a lower limit of 80cm this siecle and more for the next 200 years; or the NOAA, witch estimates between 20 cm and 2m.

The problem to solve in order to predict the sea level rise is very complicated. Even knowing the exact amount of water coming from Greenland or west Antarctica, or the exact temperature rise and subsequent water dilatation it would be complex as the seas are filling the land floating in the magma. So, we have to be conscious or the great error margins and the difference between coasts.

But anyway, going back to the 40 m, I think my house would be included there, some years ago, in some floods just 3 m were enough to reach the lower floor, so I will not be here to see it but it could be sad to my grandsons to say this part of the sea was our grandfathers house.

A long time before that, with much less, it is likely that some housing market will realise about that and the wonderful coastal second houses or investment values will drop sharply causing an economical and maybe financial crack, and even before the strong storms will become a great problem for inhabitants owners and insurance companies.

Water: our great treasury at risk

This post (in Spanish) wonderfully explains the small amount of water there is in the earth compared to the size of the planet and the even tinier proportion of freshwater.

  • In fact, freshwater is less than 4% of the water in earth as 96,54% is in the oceans and seas.
  • Almost all the rest is in form of snow/ice, 1.76%, at least for the moment, and underground 1.69%
  • The lakes only hold 0.013% of the water, half freshwater, half salty. 130 ppm
  • The rivers are even more insignificant with a tiny 0.0002%, 2 ppm of the water. So, if we apply this stupid comment about the small amount of 450 ppm of CO2, we would have been lost as we depend on roughly 72 ppm of freshwater. I know this is nonsense, it is just to remember that in some cases ppms are critical.

Most dramatic consequences of climate change are related with water somehow: droughts, extreme rainfalls, floods,… Being conscious of the big figures can help us remember how delicate are water equilibria.

Extreme weather and skepticism

Recently, IPCC launched a special report about extreme weather events (SREX). And the climate blogosphere has reacted, as it should.

Climate Hawks considered it correct but too soft in some senses. Joe Romm says it is a bit outdated regarding some articles, RealClimate does not agree with  one interpretation of statistics.

In the other hand, some climate skeptics have welcomed it effusively ,for example this one in spanish considers it a victory of the science.

This author was based in Piekle Jr blog and has read a different report really, because he considers that the report denies the occurrence of more extreme events in last years due to climate change. It has been one of the most striking examples of cherry picking I have come across last times, and there are many of those (I love this word).

A last example is the vegan blog from which I took the photo. They consider the link established and the occurrence clear. Yes , reading the same report.

I haven’t read it thoroughly but I agree more with the vegans, the report is written in a scientific tone, not a journalist one, but clearly talks about the risks increment due of extreme events.

This is an important battlefield in climate change, extreme events are an important negative consequence of climate change but at the same time are a great driving force for public opinion. Average temperatures are not easy to notice whereas terrible floods or hurricanes or droughts are impossible to forget. Even when they are not scientifically considered a climate change consequence they exert a great effect. Sometimes the science come to us in unexpected ways. For these reasons we will continue to discuss about them.

And painfully to suffer them unless we change our emissions path fast.

Snow at home

This week has been unusually cold in the whole Europe, and also for me. I am not used to see all this snow around me, and even if some snow around Bilbao is not strange every winter I do not remember it lasting so long. My memories of childhood remember a friend always asking for snow to avoid going to school as it happened once, but regrettably for him no more in our school years.
Anyway I may be wrong because I do not trust too much my weather memories, nor the memories of people surrounding me, because it is easy to listen many people explaining how extreme has been any weather condition every year. Nevertheless, as I frequently discuss with my wife climate change is not about our vague memories or climate feelings, it is about data, long term and geographically widespread data. For this reason I do not read with much interest the frequent posts in skeptic blogs about cold winter in India, or in Nebraska, or this time in Europe.
The skeptic posts about those freezing temperatures are widespread, here, here, here , and here, as it is cold is not warming. The answer in climate hawks blogs is that more energy in the atmosphere means more extreme weather events and I remember a conference about climate change where the speaker say precisely that, more extreme events in Europe would occur due to changes in wind regimes could be a consequence of higher global temperatures.

I think that it is important to distinguish weather tfrom global climate, wonderfully explained in this video. This winter is not a probe against climate change and it is not a probe of it although matches with some of the predictions. Even having extreme events doesn’t probe anything, the increasing number of extreme events is the key index to check, along with many others.

Smoking and KWhs

Heating lamp in the outside of a bar in winter time

Some weeks ago I took this photo in a cold winter day close to Bilbao. This heaters have become popular since smoking is not allowed in bars and restaurants. It was an unexpected and unnoticed consequence of smoking ban in closed places. I had seen those heater before in central Europe but not close to my home, perhaps they are following the smoking rules throughout the world. Actually, the ban is helpful for those vendors, for gas resellers and maybe for short-term economy (the bars do not agree with this but this is another question), but nobody has complained about the new KWh needed for that, the loose of energy efficiency and the increment of some more CO2 tons. I know it is not a key issue, but had it be another the problem surely it would have been present in some newspapers and discussions, at least to criticize the government forbidding smoking. Surely, we are not too conscious of climate change, energy efficiency and shavings in every day actions nor politics, in the best case the commitment  is too theoretical

And the most funny contradiction is that I was quite happy personally for the smoking ban because being a non-smoker I prefer a smoke free places, but this is not a post about smoking, is more about KWs and CO2.