Global Warming...

[melon]

While the Bush Administration publically denies that global warming is taking place, it is also secretly preparing for it. It appears that, within some groups, it is no longer a matter of "if" but "when," and it is no longer thinking in centuries, but in years...perhaps even within the next twenty.

The Pentagon's Weather Nightmare
The climate could change radically, and fast. That would be the mother of all national security issues.
FORTUNE
Monday, January 26, 2004
By David Stipp

Global warming may be bad news for future generations, but let's face it, most of us spend as little time worrying about it as we did about al Qaeda before 9/11. Like the terrorists, though, the seemingly remote climate risk may hit home sooner and harder than we ever imagined. In fact, the prospect has become so real that the Pentagon's strategic planners are grappling with it.

The threat that has riveted their attention is this: Global warming, rather than causing gradual, centuries-spanning change, may be pushing the climate to a tipping point. Growing evidence suggests the ocean-atmosphere system that controls the world's climate can lurch from one state to another in less than a decade?like a canoe that's gradually tilted until suddenly it flips over. Scientists don't know how close the system is to a critical threshold. But abrupt climate change may well occur in the not-too-distant future. If it does, the need to rapidly adapt may overwhelm many societies?thereby upsetting the geopolitical balance of power.

Though triggered by warming, such change would probably cause cooling in the Northern Hemisphere, leading to longer, harsher winters in much of the U.S. and Europe. Worse, it would cause massive droughts, turning farmland to dust bowls and forests to ashes. Picture last fall's California wildfires as a regular thing. Or imagine similar disasters destabilizing nuclear powers such as Pakistan or Russia?it's easy to see why the Pentagon has become interested in abrupt climate change.

Climate researchers began getting seriously concerned about it a decade ago, after studying temperature indicators embedded in ancient layers of Arctic ice. The data show that a number of dramatic shifts in average temperature took place in the past with shocking speed?in some cases, just a few years.

The case for angst was buttressed by a theory regarded as the most likely explanation for the abrupt changes. The eastern U.S. and northern Europe, it seems, are warmed by a huge Atlantic Ocean current that flows north from the tropics?that's why Britain, at Labrador's latitude, is relatively temperate. Pumping out warm, moist air, this "great conveyor" current gets cooler and denser as it moves north. That causes the current to sink in the North Atlantic, where it heads south again in the ocean depths. The sinking process draws more water from the south, keeping the roughly circular current on the go. ...

(Read the rest here.)

Although I think some of these "revelations" are not exactly as new as implied (the "huge Atlantic Ocean current" is the Gulf Stream, and even high school science students learn that the Gulf Stream warms that part of the Northern Hemisphere), it does give some insight as to what some people, including the government, are preparing for.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Global warming may be taking place. It has in the past. I think it is arrogant of the human species to think they can cause global warming....

 

[melon]

Global warming may be taking place. It has in the past. I think it is arrogant of the human species to think they can cause global warming....

And I think it is equally arrogant to think that we can't, and, thus, can have total disregard for the world that we live in.

My opinion...

1) Science has theorized that global warming and cooling are inevitable cycles that have lasted for millions of years, and that we have been in a long warming cycle. Hence, the fact that an Ice Age was going to happen again was only considered a matter of time, and, at one point, it was theorized to happen naturally probably by A.D. 3500. That doesn't mean, however, that we do not have a hand in accelerating that process along. Now that we probably do have a good idea of what has been driving the warming and cooling--cooling cycles that eventually create the Gulf Stream or something similar that end the Ice Ages and warming cycles that ultimately culminate in the Gulf Stream's destruction, thus leading back into another Ice Age--but these are not mere short cycles, in general. If we lose the Gulf Stream and head into an Ice Age, even a "mini" one, it will be there long after we die.

2) A unrelated theory on sunspots put on theories of the Earth's warming and cooling cycles in a smaller, non-"Ice Age" perspective. The Earth warms and cools according to 320-year sunspot cycles, and, according to that theory, the Earth was in a cool, wet cycle when the "Little Ice Age" occurred in the Middle Ages. We entered a warm, dry cycle that has lasted since 1700. That same "cool, wet cycle" is due to return by 2020, and last another 320 years. This theory, overall, is less morbid: the Gulf Stream doesn't wither up and die, but expect dramatic climactic changes in a similar vein.

Melon

 

[STING2]

Based on the weather this winter, I could use a little global warming!

 

[verte76]

We studied the "ice age" of the Middle Ages in school in our history classes. It impacted everything in Europe, particularly, of course, agriculture, also health. I don't have any evidence that it affected clothing, but I wouldn't be surprised. People dress to keep warm in colder climates.

 

[U2Bama]

My simpleton theory is that the farts of vegetarian dinosauras such as the brontosaurus and stegasaurus caused the earlier cycles of global warming.

Also, the current cycle of global warming that has caused unusually mild winters (and a complete LACK of accumulative snow) in the Gulf Coast states in the past 8 years has been caused by the fact that I bought a 4x4 Jeep in 1996, thus denying me the chance to test it on snowy roads.

~U2Alabama

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Global warming may be taking place. It has in the past. I think it is arrogant of the human species to think they can cause global warming....

Humans have managed to make hundreds of species of animals and plants extinct, polluted some bodies of water to the point where aquatic life no longer exists in them and created enormous holes in the ozone layer.

But of course, it would be utterly arrogant to think our actions can cause damage to the environment.

 

[Liesje]

Global warming is the one cause I could never really grasp. I mean, I get that it's a big ass hole in the atmosphere that means the icebergs melt, we are more susceptible to cancer from the sun, etc, but why do people complain about global warming and continue to buy cars or work in/support companies with factories that damage the ozone layer? We have Ozone Action days a lot where I live (the days where you're supposed to stay inside, not waste water on your lawn, avoid mowing lawns and creating excess polution) and yet, people are always doing EXACTLY what we're NOT supposed to: watering the lawn all day and driving around in gas-guzzling-polution-gushing-SUVs. What gives?

Sometimes I wish people would save all the energy they use preaching about how much damage we are causing to the environment and use that energy to take a long hard look at their own lives and see how they, as one individual, can help improve the situation. We don't need to drive yacht sized vehicles, we don't need to dump toxic fertilizer on our lawns, we don't need to water our lawns twice a day even during the rain, we don't need to clear cut the local woodlands to build Truman-Show-esque neighborhoods when there are perfectly usable buildings already standing, we don't need water toys that cause all manner of noise, air, and water pollution...I could go on and on....

 

[~*Buffalo*~]

Sometimes I wish people would save all the energy they use preaching about how much damage we are causing to the environment and use that energy to take a long hard look at their own lives and see how they, as one individual, can help improve the situation. We don't need to drive yacht sized vehicles, we don't need to dump toxic fertilizer on our lawns, we don't need to water our lawns twice a day even during the rain, we don't need to clear cut the local woodlands to build Truman-Show-esque neighborhoods when there are perfectly usable buildings already standing, we don't need water toys that cause all manner of noise, air, and water pollution...I could go on and on....

Exactly. I learnt about Creeping Environmental Problems (CEPs) at uni, of which drought is the main one but global warming probably comes under that heading as well. Because the symptoms take so long to appear, people are on the whole very complacent and believe that they can deal with the problem when it happens - which, of course, makes the whole situation a lot more difficult.

So, yes, I agree with you, LivLuvand BootlegMusic, there are a lot of things we can start doing now that may make a difference later on. Global warming won't have the same immediate, destructive effects as an earthquake or a cyclone, which means that people won't necessarily be able to tell whether driving a more efficient car has helped to prevent it, nor may they care. But if it does help in some way, then it's worth it ... besides, a little car is much better than a yacht-sized one in every single way.

 

[Angela Harlem]

If anyone is unsure whether it is actually occuring, come spend a summer with me.

And these are only small gradual changes.

 

[Kieran McConville]

The summers sure are getting hotter, aren't they. And I would venture to add that the last really cold winter I can recall was about 1998 or 2000. But that's just Australia.

I think maybe some people are confusing the hole in the ozone layer with the greenhouse effect. One in theory at least is letting more harmful radiation through to the earth's surface (though I tend to wonder if jet fuel does far more harm than a few billion aerosol cans), and the other is a sort of blanket of junk up in the atmosphere.

I would honestly be surprised if the US government were not secretly preparing for eventualities, just as I would be very surprised if the major oil companies are not planning for their own obselescence (ie. to avoid it).

 

[Angela Harlem]

You'd be copping some heat up your way K, for sure. Easy for me to whinge, but its only worse up north.
On the issue of the ozone and greenhouse, I heard once (spoken so it could be all bullshit) was our cattle alone contribute to 3% of the hole in the ozone. Farting is the culprit. I kid you not, this was said to me once. Cows emit obviously noxious gas, which somehow makes it's way up a fair few km's in the air...If this is true, why not a few billion aerosols? And on that, isn't the rest of the world now CFC free with aerosols too?

Interesting, no matter how accurate lol.

 

[Kieran McConville]

I think the cow thing is a bit of an urban myth. Not saying you buy it or anything, but if you think about it for a moment, what's so special about cows. I'd guess a lot of animals pass wind, as they say. No, I can't say I buy that explanation.

Actually I think you get the heat worse. You live in some kind of bowl from what I understand, whereas I live on top of a mountain (albeit further north).

 

[Sue DeNym]

We don't need to drive yacht sized vehicles, we don't need to dump toxic fertilizer on our lawns, we don't need to water our lawns twice a day even during the rain, we don't need to clear cut the local woodlands to build Truman-Show-esque neighborhoods when there are perfectly usable buildings already standing, we don't need water toys that cause all manner of noise, air, and water pollution...I could go on and on....

Absolutely. We're destroying our home for the sake of convenience and ego. Everywhere I look, people are driving ego-wanking, air polluting SUVs, throwing their garbage all over the ground, destroying the landscape to build yet another shopping mall we do not need (and there are many vacant lots and half-full buildings in this town!) or putting more toxic chemicals in our drinking water to "purify" it. I just wish people would get it through their thick stupid heads what they are doing to themselves and the planet.

 

[verte76]

We have so many shopping malls, etc, etc in Birmingham it's ridiculous. Half the stores are shut down and it's just a bunch of empty buildings all over the place. Egads, some of this is just common sense, not some theory or something. There's alot of space just going to waste.

 

[Rono]

I do not care if we cause the global warming. We do not have the right the destroy nature anyway.

 

[nbcrusader]

Sometimes I wish people would save all the energy they use preaching about how much damage we are causing to the environment and use that energy to take a long hard look at their own lives and see how they, as one individual, can help improve the situation. We don't need to drive yacht sized vehicles, we don't need to dump toxic fertilizer on our lawns, we don't need to water our lawns twice a day even during the rain, we don't need to clear cut the local woodlands to build Truman-Show-esque neighborhoods when there are perfectly usable buildings already standing, we don't need water toys that cause all manner of noise, air, and water pollution...I could go on and on....

Now you've crossed the line to personal responsibility..... Why, you ask? It is always easier to point to the government or corporation than to one's own life.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Well that's cute. Personal responsibility is important, but we can only control our own lives, we cannot control - without government intervention - the actions of large organisations who by their very nature do things on a much larger scale.

What would you prefer? Every citizen goes green and the polluting industries get to continue polluting. Don't see it happening, as long as people need to buy their products to function in society.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Mind you, I would love to see SUVs off the roads. But banning them? Well now, that would be government intervention wouldn't it.

 

[nbcrusader]

What would you prefer? Every citizen goes green and the polluting industries get to continue polluting. Don't see it happening, as long as people need to buy their products to function in society.

Industry follows what people want. Society is not a victim.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Ah yes. Look in fairness, I can see your argument, honestly I can. I understand what you are saying. But this just sounds like laizze faire for the sake of it.

The market does not always respond to what people 'want'. Sometimes the market tells people what they want.

OK you don't need an SUV, that's a matter of personal choice. But try opting out of fossil fuel use (no electricity, no petrol for the car) and see how far you get. On that level, either it will be driven by action of the government kind, or it will not happen.

I'd love to see people choose en masse to do things differently... but that falls into the category of 'wouldn't it be nice', in my view.

 

[anitram]

I don't think we need SUVs either, but you will not get very far if individuals change their ways while industries continue to pollute. Your lungs will get dirtier and dirtier, long after you sell your SUV.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Better public transport would be nice, but as long as people need cars to function normally (get to your job, at the very least), expect the pollution to go on.

See, I'm sorry, but a bunch of people can't just go out and build a monorail or a bus system. Only a government can do that (or pay a business to do it, but if it paid for itself we'd have it already, right?).

 

[Liesje]

Well that's cute. Personal responsibility is important, but we can only control our own lives, we cannot control - without government intervention - the actions of large organisations who by their very nature do things on a much larger scale.

What would you prefer? Every citizen goes green and the polluting industries get to continue polluting. Don't see it happening, as long as people need to buy their products to function in society.

You've misinterpreted my point. I did not mean to say that it is MORE important to deal with pollution on an individual basis than try and change regulations and policies. All I meant was that I've heard people complain endlessly about how much we're destroying earth, and then I watch them drive off in an SUV to their summer home with five jet skis. We should practice what we preach.

 

[Liesje]

Better public transport would be nice, but as long as people need cars to function normally (get to your job, at the very least), expect the pollution to go on.

Yeah, but people don't need three or four cars per family. And we don't need cars the size of small busses.

 

[ILuvLarryMullen]

regardless of whether or not global warming is happening due to human behavior(and for the record I think that it is). We DO know that smog is unhealthy to breath, rivers are becoming polluted and unusuable, we're polluting the environment with all sorts of carcinogens, etc. For those reasons alone we should try to change what we're doing regardless of whether or not it is warming the earth.

 

[OzAurora]

Wow, some interesting points have been made thus far, environmental issues are concerns that are very dear to my heart- having studied an environmental major at uni and writing many articles on local environmental issues for a local publication, I just love seeing threads like this.

One thing that I have learnt and for the Australians in the thread (they will know who I am talking about here) I would like to quote Mr Paul Kelly- "From little things, big things grow". Whilst that line is in relation to the plight of Aboriginal land rights in Australia, I also think that it is an excellent metaphor in relation to environmental issues. Education is the primary goal, as I see it when it comes to addressing concerns, whether they be about global warming, recycling or buying free range eggs etc, etc. By simply educating people, making them aware that maybe instead of buying a TDK brand of blank tape, because they have been quite substantial contributors in polluting numerous rivers in Germany and buying an alternative brand who have an ethical and environmental approach toward manufacturing, by informing people, to take one little step that is pro-active, well that can lead to much bigger steps and it can and does happen, however education is the driving force.

Another thing that I learnt, which has always stayed with me from when I was at uni, was that in order for the educators to educate the masses, one must become a policy maker. It is all very well to tie oneself to a tree or follow a uranium laden ship in a dinghy to make a point, however most of the time these stunts just dont work. Those who are actively concerned about such issues need to seek vlunteer jobs or careers in areas where environmental policies are being formed. Whilst being a member of a local council action group is not going to be a setting for making agendas to the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, however it is in keeping with the analogy of "from little things, big things grow".

I honestly believe that if those who are concerned (and I am not an idealist, I know that there a millions of people who simply dont give a shit) but for those who do give a shit, if they just actively did a few small things, such as ethical buying of products and services, recycled dilligently (and believe me, if you do this propperly where you compost all food scraps etc., the average family should only have one bag of rubbish a week) and thought about transport and the alternatives on offer more closely the world would be much better off, well the human race would be. The earth is a very stoic entity, it has survived many catastrophes and whilst global warming has happened in its geological history before, I whole heartedly believe that the human species is exacerbating the rate and really at the same time all that we are doing is fowling the nest in which we live.

It is very easy to become complacent about environmental issues, especially when you dont see them impacting your life inherently, however these issues are very real and I know that if you care that even one person doing something that is pro-active, that it is a positive step in the right direction

 

[Kieran McConville]

All good points. Livluvandbootlegmusic, sorry for any confusion... haha... in fact I was replying to about three different people who were pursuing a similar strand of thought. You might have been one, but mainly it was U2bama and NBcrusader.

I heartily agree that baby steps are important. And four cars to a family is surely excessive.

Sometimes the 'chaining oneself to a tree' part is important, sometimes it's been that do-or-die (think the Franklin Dam case in Tasmania), but if that's the catalyst it takes before the serious policy room stuff will happen, then so be it.

So mostly, I agree.

 

[Sue DeNym]

By simply educating people, making them aware that maybe instead of buying a TDK brand of blank tape, because they have been quite substantial contributors in polluting numerous rivers in Germany and buying an alternative brand who have an ethical and environmental approach toward manufacturing, by informing people, to take one little step that is pro-active, well that can lead to much bigger steps and it can and does happen, however education is the driving force.

I agree. And I do want to know which companies have ethical environmental practices, so I can support them. Is there a website or book that lists them anywhere?

I do what I can for the environment. The family car is a model that gets 37mpg, we recycle and pick up litter when we're out. We also buy organic products when we can. Little things, yes, but if everybody did them, there would be a very visible difference.

 

[DrTeeth]

The idea that nothing we humans do is going to affect the weather sounds a bit naive to me. We have more than enough nukes to destroy this planet more than once. We have killed numerous species and we have created new ones. We have changed, destroyed and created complete ecosystems. There isn't a place on this planet where the effects of human beings can't be noticed. Affecting the weather isn't realy such a big step, ever heard of a nuclear winter?

Global warming is a fact, we have known for quite some time that the composition of the atmosphere is responsible for the nice temperature we have now. We also know that we have been adding these greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution (enhanced global warming).

The issue of cow farts is interesting but imo used too often as an excuse to do nothing. Let's not forget that we are responsible for the composition of cow farts because we're the ones who keep putting them on diets which make these animals produce, produce and produce some more. This is why cows continuously have diarrhoea producing extra methane. Ever noticed herbivorous animals in the wild? Nice dry and compact excrements they have, nothing like cowshit at all. That's why I think the issues of dinosaurfarts being responsible for green- and icehouses is too far fetched; they were herbivores in nature as well.

For now the effect of methane is probably negligible in this discussion anyway. While a methane molecule has a higher effect on trapping infrared light than say a CO2 molecule, it only stays in the atmosphere for about one decade before being oxidized into other forms. It takes centuries for CO2 to get from the atmosphere into the subsurface. Methane used to be a growing emission because of the production of rice which caused a lot of methane production but most of the land that can be used to grow rice is already under irrigation anyway and the future increase in methane emitting wetlands is negligible as well. The only role methane might play here is when the increase in sea temperature will melt frozen methane at the oceanfloor (methane clathrate). But for now, we really don't know if that's going to happen.

We already know that changes in the global carbon flux and the hereby effected sedimentationrates and tectonic changes are responsible for green- and icehouses. At this point there is a tectonic-scale tendency towards cooling but this occurs at such a slow rate that after about a 1000 years, the Earth's climate will have been cooled by an astonishing 0.0001 degrees C. This combined with orbitally driven climate changes will have an effect on the Earth's temperature far below the projected range of CO2 warming.

As for solutions, the buying of three cars instead of four is admirable but capitalism isn't going to sort this one out. We all know we make different choices when we're at the store than when we fill out a environmental issues questionaire (sp??). We all want the cars, the houses, the DVD players etc. Stop consuming would do the trick but I don't see that happening.

What we need is new techniques, new legislation and the politicians who have the balls to invest en enforce. Especially in the third wordl.So no cutting of subsidies for environmental friendly cars (Dutch government). Do not spend another sack of cash on any more research to see the effects of methane (NASA). Don't decrease environmental legislation on companies because the economy isn't growing that fast at this moment (most governments). And don't say you are going to spend money on environmental research (which other countries have already finished, you could just call them and ask for a copy) to make you look good in the elections (Bush).