117 Where are we now ?

Science:

  • More certain than before about anthropogenic causes of climate change

  • Global data gathering continues from satellites and field campaigns

  • New methods and ideas cause reanalysis of existing data

  • Stronger link with social and political science

  • Having hard time to translate scientific information into the plain language for decision makers and politicians!

Education:

  • Too much on “polar bears” and too little on local and scientific issues (e.g. many students do not know how do we measure proxies or use satellites, how climate change affect local area, etc.)

  • Public lacks education about the Earth history and cyclicity of its natural processes, such as volcanic eruptions that caused massive extinctions in the past and/or glacial cycles that caused higher sea-level rises than we have now (e.g. Sangamon/ Eemian), etc.

Society:

  • Subdivided (skeptics, alarmists, deniers, etc.); like now with Covid vaccines;

  • Does not notice two scales of Earth history: earth evolution with its thousands and millions years and last 140 years since Great Technological Revolution; as a result we are unable to reason on decision making.

  • Opportunistic (drive for funding, careers, finger-pointing, etc.); slows down the progress and deviates the course of actions.

  • Economical benefits usually outweigh environmental concerns; people need jobs; economists and politicians are paranoid with economic growth indicators; as result we have disproportional exploitations of natural resources and as a result wealth distribution that further divides society and hampers decision making process.

  • People are not ready to change habits (I am hot and need my air conditioner RIGHT NOW! Where is my ice machine? My apartment is so cold! Let’s throw the party and also throw a lot of food and plastics in the garbage! etc.)

Societal response: let’s create a committee!!!!!

Awareness and assessment!

Most findings in IPCC reports were already published in 1948 paper by Ahlmann.

Congratulations! We are behind by more than 40 years!

 

Who are IPCC contributors?

Physics, environmental science: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_%C3%9Crge-Vorsatz

Biologist, climate scientist:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ove_Hoegh-Guldberg_(biologist)

Industrial Engineering in and economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri

Engineering, fluid physics:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Masson-Delmotte

Atomic, Molecular Astrophysics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oppenheimer

Policy studies, sustainable energy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Skea

Sustainability, environmental planning, Climate Protection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debra_Roberts

Physics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Stocker

Marine animals, ecosystems

Sustainable development

Economist, environmental policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoesung_Lee

Environmental biology, modeling climate change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider

 

ANY GEOLOGIST IN THE LIST? HELLO?

 

IPCC main findings:

  • UN report found that shutdown of conveyor belt current (thermohaline circulation in oceans) has occurred historically, but there is no evidence that it will occur again any time soon.

  • There is sufficient evidence (in IPCC report) to state that::

    •  There is widespread evidence of human influence on global climate.

    • Warming is now occurring.

    • Mean surface temperature of Earth will likely increase between 1.80 and 40 C (30 and 70 F) during this, i.e. 21st century.

Different Views on Global Warming: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1893089

image      image    image

Penn State Glaciologist Richard Alley;

University of Alabama in Huntsville Climatologist John Christy;

Columbia University Oceanographer Wallace Broecker

 

Latest Climate Summit, Dec 2023 in Dubai: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference

image

Sultan Al Jaber, right, president of COP28, at the summit early on Wednesday.

Past U.N. climate deals have shied away from mentioning the words “fossil fuels.”Credit…Kamran Jebreili/Associated Press

“Humanity has finally done what is long, long, long overdue,” said Wopke Hoekstra, the European commissioner for climate action. “Thirty years — 30 years! — we spent to arrive at the beginning of the end of fossil fuels.”

The new deal is not legally binding and can’t, on its own, force any country to act. Yet many of the politicians, environmentalists and business leaders gathered in Dubai hoped it would send a message to investors and policymakers that the shift away from fossil fuels was unstoppable. Over the next two years, each nation is supposed to submit a detailed, formal plan for how it intends to curb greenhouse gas emissions through 2035. Wednesday’s agreement is meant to guide those plans. (from NYT, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/13/climate/cop28-climate-agreement.html)

What’s going on in New York?

The New York State Climate Impacts Assessment has just announced publication of new projections for how New York’s climate could change in the future: https://nysclimateimpacts.org/ . These projections use the same climate models that are used in the latest IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report.

As an example of the visualizations you’ll find, here’s a screenshot that shows how temperatures in New York State may become more like the 1981-2010 average temperatures of locations to the south of us.  I think it’s unlikely that we’ll live in a world with the “Very high emissions scenario,” but it’s useful for illustration purposes. And under the “Intermediate emissions scenario,” the climate in New York’s North Country could be more like that of southern Pennsylvania by the end of this century.
Map of the east coast of the United States showing how New York City's average temperature will change in the 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s compared to the baseline 1981-2010 average. In an intermediate emissions scenario, New York City's average temperature is projected to be be comparable to the 1980-2010 average for Huntsville, Alabama. In a very high emissions scenario, New York City's average temperature is projected to be comparable to the 1980-2010 average for Jackson, Mississippi.
Dr. Bryce Hand, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Syracuse University, created  graphical depiction of the New York State influenced by the climate change. Below, in his own words:
I made these graphics a few years ago, now updated to 2024.  The presentation is similar to what you posted.  (I think it’s pretty effective.)  My reference city, of course, is Syracuse, 43° N.
 
I start in 1975, b/c that’s when the current phase of warming really took off:
Using the rate of global warming since 1975 and the latitudinal temperature gradient for central NY, I calculated that Syracuse was going south at two miles/year.  Climatologically, compared to 1975, Syracuse now is at the latitude of Scranton, PA.
Then, for purposes of a talk I‘ll be giving in a couple months, I projected to 2090.  That’s when someone who’s 21 years old now reaches my age (87).  It puts Syracuse pretty close to Baltimore, MD:

 

 

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Geology 101 for Lehman College (CUNY) Copyright © by Yuri Gorokhovich and Lumen Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book