Page 55 of 55 FirstFirst ... 545535455
Results 541 to 547 of 547

Thread: The effects of warming: Kilodeaths

  1. Top | #541
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    6,382
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    23,211
    Rep Power
    79
    Opinion | How Scientists Got Climate Change So Wrong - The New York Times
    Few thought it would arrive so quickly. Now we’re facing consequences once viewed as fringe scenarios.

    For decades, most scientists saw climate change as a distant prospect. We now know that thinking was wrong. This summer, for instance, a heat wave in Europe penetrated the Arctic, pushing temperatures into the 80s across much of the Far North and, according to the Belgian climate scientist Xavier Fettweis, melting some 40 billion tons of Greenland’s ice sheet.

    Had a scientist in the early 1990s suggested that within 25 years a single heat wave would measurably raise sea levels, at an estimated two one-hundredths of an inch, bake the Arctic and produce Sahara-like temperatures in Paris and Berlin, the prediction would have been dismissed as alarmist. But many worst-case scenarios from that time are now realities.

    ...
    So far, the costs of underestimation have been enormous. New York City’s subway system did not flood in its first 108 years, but Hurricane Sandy’s 2012 storm surge caused nearly $5 billion in water damage, much of which is still not repaired. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey gave Houston and the surrounding region a $125 billion lesson about the costs of misjudging the potential for floods.
    Opinion | Climate Change Will Cost Us Even More Than We Think - The New York Times
    Economists greatly underestimate the price tag on harsher weather and higher seas. Why is that?

    For some time now it has been clear that the effects of climate change are appearing faster than scientists anticipated. Now it turns out that there is another form of underestimation as bad or worse than the scientific one: the underestimating by economists of the costs.

    ...
    One reason is obvious: Since climate scientists have been underestimating the rate of climate change and the severity of its effects, then economists will necessarily underestimate their costs.
    One problem is lack of experience with similar conditions. Another problem is difficult-to-quantify variables, like biodiversity. Another is cascading effects.

  2. Top | #542
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    11,091
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    16,797
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
    Opinion | How Scientists Got Climate Change So Wrong - The New York Times
    Few thought it would arrive so quickly. Now we’re facing consequences once viewed as fringe scenarios.

    For decades, most scientists saw climate change as a distant prospect. We now know that thinking was wrong. This summer, for instance, a heat wave in Europe penetrated the Arctic, pushing temperatures into the 80s across much of the Far North and, according to the Belgian climate scientist Xavier Fettweis, melting some 40 billion tons of Greenland’s ice sheet.

    Had a scientist in the early 1990s suggested that within 25 years a single heat wave would measurably raise sea levels, at an estimated two one-hundredths of an inch, bake the Arctic and produce Sahara-like temperatures in Paris and Berlin, the prediction would have been dismissed as alarmist. But many worst-case scenarios from that time are now realities.

    ...
    So far, the costs of underestimation have been enormous. New York City’s subway system did not flood in its first 108 years, but Hurricane Sandy’s 2012 storm surge caused nearly $5 billion in water damage, much of which is still not repaired. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey gave Houston and the surrounding region a $125 billion lesson about the costs of misjudging the potential for floods.
    Opinion | Climate Change Will Cost Us Even More Than We Think - The New York Times
    Economists greatly underestimate the price tag on harsher weather and higher seas. Why is that?

    For some time now it has been clear that the effects of climate change are appearing faster than scientists anticipated. Now it turns out that there is another form of underestimation as bad or worse than the scientific one: the underestimating by economists of the costs.

    ...
    One reason is obvious: Since climate scientists have been underestimating the rate of climate change and the severity of its effects, then economists will necessarily underestimate their costs.
    One problem is lack of experience with similar conditions. Another problem is difficult-to-quantify variables, like biodiversity. Another is cascading effects.
    The New York Times, you're quoting the NYT? That has as much credibility as Pravda!

  3. Top | #543
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    6,382
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    23,211
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    The New York Times, you're quoting the NYT? That has as much credibility as Pravda!
    Angelo, I thought that you believed in capitalism.

  4. Top | #544
    Administrator lpetrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Lebanon, OR
    Posts
    6,382
    Archived
    16,829
    Total Posts
    23,211
    Rep Power
    79
    The NSW bushfires are different. Climate change is the culprit
    In the past I have heard some federal politicians dodge the question of the influence of climate change on extreme weather and fires by saying, "It's terrible that this matter is being raised while the fires are still burning." But if not now, then when?

    "Unprecedented" is a word that we are hearing a lot: from fire chiefs, politicians, and the weather bureau. I have just returned from California where I spoke to fire chiefs still battling unseasonal fires. The same word, "unprecedented", came up.

    Unprecedented dryness; reductions in long-term rainfall; low humidity; high temperatures; wind velocities; fire danger indices; fire spread and ferocity; instances of pyro-convective fires (fire storms – making their own weather); early starts and late finishes to bushfire seasons. An established long-term trend driven by a warming, drying climate. The numbers don’t lie, and the science is clear.
    So Australia's getting it also.

    New South Wales is in southeastern Australia.

  5. Top | #545
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    21,631
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,108
    Rep Power
    82
    Today is the first day since records began when no rain was recorded anywhere on the Australian mainland.

    The Australian mainland is a continent with approximately the same land area as the continental United States.

  6. Top | #546
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,203
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    29,416
    Rep Power
    54
    RU sure. Last week we got some drizzle, a trace, here on the coast when authorities officially reported no rain, just fog, in the state. Difficult thing confirming no rain when not enough people or qualified people are available to report actual condition outcomes. Just sayin' ....

    Jeez I'm beginning to read like Speakpigeon​.

  7. Top | #547
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    11,091
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    16,797
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Today is the first day since records began when no rain was recorded anywhere on the Australian mainland.

    The Australian mainland is a continent with approximately the same land area as the continental United States.
    Big difference being that much of Australia's interior gets very little rain to begin with.

    http://www.bonzle.com/c/a?a=f&sc=dry

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •