Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Bruce Ross and global warming - Record-Searchlight (blog)

"It is hard to exaggerate how dramatic this is. Perhaps not since the felling of America's vast forests in the 19th century, or possibly since the razing of China's and western Europe's great forests a thousand years before that, has the world seen such a spectacular environmental change. The consequences for Arctic ecosystems will be swingeing."


Mr. Ross's recent blog caught my eye. Thanks Bruce! Enjoyed reading it and his reference to "my ruined weekend." Too late for that, I suppose. How about a ruined Tuesday night? Or by the time I publish this a ruined Wednesday morning.

I disagree with the Economist quote that Bruce provided. Global warming will not "make a lot of people rich." It will make a tiny number of people incredibly, obscenely rich. Not that they need the money.

People like the Koch Brothers, for example, who have benefitted as much as anyone on Earth from our addiction to fossil fuels. And have done everything possible to make sure we continue our addiction, including giving over $61 million "to groups denying climate change science since 1997."

Bruce refers to an Economist article about the disappearing ice in the Arctic that I had not read and found fascinating. My first thought as I read it that it was that not long ago that this magazine denied that humans are responsible for climate change. Somewhere along the line they evolved. When? I don't know but here is what they are now saying:

"Since 1951 it (the Arctic) has warmed roughly twice as much as the global average. In that period the temperature in Greenland has gone up by 1.5°C, compared with around 0.7°C globally. This disparity is expected to continue. A 2°C increase in global temperatures--which appears inevitable as greenhouse-gas emissions soar--would mean Arctic warming of 3-6°C."

If this happens--this level of warming--we are talking 5.4-10.8°F. That would be astounding if that occurred.

As anyone knows who reads my blogs, I write these ridiculously long pieces that go on and on but it's articles like this one from the Economist that make me do it. Rather than ruining my weekend, I love this stuff. Now that I am aware of it, I will need to buy this issue. This is what I live for. Consider this juicy paragraph:

There is no serious doubt about the basic cause of the warming. It is, in the Arctic as everywhere, the result of an increase in heat-trapping atmospheric gases, mainly carbon dioxide released when fossil fuels are burned. Because the atmosphere is shedding less solar heat, it is warming--a physical effect predicted back in 1896 by Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish scientist. But why is the Arctic warming faster than other places?"

And this:

"But the main reason for Arctic amplification is the warming effect of replacing light-coloured snow and ice with darker-coloured land or water. Because dark surfaces absorb more heat than light ones, this causes local warming, which melts more snow and ice, revealing more dark land or water, and so on. Known as the albedo effect, this turns out to be a more powerful positive feedback than most researchers had expected. Most climate models predicted that the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free in summer by the end of this century; an analysis published in 2009 in Geophysical Research Letters suggested it might happen as early as 2037. Some now think it will be sooner."

And ponder this quote: "Greenland's ice cap is losing an estimated 200 gigatonnes of ice a year, enough to supply a billion people with water."

Can you imagine what we could do with all that fresh water if we could capture and use it?A gigaton is a billion tons. Incredible! And even more incredible is the fact that there are humans among us who can read this and insist melting ice has nothing to do with a warmer world. Can you imagine the thought process that allows them to believe that? As a psychologist for over 25 years, I have often marveled at how some minds work, but climate change deniers are, by far, the most fascinating to me. I will never understand how they think what they do and believe it has anything to do with science. It is a mystery.

Finally, let me thank reddingsister for quipping that I will be "eaten by Foxy Lady." That made me laugh. And despite one claim to the contrary, I have never banned anyone from my blog. I promise. I would not know how to do this.

No comments:

Post a Comment