Just Temperature Redux: What about the Cherries and Apples?

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 1:23 AM GMT on May 21, 2012

Share this Blog
14
+

Just Temperature Redux: What about the Cherries and Apples?

March and April were very warm in the United States, and especially in March when it was 86 degrees F in Detroit, there was a lot of press attention to the heat (my blog at the time). Following the March heat wave I watched with interest the caster that has weather events and earthquakes on the homepage. There was a period of time when there were record highs and, a couple of hundred miles away, record lows. There were these waves moving (very) warm air north and (very) cool air south (another old Rood blog Warm, Cold, Warm, Cold). This is what weather does, moves heat from the tropics to the poles; it tries to smooth out the distribution of temperature, heat, energy. The climate of the Earth is strongly linked to the Equator to Pole temperature contrast. (I note that, at this writing, a May 20 record high in Holland, MI, of 92 F. In fact, May 20 is pretty much coast-to-coast high.)

So I am watching these highs and lows, expecting someone to write to me and tell me how cold it was in Tennessee, and what do you say to that you alarmist?

The past few months provide us a nice example of climate, and a useful framing for thinking about the future. Scientists are always explaining that just because the globe is, on average, warming, that does not mean that it no longer gets cold. When I have written about this in the past, I always start with the Sun still goes away at the winter pole; it gets cold; the pole is relatively isolated, so there are cold pockets of air up north. (Yes, I am presuming a Northern Hemisphere bias.) So it’s cold up north, and down south it’s hot. If you think about the Earth, the seasons, the distribution of land and ocean, an increase in average global temperature suggests an increase in the average temperature between, say, 30 degrees latitude south and north. Half of the Earth’s area lies in those bounds, and, well, the Sun is always there.

Next if we think about weather and climate, the contrast between the temperature at the equator and the pole is a measure of the amount of mixing that the atmosphere and ocean need to do to work towards a balance. If someplace up north is still getting about as cold as it used to get, because the Sun is down and it is a bit isolated, and there is more and more build up of heat in the tropics, then something has to give. Using climate and weather models as a guide, we see large mixing events in the late winter, perhaps more characteristic of events of, historically, early spring.





Figure 1: From an old, but good, blog: Warm, Cold, Warm, Cold. A schematic picture that represents a wave in temperature. There are hot and cold parts of the wave.

So there are bursts of warm air north in late winter or earlier in the spring. But there are still pockets of cold air and these get pushed south. The variability, hot and cold contrast in this case, actually increases. The bursts of warm air appear as the onset of spring, leaves and flowers come out. And there they sit waiting for the return of the cold air. This year’s warm spring did great damage to the sour cherry crop (Michigan, Wisconsin, New York) and the apple crop all across the upper Midwest. (Iowa, Michigan).

This scenario of a warm period followed by a frost that kills fruit blossoms is not new. I grew up in the South, and just about every year there was some strip of peach-growing land that was damaged by the onset of spring, followed by a frost. What this current case study lets us think about is what does a warming climate bring to table? Earlier warm spells extending farther north. Increased vulnerability as larger areas of land are impacted by the mixing of the increasing temperature contrasts. Increased crop risk as new weather threats encroach on new regions. There are adaptation strategies for these risks, but they come at a cost.

So I want to finish this blog with something of a change of gears. It relies on a paper brought to my attention by Chris Burt. It is a paper in Nature entitled Warming experiments underpredict plant phenological responses to climate change by E. M. Wolkovich (2012) and many others. There are a couple of points I want to make about this paper.

First, the paper is a nice exposition about how biological scientists think about the intersection of their field with climate change. Advancing onset of leafing and flowering is one of the most sensitive indicators of the onset of spring. Though many factors influence when plants start to leaf out and flower, temperature is the predominate factor. The variable that is used as a proxy for climate is mean annual temperature, and variability of the mean annual temperature represents the variability in the onset of spring.

The second point I want to make about the paper is a clarification – perhaps a translation between different scientific fields. As pointed out in Wolkovich et al. (2012), there is substantial observational evidence that spring is coming earlier. This move to earlier times is especially evident in the northern hemisphere and more evident at higher latitudes, say, in Michigan or Canada. When Wolkovich et al. (2012) talk about “warming experiments” they are not talking about experiments with climate models. They are talking about experiments that artificially warm plant communities to investigate their sensitivity to increased temperatures. In this paper, they find that such experiments do not explain the observations of the onset of spring in natural plant communities.

Returning to climate change - Wolkovich et al. (2012) estimate that for each degree C that mean annual temperature increases the onset of leafing and flowering will move forward by 5-6 days. Given temperature trends for the past forty years, this translates to 1.1 to 3.3 days per decade. And returning to the cherries and apples, these types of trees are especially vulnerable to bloom followed by a frost, especially in high latitudes. So if you are an orchard fruit grower, how do you use this information? Do you treat this year as a simple fluke of weather, or do you look to start a replacement program with different types of fruit or different hybrids as the orchard is refurbished? Or do you look to ways to manage the temperature in the orchard, and perhaps a market advantage with earlier fruit?

r



Figure 2: Larger image Ripe by Jennifer Bruce from Absolute Michigan


Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 170 - 120

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

Quoting BobWallace:
NPR had a piece on this evening's news about farmers in Missouri dealing with very early, very dry conditions brought on as much by heat as lack of rain.

Climatologists call it a "flash drought," a sudden, unexpected burst of high temperatures and low humidity that can wither crops in a matter of days. And with temperatures hovering above 90 degrees, farmers worry the weather could have disastrous consequences on corn and other crops.

One of the farmers talks about how, this time last year, his fields were under water and this year his crop is threatened by too little water.
I don't think it's going out on a limb to state that a new climate regime has been entered, at least here in the U.S.:

Hot

Hot

Hot
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13744
A new term for me - flash drought.

NPR had a piece on this evening's news about farmers in Missouri dealing with very early, very dry conditions brought on as much by heat as lack of rain.

Climatologists call it a "flash drought," a sudden, unexpected burst of high temperatures and low humidity that can wither crops in a matter of days. And with temperatures hovering above 90 degrees, farmers worry the weather could have disastrous consequences on corn and other crops.

One of the farmers talks about how, this time last year, his fields were under water and this year his crop is threatened by too little water.

Link

It has been interesting to hear nothing about flooding in the Midwest after a string of flood years.

Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting Neapolitan:
I suppose I'll be considered "alarmist", but that's okay; if the apartment building is on fire and I'm called an "alarmist" for dialing 911, so be it. But I'm beginning to think we're closer to the edge than many of us might imagine (Zakaria's rosy outlook in comment #159 aside). A coupld of things I've run across:

--Climate Armageddon: How the World's Weather Could Quickly Run Amo

The true gloomsters are scientists who look at climate through the lens of "dynamical systems," a mathematics that describes things that tend to change suddenly and are difficult to predict. It is the mathematics of the tipping point—the moment at which a "system" that has been changing slowly and predictably will suddenly "flip." The colloquial example is the straw that breaks that camel's back. Or you can also think of it as a ship that is stable until it tips too far in one direction and then capsizes. In this view, Earth's climate is, or could soon be, ready to capsize, causing sudden, perhaps catastrophic, changes. And once it capsizes, it could be next to impossible to right it again.

The article talks about a number of different large-scale "tipping points" that are scary enough if looked at on their own, but, considered as part of a complex, tightly interwoven system, are considerbaly more "alarming". For instance, the Amazon rainforest is in an ever-tightening downward spiral, and its loss could soon hit a point that could alter global weather patterns over the course of not centuries or decades, but just a few years. Ditto Arctic Sea ice. Ditto the West Antarctic ice sheet. Ditto Canadian and Siberian boreal forests. And so on.

The real nightmare scenario is when all these changes begin to rein- force one another. The Arctic loses its summer sea ice, causing Greenland's ice to melt and encouraging the boreal forests to change as well. The freshwater runoff changes the thermohaline dynamics and affects the jet stream. The El Niño–Southern Oscillation and the Amazon interact in such a way as to reinforce one another, perhaps affecting the monsoon in India and Africa. "It wouldn't be such a silly thing to say that if you meddle with one, you might affect the other," says Lenton. "Which direction the causality would go is not always obvious. We know it's connected, we know it's nonlinear, we know they somehow couple together. When you see one change, you see changes in the other."

"Then we start talking about domino dynamics," says Lenton. "The worse case would be that kind of scenario in which you tip one thing and that encourages the tipping of another. You get these cascading effects."

It would take a perfect storm of climate flips to get us to this particular worst-case scenario. If it does come to pass, however, at least it will happen quickly.


--IEA: Global CO2 Emissions Hit New Record In 2011, Keeping World On Track For ‘Devastating’ 11°F Warming

First the bad news from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Thanks to a huge jump in Chinese emissions, “global carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil-fuel combustion reached a record high of 31.6 gigatonnes (Gt) in 2011.”

The worse news is that, “The new data provide further evidence that the door to a 2°C trajectory is about to close,” according to IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol. Why does that matter? As Reuters reported:

Scientists say ensuring global average temperatures this century do not rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels is needed to limit devastating climate effects like crop failure and melting glaciers.


--Apocalypse Soon: Has Civilization Passed the Environmental Point of No Return?

Remember how Wile E. Coyote, in his obsessive pursuit of the Road Runner, would fall off a cliff? The hapless predator ran straight out off the edge, stopped in midair as only an animated character could, looked beneath him in an eye-popping moment of truth, and plummeted straight down into a puff of dust. Splat! Four decades ago, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer model called World3 warned of such a possible course for human civilization in the 21st century. In Limits to Growth, a bitterly disputed 1972 book that explicated these findings, researchers argued that the global industrial system has so much inertia that it cannot readily correct course in response to signals of planetary stress. But unless economic growth skidded to a halt before reaching the edge, they warned, society was headed for overshoot—and a splat that could kill billions.

Don't look now but we are running in midair, a new book asserts. In 2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years (Chelsea Green Publishing), Jorgen Randers of the BI Norwegian Business School in Oslo, and one of the original World3 modelers, argues that the second half of the 21st century will bring us near apocalypse in the form of severe global warming. Dennis Meadows, professor emeritus of systems policy at the University of New Hampshire who headed the original M.I.T. team and revisited World3 in 1994 and 2004, has an even darker view. The 1970s program had yielded a variety of scenarios, in some of which humanity manages to control production and population to live within planetary limits (described as Limits to Growth). Meadows contends that the model's sustainable pathways are no longer within reach because humanity has failed to act accordingly.

Instead, the latest global data are tracking one of the most alarming scenarios, in which these variables increase steadily to reach a peak and then suddenly drop in a process called collapse. In fact, "I see collapse happening already," he says. "Food per capita is going down, energy is becoming more scarce, groundwater is being depleted." Most worrisome, Randers notes, greenhouse gases are being emitted twice as fast as oceans and forests can absorb them. Whereas in 1972 humans were using 85 percent of the regenerative capacity of the biosphere to support economic activities such as growing food, producing goods and assimilating pollutants, the figure is now at 150 percent—and growing.


--And so on, and so forth, and so on, and so forth... The point is, even if the most dire predictions don't come to pass, there's little to no reason to suspect--as do some still in denial--that only the smallest and most inconsequential effects are going to be experienced. IOW, we're in trouble, deep trouble. And it's getting worse by the day...


As Levi32 might say, I see the experts have finally come around to my way of thinking. ;-)

Areas of permafrost are melting and atmospheric methane is on the rise. The past 40 years of warming will seem meager compared to what the next 40 years will bring. Should I live another 20 years, I feel certain that I will witness far more negative effects of a warming climate than I would have ever wanted to witness.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
Quoting OldLeatherneck:
The US Navy has declared that a 6-9 foot sea-level rise will destroy every seaport in the entire world. Will this happen during this century....??? Who knows?? Most experts seem to say that it would take hundreds of years for both the Greenland and Antarctic icecaps to disappear.
But here's the thing (or part of it): while it will likely take centuries--if not millennia--for Greenland and Antarctica to become expanses of brown rock dotted with steaming puddles, our precarious and tenuous human existence will encounter large-scale catastrophe far before that happens. IOW, while it's true that if those two places melted overnight, sea levels would rise a few hundred feet, the amount of misery and anguish and upheaval caused by just a fraction of it going away relatively quickly--a few decades, say--would be unlike anything the modern world has ever experienced.

Enjoy your judgeship--and know we feel your pain. ;-)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13744
Quoting BobWallace:
I attempt to not go full-alamist, largely because I don't know what the climate science consensus is. I can't tell who might be pushing far out past the data and who might be vastly under-estimating how bad it is/is likely to get.
I understand your way of thinking, so I can appreciate your hesitance to "go full alarmist". ;-) But I study this subject in great detail, and, while I certainly don't claim any superiority of knowledge on the subject, I think I can modestly and honestly claim a valid understanding of the consensus--and it is an alarming (and there's that word again) one. Bits and pieces viewed alone might not seem bad, and, in fact, may appear just as random and interesting curiosities: Say, there's record low ice volume again in the Arctic! Hey, there's yet another drought in the Amazon! Wow, another dozen nations set new all-time high temperature records again this year, while none set new all-time record lows! But when viewed holistically--that is, all at once, every item part of a huge and complex machine--the picture, in my opinion, goes far beyond interesting and ends up deep in the realm of the extremely disturbing. And so I say again, with nary a speck of hyperbole or exaggeration: we are in deep trouble.
Quoting BobWallace:The one solid thing that I can settle on is that it makes zero sense to not take preventative action.

Worst case, we spend a little more money converting to renewable energy and end up with cheaper energy bills, a cleaner environment, and sustainable energy sources.
I wholeheartedly agree...though I'm beginning more and more to believe that such expenditures will merely delay what we've allowed to become inevitable through greed, ignorance, procrastination, and simple stupidity.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13744
Quoting BobWallace:
"we're in trouble, deep trouble. And it's getting worse by the day..."

I attempt to not go full-alamist, largely because I don't know what the climate science consensus is. I can't tell who might be pushing far out past the data and who might be vastly under-estimating how bad it is/is likely to get.

The one solid thing that I can settle on is that it makes zero sense to not take preventative action.

Worst case, we spend a little more money converting to renewable energy and end up with cheaper energy bills, a cleaner environment, and sustainable energy sources.



I have mixed feelings bout the future. For most of my life I've been accused of having "contagious enthusiasm." Now I'm slowly moving into the "Doomer" camp. I see no way that governments across the globe are going to take any meaningful actions to curtail or reduce CO2 emissions before 2020. Which means we are slowly sliding towards a worst case scenario. However, nobody can define the timeline for a worst case scenario. There is one thing to keep in mind, while what is transpiring rapidly in geoligical terms is still a relatively slow process in human terms.

The US Navy has declared that a 6-9 foot sea-level rise will destroy every seaport in the entire world. Will this happen during this century....??? Who knows?? Most experts seem to say that it would take hundreds of years for both the Greenland and Antarctic icecaps to disappear. So civilization may have time to move major population centers that will be impacted by rising sea-levels.

Climatologically speaking, I'm more concerned about rapidly changing weather patterns. Extreme heat waves, extreme drought and violent storms with severe flooding may begin to occur more frequently causing catastrophic economic and humanitarian distress.

While Carbon Dioxide is still the "Elephant in the room", accounting for about 80% of the increase in radiative forcing, Methane may be the "Herd of Mastodons" waiting on the horizon. I don't think any of the scientists who are studying this can accurately model the climatological effects of exponentially increasing releases of Methane.

With the world's population exceeding 7 Billion and no sign that it will not reach 9 Billion it is hard to imagine how there will be enough food, water and the energy to support that many people at the same time the world attempts to wean itself off of fossil fuels.

This will be my last post until Wednesday. I'm an election judge in the Texas Primary tomorrow. What fun that will be!! I live in a Red county in a very Red state. Being a Democrat here is akin to being a Jehovah's Witness in Saudi Arabia.

Keep up the good work my friends and I'll be back on Wednesday.

Member Since: May 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
"we're in trouble, deep trouble. And it's getting worse by the day..."

I attempt to not go full-alamist, largely because I don't know what the climate science consensus is. I can't tell who might be pushing far out past the data and who might be vastly under-estimating how bad it is/is likely to get.

The one solid thing that I can settle on is that it makes zero sense to not take preventative action.

Worst case, we spend a little more money converting to renewable energy and end up with cheaper energy bills, a cleaner environment, and sustainable energy sources.

Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
163. vanwx
Thanks for the links. All have been due-ly book-marked. I do wish they could see below 8 celcius but "hey' I'm chasing the gulf stream here.Thanks again.
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
I suppose I'll be considered "alarmist", but that's okay; if the apartment building is on fire and I'm called an "alarmist" for dialing 911, so be it. But I'm beginning to think we're closer to the edge than many of us might imagine (Zakaria's rosy outlook in comment #159 aside). A coupld of things I've run across:

--Climate Armageddon: How the World's Weather Could Quickly Run Amo

The true gloomsters are scientists who look at climate through the lens of "dynamical systems," a mathematics that describes things that tend to change suddenly and are difficult to predict. It is the mathematics of the tipping point—the moment at which a "system" that has been changing slowly and predictably will suddenly "flip." The colloquial example is the straw that breaks that camel's back. Or you can also think of it as a ship that is stable until it tips too far in one direction and then capsizes. In this view, Earth's climate is, or could soon be, ready to capsize, causing sudden, perhaps catastrophic, changes. And once it capsizes, it could be next to impossible to right it again.

The article talks about a number of different large-scale "tipping points" that are scary enough if looked at on their own, but, considered as part of a complex, tightly interwoven system, are considerbaly more "alarming". For instance, the Amazon rainforest is in an ever-tightening downward spiral, and its loss could soon hit a point that could alter global weather patterns over the course of not centuries or decades, but just a few years. Ditto Arctic Sea ice. Ditto the West Antarctic ice sheet. Ditto Canadian and Siberian boreal forests. And so on.

The real nightmare scenario is when all these changes begin to rein- force one another. The Arctic loses its summer sea ice, causing Greenland's ice to melt and encouraging the boreal forests to change as well. The freshwater runoff changes the thermohaline dynamics and affects the jet stream. The El Niño–Southern Oscillation and the Amazon interact in such a way as to reinforce one another, perhaps affecting the monsoon in India and Africa. "It wouldn't be such a silly thing to say that if you meddle with one, you might affect the other," says Lenton. "Which direction the causality would go is not always obvious. We know it's connected, we know it's nonlinear, we know they somehow couple together. When you see one change, you see changes in the other."

"Then we start talking about domino dynamics," says Lenton. "The worse case would be that kind of scenario in which you tip one thing and that encourages the tipping of another. You get these cascading effects."

It would take a perfect storm of climate flips to get us to this particular worst-case scenario. If it does come to pass, however, at least it will happen quickly.


--IEA: Global CO2 Emissions Hit New Record In 2011, Keeping World On Track For ‘Devastating’ 11°F Warming

First the bad news from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Thanks to a huge jump in Chinese emissions, “global carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil-fuel combustion reached a record high of 31.6 gigatonnes (Gt) in 2011.”

The worse news is that, “The new data provide further evidence that the door to a 2°C trajectory is about to close,” according to IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol. Why does that matter? As Reuters reported:

Scientists say ensuring global average temperatures this century do not rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels is needed to limit devastating climate effects like crop failure and melting glaciers.


--Apocalypse Soon: Has Civilization Passed the Environmental Point of No Return?

Remember how Wile E. Coyote, in his obsessive pursuit of the Road Runner, would fall off a cliff? The hapless predator ran straight out off the edge, stopped in midair as only an animated character could, looked beneath him in an eye-popping moment of truth, and plummeted straight down into a puff of dust. Splat! Four decades ago, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer model called World3 warned of such a possible course for human civilization in the 21st century. In Limits to Growth, a bitterly disputed 1972 book that explicated these findings, researchers argued that the global industrial system has so much inertia that it cannot readily correct course in response to signals of planetary stress. But unless economic growth skidded to a halt before reaching the edge, they warned, society was headed for overshoot—and a splat that could kill billions.

Don't look now but we are running in midair, a new book asserts. In 2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years (Chelsea Green Publishing), Jorgen Randers of the BI Norwegian Business School in Oslo, and one of the original World3 modelers, argues that the second half of the 21st century will bring us near apocalypse in the form of severe global warming. Dennis Meadows, professor emeritus of systems policy at the University of New Hampshire who headed the original M.I.T. team and revisited World3 in 1994 and 2004, has an even darker view. The 1970s program had yielded a variety of scenarios, in some of which humanity manages to control production and population to live within planetary limits (described as Limits to Growth). Meadows contends that the model's sustainable pathways are no longer within reach because humanity has failed to act accordingly.

Instead, the latest global data are tracking one of the most alarming scenarios, in which these variables increase steadily to reach a peak and then suddenly drop in a process called collapse. In fact, "I see collapse happening already," he says. "Food per capita is going down, energy is becoming more scarce, groundwater is being depleted." Most worrisome, Randers notes, greenhouse gases are being emitted twice as fast as oceans and forests can absorb them. Whereas in 1972 humans were using 85 percent of the regenerative capacity of the biosphere to support economic activities such as growing food, producing goods and assimilating pollutants, the figure is now at 150 percent—and growing.


--And so on, and so forth, and so on, and so forth... The point is, even if the most dire predictions don't come to pass, there's little to no reason to suspect--as do some still in denial--that only the smallest and most inconsequential effects are going to be experienced. IOW, we're in trouble, deep trouble. And it's getting worse by the day...
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13744
green - percy

Bringing news is a good thing. But how about giving us a brief statement of what you're linking?

If it's worth sharing, it's worth summarizing....
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Germany again with wonderful news. It can be done and is being done.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
reason for optimism

Um, fluff article from CNN about how a lot has actually gotten better in the world recently. Just a counterpoint to the gloom and doom I bring here. Absolutly not related to anything this blog is about.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting vanwx:
BTW,
Would one of you knowledgeable people help me find some good sites for SST's (sea surface temp;s)?



Link .
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
By the way, over on Nevin's blog, his latest post is showing several earlier eyars with similar holes in the north of Baffin bay.

SO good news for the ice in that this year is not too special, at least in that regard. Hopefully i am similarly wrong is my pesssimism.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting vanwx:
BTW,
Would one of you knowledgeable people help me find some good sites for SST's (sea surface temp;s)?


BEst I've found is on the wunderground site here. Scroll down to the bottom. But it has been two years since I've really used sea temp data so maybe something else has grown in the meantime.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
155. vanwx
BTW,
Would one of you knowledgeable people help me find some good sites for SST's (sea surface temp;s)?
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
154. vanwx
Gee green...
I 've liked both your and Someone..'s contributions. I think you are refering to the faker/troll 'MaoistForAgenda21:'. some symbiote disrupter. Trolls try to get working people into useless fights or false dichotomies. I thought this particular was pretty good at throwing those disrupters out.
'MaoistForAgenda21' is a contradiction in terms; only a pychopath or a 'bot' would call themselves such. The 'enemy' wins if we can not talk together. This isn't our first troll. I've no idea if there is some 'agenda 21' but no Maoist would support that.
Both you, Greentortulini and 'someonesgottibetherookie' have always argued for a planet where humans can live. This stupid troll is just a phase. Lets talk climate.
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


When I said a lie that puts the innocent in harms way is never forgivable and should be be dealt with using the death penalty I was not advocating lynch mobs or a lack of a jury trial. I believe in the due process of law. What I should have stated is that those found guilty of using lies to put others at risk should have the death penalty as an accepted punishment.

I am not an advocate of anything that Pentti Linkola says. First off, I would never deny a person the right to try to save themself when all cannot be saved. I would, however, chop off the hand of any that tried to stop others from saving themself. When it come to climate change, we are all in the same boat. We are not trying to leave a sinking ship when it comes to climate change for there are no life boats to man. We either sink together or work to save as many that try to save themself. People that use lies to put others at risk I will leave to fend for themselves and would not look back at them with any feeling of sympathy.


Please don't respond to him. He doesn't want respect or honest debate, he just wants attention.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting MaoistForAgenda21:


Well said my fellow comrade, I couldn't agree more! Desperate times call for desperate measures, it's time we start culling this herd of useless eaters and the deniers go 1st! Have you heard about Pennti Linkola? He has some wunderful ideas needed to usher in our new age utopia, Ordo ad chao, very exciting time to be alive my friend when we get to live in a transitory phase of existence and witness the proverbial phoenix rising from the ashes!

Pentti Linkola on The Way Forward:
Pentti Linkola: Ideas


Pentti Linkola writes about the apocalyptic climactic changes that will soon effect us here in humanityland, but he doesn't take the easy way out that most authors do. Instead, he chooses to be brutally honest and suggests that we've already missed our chance to curb our damage of the world, so what we must do is to begin the elimination of human and technological excesses now.

Quotations

"What to do, when a ship carrying a hundred passengers suddenly capsizes and there is only one lifeboat? When the lifeboat is full, those who hate life will try to load it with more people and sink the lot. Those who love and respect life will take the ship's axe and sever the extra hands that cling to the sides."

"The composition of the Greens seems to be the same as that of the population in general — mainly pieces of drifting wood, people who never think."

"A minority can never have any other effective means to influence the course of matters but through the use of violence."

"Any dictatorship would be better than modern democracy. There cannot be so incompetent dictator, that he would show more stupidity than a majority of the people. Best dictatorship would be one where lots of heads would roll and government would prevent any economical growth."

"The most central and irrational faith among people is the faith in technology and economical growth. Its priests believe until their death that material prosperity bring enjoyment and happiness - even though all the proofs in history have shown that only lack and attempt cause a life worth living, that the material prosperity doesn't bring anything else than despair. These priests believe in technology still when they choke in their gas masks."

"That there are billions of people over 60kg weight on this planet is recklessness."

"Alternative movements and groups are a welcome relief and a present for the society of economic growth."

"We will have to...learn from the history of revolutionary movements — the national socialists, the Finnish Stalinists, from the many stages of the Russian revolution, from the methods of the Red Brigades — and forget our narcissistic selves."

"Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed."

"A fundamental, devastating error is to set up a political system based on desire. Society and life are been organized on basis of what an individual wants, not on what is good for him or her...Just as only one out of 100,000 has the talent to be an engineer or an acrobat, only a few are those truly capable of managing the matters of a nation or mankind as a whole...In this time and this part of the World we are headlessly hanging on democracy and parliamentary system, even though these are the most mindless and desperate experiments of the mankind...In democratic coutries the destruction of nature and sum of ecological disasters has accumulated most...Our only hope lies in strong central government and uncompromizing control of the individual citizen."


"If the present amount of Earths population is preserved and is reduced only by the means of birth control, then:

- Birthgiving must be licenced. To enhance population quality, genetically or socially unfit homes will be denied offspring, so that several birth licences can be allowed to families of quality.

- Energy production must be drastically reduced. Electricity is allowed only for the most necessary lighting and communications.

- Food: Hunting must be made more efficient. Human diet will include rats and invertebrate animals. Agriculture moves to small un-mechanized units. All human manure is used as fertilizer.

- Traffic is mostly done with bicycles and rowing boats. Private cars are confiscated. Long-distance travel is done with sparse mass transport. Trees will be planted on most roads.

- Foreign affairs: All mass immigration and most of import-export trade must stop. Cross-border travel is allowed only for small numbers of diplomats and correspondents.

- Business will mostly end. Manufacture is allowed only for well argumented needs. All major manufacturing capacity is state owned. Products will be durable and last for generations.

- Science and schooling: Education will concentrate on practical skills. All competition is rooted out. Technological research is reduced to extreme minimum. But every child will learn how to clean a fish in a way that only the big shiny bones are left over."


When I said a lie that puts the innocent in harms way is never forgivable and should be be dealt with using the death penalty I was not advocating lynch mobs or a lack of a jury trial. I believe in the due process of law. What I should have stated is that those found guilty of using lies to put others at risk should have the death penalty as an accepted punishment.

I am not an advocate of anything that Pentti Linkola says. First off, I would never deny a person the right to try to save themself when all cannot be saved. I would, however, chop off the hand of any that tried to stop others from saving themself. When it come to climate change, we are all in the same boat. We are not trying to leave a sinking ship when it comes to climate change for there are no life boats to man. We either sink together or work to save as many that try to save themself. People that use lies to put others at risk I will leave to fend for themselves and would not look back at them with any feeling of sympathy.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
Quoting BobWallace:
The UN's target is a 2 C (3.6 degree Fahrenheit) limit on warming from pre-industrial levels for manageable climate change.

In a report issued on the penultimate day of new UN talks in Bonn, scientists said Earth's average global temperature rise could exceed the dangerous 3.5 C (6.3 F) warming they had flagged only six months ago.

Marion Vieweg, a policy researcher with German firm Climate Analytics, told AFP the 3.5 C (6.3 F) estimate had been based on the assumption that all countries will meet their pledges, in themselves inadequate, to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

New research has found this is not "a realistic assumption," she said, adding that right now "we can't quantify yet how much above" 3.5 C (6.3 F) Earth will warm.

The monitoring tool is called Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a joint project of Climate Analytics, Ecofys and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

Her colleague, Bill Hare, said the gap between countries' promised interventions and the reality was "getting bigger."

Projections are for greenhouse-gas overshoot of between nine and 11 billion tonnes per year beyond the annual 44-billion-tonne ceiling needed by 2020 to achieve the 2 C (3.6 F) target.


Link


This puts us back to pre-industrial revolution values any time we see fit....

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BobWallace:


Any economist who believes that labor won't largely be eliminated from future economies isn't using their eyes. You can see that happening all around you now. We already have hundreds of millions of people for whom we have no 'need'. The days of everyone being engaged in doing something useful are over. Many of the world's cities are packed with people 'just getting by'. A few generations ago they would have been producing food, cobbling shoes, digging ditches.

Bored out of their minds - that one doesn't bother me. We continue to invent entertainment.

Hand made goods are basically entertainment for those creating the goods, in general. An entertaining way to make a living. The fact that a small portion of the market will pay a premium for those products makes it viable.

Will that hold as goods become cheaper and cheaper?



Accidentally skipped the last sentence in regards to my idea. The answer is probably not. My idea was built as a method of introducing biking to a local community as well as an experiment in a new type of cooperative. In regards to economics, it is more about reducing the barriers to entry for craftsmen rather than a long term TS solution.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting BobWallace:


Any economist who believes that labor won't largely be eliminated from future economies isn't using their eyes. You can see that happening all around you now. We already have hundreds of millions of people for whom we have no 'need'. The days of everyone being engaged in doing something useful are over. Many of the world's cities are packed with people 'just getting by'. A few generations ago they would have been producing food, cobbling shoes, digging ditches.

Bored out of their minds - that one doesn't bother me. We continue to invent entertainment.

Hand made goods are basically entertainment for those creating the goods, in general. An entertaining way to make a living. The fact that a small portion of the market will pay a premium for those products makes it viable.

Will that hold as goods become cheaper and cheaper?



To me, talking with economists has been an interesting experience. I don't understand how they think labor will always be necessary either... or actualy, they do make arguments that seem reasonable, but a few days later I can never get those arguments to add up in my head.

Futurology is harder than climate science in the sense that though we can predict technological thresholds, what humans will do when we get there is worrisome. I think there are a lot of biological impulses that will not want a world of plenty and peace. But not my subject and any speculation would put in tinfoil hat land.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
147. vanwx
I'm so embarrassed. I wrote...salinity decreasing.. and meant increasing. I was concerned about the fresh-water flush that happened last fall into to Bering sea. My main concern is about changes to the Thermo Haline Cycle but salinity changes the freeze up dates in the north. The Arctic Ocean had been one of the most stratified seas and that is changing. Thanks for the note about the Antarctic circumpolar currents; loss of temperature difference could have effects for the whole cycle (like how we've modified the jet stream into weaker and more southerly). The THC(thermo haline cycle) has different constraints.
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
Oops, wrong link. The one above is for land-based permafrost. This one should show the permafrost area under the Arctic Ocean.


Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Interesting topic. Found this...



Under the Arctic Ocean, which covers the North Pole, some of the sea floor is frozen (Figure 4). Permanently frozen sea floor is called subsea permafrost.

Subsea permafrost formed more than 11,000 years ago, during the last ice age. Back then, more of Earth's water was trapped as ice on land. That caused sea level to be lower than it is today. More land was exposed, and some of it froze. Then the ice age ended and the seas rose again. When the sea level rose, the oceans covered up areas of permafrost. Today, some of the sea floor is frozen up to 100 meters (328 feet) thick under the bottom of the ocean.

Subsea permafrost exists only under the Arctic Ocean. Subsea permafrost does not exist in the Southern Hemisphere.

...

The state with the most permafrost is Alaska (Figure 3). More than 80 percent of the state's land surface has permafrost underneath it. The Rocky Mountains, in the western U.S., also have permafrost.



Link


Just started reading a book on Siberia. A lot of Siberia is permafrost and it extends down over 3,000 feet in some places.

Sounds to me like a lot of northern lands are likely to turn into marsh rather than usable land as melting gets severe.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting OldLeatherneck:


It is my understanding that there is permafrost under the ocean on the East Siberian Ice Shelf (ESAS)




In the past decade, within the framework of joint Russian-German marine and terrestrial studies on the Arctic shelf, New Siberian Islands, and coastal lowlands of the Laptev and East Siberian seas, fundamentally new data have been obtained on terrestrial and offshore permafrost in this area. Field and laboratory investigations supplemented with numerical modeling and generalization of the results of numerous geological surveys, exploratory works, and scientific researches performed in previous years have made it possible to revise existing knowledge about the distribution, thickness, physical state, and history of development of terrestrial and offshore permafrost in the East Siberian part of the Arctic. The main results of these studies and their interpretation are discussed in this paper.


Full article is behind a paywall
Link


Ah! I see. Thank you for this information. I am not too old to still learn!
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


While there is no "permafrost" under the Arctic Ocean, there is under water frozen methane layers that are beginning to thaw.


It is my understanding that there is permafrost under the ocean on the East Siberian Ice Shelf (ESAS)




In the past decade, within the framework of joint Russian-German marine and terrestrial studies on the Arctic shelf, New Siberian Islands, and coastal lowlands of the Laptev and East Siberian seas, fundamentally new data have been obtained on terrestrial and offshore permafrost in this area. Field and laboratory investigations supplemented with numerical modeling and generalization of the results of numerous geological surveys, exploratory works, and scientific researches performed in previous years have made it possible to revise existing knowledge about the distribution, thickness, physical state, and history of development of terrestrial and offshore permafrost in the East Siberian part of the Arctic. The main results of these studies and their interpretation are discussed in this paper.


Full article is behind a paywall
Link
Member Since: May 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
Modelling sea level rise impacts on storm surges along US coasts

We find that substantial changes in the frequency of what are now considered extreme water levels may occur even at locations with relatively slow local sea level rise, when the difference in height between presently common and rare water levels is small. We estimate that, by mid-century, some locations may experience high water levels annually that would qualify today as 'century' (i.e., having a chance of occurrence of 1% annually) extremes. Today's century levels become 'decade' (having a chance of 10% annually) or more frequent events at about a third of the study gauges, and the majority of locations see substantially higher frequency of previously rare storm-driven water heights in the future. These results add support to the need for policy approaches that consider the non-stationarity of extreme events when evaluating risks of adverse climate impacts.


Full article in IOPScience Environmental Research letters

Link



After reading this article I was reminded of what Dr. masters recently posted about Hurricane Irene in 2011. Although Irene was only a TS when it hit the new York harbor it came within 8 inches of topping the seawall around Manhattan. Our coastal seaports might be threatened earlier than anticipated with increasing sea levels coupled with '100 year' Severe Weather events occuring every decade or more frequently.

We don't have decades for our politicians to decide that AGW is not a "HOAX" and another decade for them to debate which courses of action will have the least impact on the bottom line of the Petrochemical Industry.

Civilization as we have known it is hanging in the balance!!




Member Since: May 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
Quoting vanwx:



Thanks for that Bob, Amazing graphs! But what my concern is that the salinity of the arctic is lessoning. That Bering freeze up last winter was not so much that the temporal winter pole had moved to the dateline but that the Thermo Haline Cycle(as weak as it was) had displaced the latent fresh water to the Bering Sea. Also, naked ocean(as we have in the summer now) mixes more than the old 'under the ice'. ocean.


This is the other end of the globe, but seems to bear on the issue of salinity and currents.

New research by teams of Australian and US scientists has found there has been a massive reduction in the amount of Antarctic Bottom Water found off the coast of Antarctica.

Comparing detailed measurements taken during the Australian Antarctic program's 2012 Southern Ocean marine science voyage to historical data dating back to 1970, scientists estimate there has been as much as a 60 per cent reduction in the volume of Antarctic Bottom Water, the cold dense water that drives global ocean currents.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/1205 21104635.htm

I also read something that I can't find now about how reduction of salinity and some of the sea level rise observed seems to be due to the amount of water pulled from aquifers.

We're doing all sorts of strange stuff to the planet. If all these things work together in the worst way it could get really nasty.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
140. vanwx
Quoting BobWallace:


We've got significantly less volume this year compared to 2012.

img src="Apr 12 Monthly Death Spiral">

And extent/area roughly the same. That means that the ice has to be thinner.

You're automatically going to win your bet if it was made on volume. A new extent/area record is likely to be dependent on weather. 2007 saw the ice get slammed, that might not happen this year. We can see high extent/area numbers created by thin ice spread wide.

I agree that the Eastern Passage should open early. The European portion is already quite melted. I'm not so sure about the Northwest Passage. An abnormal amount of ice was formed in that part of the Arctic this last winter and, to date, melting hasn't gotten underway in the Canadian Archipelago.

Link

Here's a page of excellent graphs for the ice. Clicking on Regional Graphs in the upper right will let you see what is happening in the different parts of the Arctic.

Link



Thanks for that Bob, Amazing graphs! But what my concern is that the salinity of the arctic is lessoning. That Bering freeze up last winter was not so much that the temporal winter pole had moved to the dateline but that the Thermo Haline Cycle(as weak as it was) had displaced the latent fresh water to the Bering Sea. Also, naked ocean(as we have in the summer now) mixes more than the old 'under the ice'. ocean.
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
Crossing the Arctic -

If you watch this gif on Arctic ice thickness for the last 30 days you can see the Eastern Passage starting to open. (Top of the Arctic, along the north edges of Europe and Asia.)

Take a look at all the thick red and yellow stuff blocking the Northwest Passage.

Link

--

Here's another fun one. Speed and drift.

Link

Watch what is predicted for the next few days. Bunches of ice are charging to their deaths. That's the sort of thing that will set new extent/area records.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
138. vanwx
People looking at the area around Tuktoyaktuk,NWT, Canada

All those ponds around the area drain underground as soon as the permafrost underneath melts. The area has always been a desert. What happens in the new weather will be different but it will still reach -50 every winter
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
Quoting vanwx:
My daily 'ice-check',s are

http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=E n&n=D32C361E-1

click on arctic ocean, and

http://nsidc.org/

top left corner.

I have a small bet on ice being worse/less than 2007. I should have made it for a million. I guess the pay-out will be for the minimum (some time in August) but I can see shipping in both the north-west passage and the north-east passage within weeks= Russian oil to Japan/northern gold mines, etc. Or Europe to Asia in 1/2 the time/cost... and vise versa.


We've got significantly less volume this year compared to 2012.

img src="Apr 12 Monthly Death Spiral">

And extent/area roughly the same. That means that the ice has to be thinner.

You're automatically going to win your bet if it was made on volume. A new extent/area record is likely to be dependent on weather. 2007 saw the ice get slammed, that might not happen this year. We can see high extent/area numbers created by thin ice spread wide.

I agree that the Eastern Passage should open early. The European portion is already quite melted. I'm not so sure about the Northwest Passage. An abnormal amount of ice was formed in that part of the Arctic this last winter and, to date, melting hasn't gotten underway in the Canadian Archipelago.

Link

Here's a page of excellent graphs for the ice. Clicking on Regional Graphs in the upper right will let you see what is happening in the different parts of the Arctic.

Link
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
136. vanwx
My daily 'ice-check',s are

http://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/default.asp?lang=E n&n=D32C361E-1

click on arctic ocean, and

http://nsidc.org/

top left corner.

I have a small bet on ice being worse/less than 2007. I should have made it for a million. I guess the pay-out will be for the minimum (some time in August) but I can see shipping in both the north-west passage and the north-east passage within weeks= Russian oil to Japan/northern gold mines, etc. Or Europe to Asia in 1/2 the time/cost... and vise versa.
Member Since: February 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
Quoting JupiterKen:


There's permafrost under water?


While there is no "permafrost" under the Arctic Ocean, there is under water frozen methane layers that are beginning to thaw. Frozen methane, if under water or under frozen ground, is the same problem when it is released into the atmosphere. This previously frozen methane is entering the atmosphere. While "permafrost" is assigned to frozen land it is, in a very real sense, that frozen layers of methane exist under water and sea ice. Well, for now anyway.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
Quoting greentortuloni:


As someone working in Robotics, I agree: the economic singularity (ES), i.e. X% of people can produce all that is required (X varies), is coming. Capitalism is dying. Not just for the ES but also for the associated TS (technological singularity): the jobs that can't be done by robots will soon be so complicated that labor will stop being an economic factor.

I've talked to a lot of people about this. (Talked = trapped them at dinner at conference and bored them.) The economists don't tend to beleive that labor will ever be removed from economics but they also agree that if labor is removed, traditional economics breaks down.

However, I have a different vision of the future: my idea, which I am actually submitting a business plan for next week, is the idea of craftspeople cooperatives. The idea is that people want to create stuff and there is a value for human made goods. As the prices of machine made stuff falls, genuine human goods will create a secondary market.

It sound pretty stupid here in a 15 minute blog post but the idea is to create a system of universal human rights managed locally, of universal distribution for free and with people persuing what they want to persue craft and work-wise.

I realize it isn't that simple, not does it solve a lot of problems (including the Camelot problem: what happens when everyone is bored out of their mind) but it is the best system I could come up with.


Any economist who believes that labor won't largely be eliminated from future economies isn't using their eyes. You can see that happening all around you now. We already have hundreds of millions of people for whom we have no 'need'. The days of everyone being engaged in doing something useful are over. Many of the world's cities are packed with people 'just getting by'. A few generations ago they would have been producing food, cobbling shoes, digging ditches.

Bored out of their minds - that one doesn't bother me. We continue to invent entertainment.

Hand made goods are basically entertainment for those creating the goods, in general. An entertaining way to make a living. The fact that a small portion of the market will pay a premium for those products makes it viable.

Will that hold as goods become cheaper and cheaper?

Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting OldLeatherneck:


I would not want to be on a drill rig in an area that may be releasing plumes of methane. Also if they are using shallow water rigs, how stable is the permafrost on the sea bed??



There's permafrost under water?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I understand well what you are saying and it is all true. The reason I envision the end of globalization is because it will become too expensive to send raw materials halfway around the world, manufacture pieces, ship the pieces to another part of the world for assembly and then finally shipped back to regions where the raw products probably came from. Manufacturing and assembly work will need to be done where the raw materials are located.

What the 1% do not seem to realize is that they are destroying the buying power of the people that make their profits for them. What good is a "cheap", new car, if only 1% of the population can afford them?

Automation, robotics and low wages will destroy the middle class. Cost of shipping will destroy globalization. Well, at least this is what I envision.


As someone working in Robotics, I agree: the economic singularity (ES), i.e. X% of people can produce all that is required (X varies), is coming. Capitalism is dying. Not just for the ES but also for the associated TS (technological singularity): the jobs that can't be done by robots will soon be so complicated that labor will stop being an economic factor.

I've talked to a lot of people about this. (Talked = trapped them at dinner at conference and bored them.) The economists don't tend to beleive that labor will ever be removed from economics but they also agree that if labor is removed, traditional economics breaks down.

However, I have a different vision of the future: my idea, which I am actually submitting a business plan for next week, is the idea of craftspeople cooperatives. The idea is that people want to create stuff and there is a value for human made goods. As the prices of machine made stuff falls, genuine human goods will create a secondary market.

It sound pretty stupid here in a 15 minute blog post but the idea is to create a system of universal human rights managed locally, of universal distribution for free and with people persuing what they want to persue craft and work-wise.

I realize it isn't that simple, not does it solve a lot of problems (including the Camelot problem: what happens when everyone is bored out of their mind) but it is the best system I could come up with.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting LowerCal:

They know what they're doing alright. Their long term plan is to transition to the carbon sequestration business. They'll own all the holes to put it back in the ground. They're just continuing to build their future market now.

Sorry for the sarcastic smack. I've been having a lot of cynical days lately. :^/


I'm not sure that is entirely sarcastic, or rather I am sure they have very good alternative plans, including places for the executives to live when the world gets too hot.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:
Well, we all knew this was coming:

Exxon wins prized access to Arctic

All those that deny that the Arctic sea ice is vanishing simply are not paying attention to the current events. Clearly, Exxon/Mobil knows what is happening. One would be inclined to think that perhaps Big Oil knew what it was doing all along. ;-)


How horrible is that? Aside from the arctic, Russia has rights to frack the US? I'm sure they care a lot about water pollution in foreign countries.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting BobWallace:
I wish there was a way to overlay lines to indicate the land masses. I look at those MODIS images and often don't know what I'm looking at.



If you really want, download QGIS and try to look at the maps using that. You may have to put in the world boundaries but the modis information has that. Then download the boundary lines and superimpose them.

It's one of those things that is easy if you've done it but hard to explain. It isn't much harder than doing something in excel once you know excel.

...then again I considered doing that but I didn't.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting BobWallace:


I grabbed it from this page -

Link

There's an interesting gif of the Beaufort ice change over days 90 to 143 of this year at the top of the page.

However I think (from the comments) this particular image is from the Bering. If so, then the land should be the tip of Alaska, where it gets closest to Russia.


I finally figured it out. I kept trying to get eastern Canada out of the picture somehow. When I stopped doing that and held the laptop upside down and it made sense.
Member Since: June 5, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 1220
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I understand well what you are saying and it is all true. The reason I envision the end of globalization is because it will become too expensive to send raw materials halfway around the world, manufacture pieces, ship the pieces to another part of the world for assembly and then finally shipped back to regions where the raw products probably came from. Manufacturing and assembly work will need to be done where the raw materials are located.

What the 1% do not seem to realize is that they are destroying the buying power of the people that make their profits for them. What good is a "cheap", new car, if only 1% of the population can afford them?

Automation, robotics and low wages will destroy the middle class. Cost of shipping will destroy globalization. Well, at least this is what I envision.


I expect that longterm we'll come up with some sort of a sustainable liquid fuel that will be 'cheap enough' for ocean transport. The future price of shipping will likely rise to the point at which most manufacturing moves closer to market, but I doubt it will all do so.

When manufacturing involves bulky raw material, that part of manufacturing will likely be done close to where the raw materials are obtained. Assembly might still be done close to market.

In the mid-future it's quite likely that we'll move to EVs and PHEVs almost exclusively and that will free oil for shipping and air travel.

Electricity is just so incredibly cheap compared to oil (and electric motors so efficient) that as soon as battery prices drop to around $250/kW and ranges increase to about 175 miles people will quickly move away from gasmobiles.

If we moved personal and moderate distance land travel to electricity we could afford to burn some oil and still get CO2 back to acceptable levels. I think we use something like 10% of our oil for airplane fuel. Move half of our air travel to HSR and I doubt we'd use 10% the oil we now do.



Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting BobWallace:
The days of a globalized economy will cease to be when the cost of shipping around the world becomes too cost prohibitive.

That's not how I'm guessing things will go.

As shipping costs rise and as labor costs even out what we're likely to see is more manufacturing of things hard to ship closer to where they are consumed. We see that already with cars. Ford and Chevy have plants overseas, foreign car companies manufacture in the US.

My understanding is that there is little low skilled labor input to solar panel manufacturing and the extra cost of shipping makes it financially feasible to manufacture panels in the US for US/NA consumption. (Once the Chinese stop illegal subsidies.)

But other parts of the economy (e.g., information and financing) have almost no shipping costs.

--

A problem that the young-uns are going to have to deal with is how to distribute goods/profits in a more equitable fashion. As we automate ourselves out of jobs we're going to either have to figure out how people are going to earn money with no jobs or turn into a "0.01%" society where a very small number own and the rest live a slum-life existence.

As we perfect robots and automated systems most of us will find ourselves in the position of having to work 80-100 hour weeks for a bowl of rice and a dorm bed in order to under-price the cost of using a machine.

I suspect we'll have to invent a new economic model.


I understand well what you are saying and it is all true. The reason I envision the end of globalization is because it will become too expensive to send raw materials halfway around the world, manufacture pieces, ship the pieces to another part of the world for assembly and then finally shipped back to regions where the raw products probably came from. Manufacturing and assembly work will need to be done where the raw materials are located.

What the 1% do not seem to realize is that they are destroying the buying power of the people that make their profits for them. What good is a "cheap", new car, if only 1% of the population can afford them?

Automation, robotics and low wages will destroy the middle class. Cost of shipping will destroy globalization. Well, at least this is what I envision.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
The days of a globalized economy will cease to be when the cost of shipping around the world becomes too cost prohibitive.

That's not how I'm guessing things will go.

As shipping costs rise and as labor costs even out what we're likely to see is more manufacturing of things hard to ship closer to where they are consumed. We see that already with cars. Ford and Chevy have plants overseas, foreign car companies manufacture in the US.

My understanding is that there is little low skilled labor input to solar panel manufacturing and the extra cost of shipping makes it financially feasible to manufacture panels in the US for US/NA consumption. (Once the Chinese stop illegal subsidies.)

But other parts of the economy (e.g., information and financing) have almost no shipping costs.

--

A problem that the young-uns are going to have to deal with is how to distribute goods/profits in a more equitable fashion. As we automate ourselves out of jobs we're going to either have to figure out how people are going to earn money with no jobs or turn into a "0.01%" society where a very small number own and the rest live a slum-life existence.

As we perfect robots and automated systems most of us will find ourselves in the position of having to work 80-100 hour weeks for a bowl of rice and a dorm bed in order to under-price the cost of using a machine.

I suspect we'll have to invent a new economic model.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:
Well, we all knew this was coming:

Exxon wins prized access to Arctic

All those that deny that the Arctic sea ice is vanishing simply are not paying attention to the current events. Clearly, Exxon/Mobil knows what is happening. One would be inclined to think that perhaps Big Oil knew what it was doing all along. ;-)

They know what they're doing alright. Their long term plan is to transition to the carbon sequestration business. They'll own all the holes to put it back in the ground. They're just continuing to build their future market now.

Sorry for the sarcastic smack. I've been having a lot of cynical days lately. :^/
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1911maker:
As the main blog is pretty much useless for anything other then weather chatter, I stopped in here.

I see you guys are going to get bored fast if no other parties from the opposing view do not show up shortly.

Please keep posting the Nuke stuff, and the ice charts etc and any thing else that is interesting.


Personally I'd rather be a bit bored than have to play whack-a-mole with the tinfoil hat and denier crowds.

They bring the same old tired bogus arguments and no data (or twisted data). I'm all for putting a bouncer on the club house door.



Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting 1911maker:
As the main blog is pretty much useless for anything other then weather chatter, I stopped in here.

I see you guys are going to get bored fast if no other parties from the opposing view do not show up shortly.

Please keep posting the Nuke stuff, and the ice charts etc and any thing else that is interesting.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/05/ti les-harness-footsteps-to-generate-electricity/
Link

every one have a good day.............


Opposing views are welcomed. They need to bring the science that supports their views. Science is interesting. Denying the Science based on ideology, religion and personal greed gets boring.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4768
As the main blog is pretty much useless for anything other then weather chatter, I stopped in here.

I see you guys are going to get bored fast if no other parties from the opposing view do not show up shortly.

Please keep posting the Nuke stuff, and the ice charts etc and any thing else that is interesting.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/05/ti les-harness-footsteps-to-generate-electricity/
Link

every one have a good day.............
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Russia's Hidden 'Arctic Nightmare'

If you want to see the impact of driling for oil in the arctic read this and watch the video.

Link
Member Since: May 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180

Viewing: 170 - 120

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.