The Heat Wave and Climate Change

[Rogar]

Like probably half the people in the country, I've paid extra special attention to the national and regional weather news lately. I live in Colorado where the heat has taken it's toll. As much as I've been listening for it, not once have I heard mention of climate change or global warming in any mainstream report. I know that weather has it's natural cycles and it would be hard to say as a fact that this is global warming. But with so many record breaking temperatures, not to mention wild wind patterns, it would seem that rational minds have to at least wonder? I have seen a couple of short articles tucked back in obscure corners of the news.

It would seem appropriate to say something like, this is what climate change might look like, expect more of this in the future, or this could just at least possibly be an early warning. Because CO2 is basically invisible, the recent weather is something tangible people can experience and connect to their energy use. For some this is probably happening anyway, but a little media mention would help.

It's not like global warming is controversial hearsay anymore. Almost all of the climate scientists are believers and I think more than half of Americans have bought in to some degree.

It just seems odd. Or maybe I've missed something.

[iris lily]

I just heard CO2 referenced by an expert on the forest fires. Granted, he was prompted by the NPR news interviewer to speak to climate change as a factor in the recent very large fires (he only named two factors at first) Interestingly, he characterized climate change as not necessarily being hot & dry, but going back and forth from wet to dry in extreme swings. The wet times increase vegetation that causes bigger fires when the hot & dry cycle starts up. The yo yo effect of climate change is wet then dry.

[bae]

Whereas where I live, in the Pacific NW, it has been uncharacteristically cold and wet, and the last two years June has been referred to as "Junuary".

[ApatheticNoMore]

It would seem appropriate to say something like, this is what climate change might look like, expect more of this in the future, or this could just at least possibly be an early warning.

Yea basically that is what they're saying:

"The reality of climate change is hitting home. It's time to plan for hotter days and rising sea levels"
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul...rming-20120702

[puglogic]

There has been quite a bit of mention of climate change in the press, in a reaction to this season's wild weather all around. But of course, don't forget that climate change is just a made-up liberal conspiracy

[CathyA]

Unfortunately, man won't really listen until its to the point of no return, IMHO. Of course I'm hoping otherwise..........

[Yossarian]

There has been quite a bit of mention of climate change in the press, in a reaction to this season's wild weather all around. But of course, don't forget that climate change is just a made-up liberal conspiracy

Just as the cold June in the NW, SE, UK etc don't disprove climate change, high temps in the plains don't prove or demonstrate anything either. Anyone contending otherwise is a huckster.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Another article "Society not ready for heat waves coming with climate change":
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news...&dlvrit=206567

To the extent one is interested in local climate mitigation I imagine a lot could be done to mitigate some extremes (depending on how bad it gets - at a certain point the planet ceases to support human life ). Plant trees to shade houses and other buildings, have reflective roofing, lessen urban heat island effects so you aren't dealing with that as well, charge people massive tax penalties for settling right in the forest in the southwest due to what they costs fire departments to protect their houses etc. Basically all this stuff and more: http://www.epa.gov/hiri/mitigation/index.htm All can be done locally. The solution to climate change is not local, this is just mitigation.

[JaneV2.0]

From what I can tell, it's OK to mention climate change as long as you don't suggest it's influenced by human activity or that we can take steps to minimize the damage. It seems to me we should proceed as if what we do matters, but that doesn't seem to be a popular approach in this country.

[bunnys]

That big T-storm on Friday went right thorough Virginia and I experienced it. After a day of 104 degrees in June we had those storms. Close to a million people in SW VA and in WV are still without power.

I can tell you from experiencing it, it was FRIGHTENING and like nothing I've ever experienced before and far more violent than a hurricane. I've lived in Virginia most of my life--this was unique weather. I hope we never experience anything like that again but I'm afraid we will.

Cathy--sadly I believe we've already reached the point of no return.

Does anyone remember back when the Al Gore movie was out and there was so much talk about this? I remember that in addition to changing our consumption/pollution/emission habits there were other possible solutions touted as well.

I remember one interview on cable news that suggested a 25 mile hose secured on Antarctica and raised up into the upper atmosphere. It would have been an engineering marvel and cost billions of dollars. It would have remained aloft with a series of balloons attached to it. (No, not party balloons--think high tech barrage balloons similar to the ones they flew over London during WWII and using steel cables attached to the balloons and the hose.)

According to this scientist, the reason CO2 emissions are having now such a negative impact on the global temperature is because back before the 1960's and clean air emission regulations began most pollution was a combination of CO2 and particulate matter. The two elements in pollution/smog had the effect of mitigating the negative impact of each pollutant upon the other. This is how it worked. CO2 trapped solar energy into the atmosphere so that it couldn't get out, warming the Earth. Sulfuric Acid particles had a different effect. Sulfuric Acid blocked solar energy from entering the atmosphere to begin with and so less solar energy entered the Earth's atmosphere than had been the case pre-Industrial Revolution. So, because less solar energy was entering--the planet would cool. But because more CO2 was being released, the planet warmed. Get it? The counter-balanced each other.

In the 1960's it became very easy to limit sulfuric acid emissions (the main element in smog) and it was done because it was causing us all kinds of pulmonary health problems as well as causing acid rain and killing all the lakes in Canada. So sulfuric acid emissions were greatly curtailed. Presto! CO2 now has no check on its Earth-warming abilities and the Earth starts to heat up.

This scientist said if we were to have this hose thing and release sulfuric acid into the upper atmosphere (WAY above weather and the air we breathe) we could start to check the amount of CO2 warming by cooling the planet with basically smog in the upper atmosphere. And the thing with this hose was that it would only have to be turned on once or twice a year to send sulfuric acid into the upper atmosphere which would then dissipate throughout the entire upper atmosphere.

Anyway, I heard about this guy 1x about 8 years ago and never heard another word about him or his idea.

Seems to me that we are at a point where we need to start doing something to COOL the Earth, not simply slow down the warming process. Furthermore, even if the US (and that's a big if) does stop its CO2 emissions, we're only 25% of all energy used on the planet. China, India and Brazil (among others) can still pollute the hell out of this planet regardless of how pure our behavior gets.

Has anyone heard of this? This is not something I could have made up. I don't have that much of a science background.