Skip to content
Grist home
All donations doubled!

Articles by Andrew Dessler

Andrew Dessler is an associate professor in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at Texas A&M University; his research focuses on the physics of climate change, climate feedbacks in particular.

All Articles

  • Search for local climate skeptic in Texas proves fruitless

    Awhile back, I ran across the web site demanddebate.com (hat tip: Michael Tobis).

    The thrust of the website is that everyone should demand debate about climate change instead of gullibly accepting the Gore/alarmist view. Their slogan is, "I'm more worried about the intellectual climate."

    I am teaching a "intro to atmospheric science" class and had been trying to find a skeptic to come talk to the students. So I hit the contact button on the web site and asked:

    I would be interested in having an expert from your group come speak to my atmospheric sciences class.

    Unfortunately, I don't have any money to support travel, so I'm hopeful that you have someone local to the area (we could probably pay for mileage to/from Houston, Austin, Dallas, or other local cities).

    Thanks!

    I didn't expect to get a response, but Steve Milloy himself e-mailed me back:

    Hi Andrew,

    Can't think of anyone offhand. But will think about it.

    BTW, you could always show them The Great Global Warming Swindle.

    We also have a YouTube video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=XDI2NVTYRXU

    Steve

    I found that unsatisfactory, so I e-mailed back:

  • Contents of the IPCC Sythesis Report Summary for Policymakers

    For those not familiar with it, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was set up in 1988 to write periodic assessments of the state of climate science. Its goal is to produce policy-neutral reports that inform policymakers about the best thinking of the scientific community. These reports have tremendous impact on the debate, owing to the credibility of the IPCC process.

    The IPCC is actually split into three working groups. Working group 1 focuses on basic climate science, working group 2 focuses on the impacts of climate change and human adaptation to it, and working group 3 focuses on mitigation efforts (efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions). In 2007, as part of the IPCC's fourth assessment report, each of the three working groups issued a report (e.g., see here for a discussion of the working group 1 report).

    Now comes the final part of the fourth assessment report: the synthesis report. This report ties together the three working group reports in an effort to create a single unified picture of what we know about climate change.

  • U.S. blocks consensus at international global warming conference … 17 years ago

    Does it seem to you like nothing ever changes in the world? Well, you're right, and now I have hard evidence. I was searching through the archive of Bob Park's What's New newsletter when I ran across this snippet, right above an update about the miracle of cold fusion:

    At the World Climate Conference in Geneva this week, the United States blocked consensus on specific goals for reduction of carbon dioxide emission. As What's New predicted a month ago, the US sided with such backward nations as China and the Soviet Union, and oil producers like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Our traditional allies, Western European nations, Canada Japan, New Zealand and Australia, said they could cut emissions through energy efficiency measures at no net cost. A German study even concludes they can make money -- selling energy-saving technologies to backward countries like the US. John Knauss, the head of NOAA who led the US delegation, contended the revised Clean Air Act would lead to significant CO2 reductions, but a recent estimate from EPA put the reduction at only about 2%.

    The date of the newsletter: November 9, 1990. Seems like it could have been yesterday. Or tomorrow.

    P.S. You should subscribe to Bob's newsletter. It's required reading for those who are interested in the politics of science.

  • Investments are needed to stave off climate-induced water crisis

    To me, loss of freshwater supplies is the scariest impact of climate change. After all, I can imagine adapting relatively successfully to a warmer world. I cannot imagine adapting to a world with less freshwater. That view was reinforced by a great article on water in The New York Times Magazine. Read it and then forward it to all of your friends.

    Over on inkstain, John Fleck also has a bunch of terrific blog entries about the ongoing water crisis in the Southeast U.S. In his latest entry, John points out that the drought there, while bad, is not that bad from a historical perspective.