Skip to content
Grist home
All donations DOUBLED
  • NOAA stunner: Climate change 'largely irreversible for 1,000 years'

    Important new research led by NOAA scientists, "Irreversible climate change because of carbon dioxide emissions," finds:

    ... the climate change that is taking place because of increases in carbon dioxide concentration is largely irreversible for 1,000 years after emissions stop ... Among illustrative irreversible impacts that should be expected if atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations increase from current levels near 385 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to a peak of 450-600 ppmv over the coming century are irreversible dry-season rainfall reductions in several regions comparable to those of the "dust bowl" era and inexorable sea level rise.

    I guess this is what President Obama meant when he warned today of "irreversible catastrophe" from climate change. The NOAA press release is here. An excellent video interview of the lead author is here.

    The Proceedings of the National Academies of Science paper gives the lie to the notion that it is a moral choice not to do everything humanly possible to prevent this tragedy, a lie to the notion that we can "adapt" to climate change, unless by "adapt" you mean "force the next 50 generations to endure endless misery because we were too damn greedy to give up 0.1 percent of our GDP each year" (see, for instance, McKinsey: Stabilizing at 450 ppm has a net cost near zero or the 2007 IPCC report).

    The most important finding concerns the irreversible precipitation changes we will be forcing on the next 50 generations in the U.S. Southwest, Southeast Asia, Eastern South America, Western Australia, Southern Europe, Southern Africa, and northern Africa.

    Here is the key figure (click to enlarge):

  • Organic farming beats genetically engineered corn as response to rising global temperatures

    This week Science published research ($ub. req'd) detailing the vast, global food-security implications of warming temperatures. The colored graphics are nothing short of terrifying when you realize the blotches of red and orange covering the better part of the globe indicate significantly warmer summers in coming decades.

    The implications of the article are clear -- we need to be utilizing agricultural methods and crops that can withstand the potential myriad impacts of global climate change, especially warmer temperatures. The article significantly notes, "The probability exceeds 90 percent that by the end of the century, the summer average temperature will exceed the hottest summer on record throughout the tropics and subtropics. Because these regions are home to about half of the world's population, the human consequences of global climate change could be enormous."

    Whether you believe global warming is part of a "natural cycle" or a man-made phenomenon is irrelevant. The bottom line is that our earth is rapidly warming, and this is going to drastically affect our food supply. We must undertake both the enormous task of reducing our carbon emissions now to avert the worst, while at the same time adapting our society to the vast and multitudinous effects of unavoidable global climate change. Failing to do either will, as the Science article indicates, have dire effects on a large portion of our world's population.

    Determining the best course of action for ensuring food security in the face of global climate change remains a challenging task. Recognizing that climate change is slated to affect developing countries and small-scale farmers the most is a crucial point. Such understanding enables people to realize that viable solutions must be accessible, affordable, and relevant to the billions of small-scale farmers in the developing world. Unfortunately, it appears that some of the solutions on the table fail to meet these criteria.

    Last week, Monsanto made a big public relations splash by filing documents with the FDA regarding a drought-tolerant GM corn variety it is developing with a German company, BASF. Monsanto claims that in field trials, the corn got 6-10 percent higher yields in drought-prone areas last year, but the release is extremely short on details. Regardless of the reality, Monsanto is presenting the corn as a way to help improve on-farm productivity in other parts of the world, notably Africa.

    Yet, absent from the media hype were the many technical and social problems with Monsanto's corn.

  • Spain experiencing severe drought due to climate change

    Warming-driven desertification is spreading. Australia has gotten the most attention, but Spain is also turning into a desert. As Time reported:

    Spain is in the grip of its worst drought in a century as a result of climate change -- this year's total rainfall, for example, has been 40 percent lower than average for the equivalent period, and the country's reservoirs are, on average, only 30 percent full. The reservoirs serving Barcelona are only 20 percent full, and without significant rainfall, supplies of drinking water will likely run dry by October.

  • Lessons the United States can learn from the drought in Australia

    drybed-small.jpgThe brutal drought has ended over large parts of Australia -- and consumers are obsessively reducing their demand for water -- and yet water "prices are set to double in the next five to 10 years," Water Services Association Australia executive officer Ross Young told a drought briefing in Canberra.

    The focus on water conservation has never been higher:

    Water is a dinner table topic. People are quite passionate about water and they are quite concerned about water in the context of climate change.

    And the results are impressive:

  • Science says we are turning the West into a desert

    A major new study in Science by a dozen water experts, concluded humans are the primary cause of changes in Western river flow, winter air temperature and snow pack in the past 50 years -- and things will only get worse if we don't act soon. The abstract of the study, "Human-Induced Changes in the Hydrology of the Western United States" (subs. req'd), led by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, states:

  • Desertification amplifies climate change, and vice versa

    droughtHere is yet another carbon-cycle amplifying feedback not in most climate models.

    On the one hand, the United Nations' top climate official, Yvo de Boer, announced that:

    Climate change has become the prime cause of an accelerating spread of deserts which threatens the world's drylands.

    On the other hand, he pointed out that desertification would, in turn, accelerate climate change:

    You'll see a sort of feedback mechanism ... quite a lot of carbon is captured in soil, so with more desertification (exposing the soil), you also get more CO2 emissions. They are two halves of the same coin.

    Well, two sides of the same coin, anyway. But we get his point. He was interviewed at a U.N. desertification conference in Madrid. What's coming?

  • Global warming cancels 4th of July celebrations

    fireworks.jpgGlobal warming threatens our White Chistmases with winter heatwaves and our Arbor Days with record wildfires. And now it imperils our Independence Day fireworks with ever worsening droughts.

    The Drudge Report headline blares "No Fireworks." As USA Today reports:

    Dozens of communities in drought-stricken areas are scrapping public fireworks displays and cracking down on backyard pyrotechnics to reduce the risk of fires.

    "From a fire standpoint and a safety standpoint, it was an easy call," Burbank Fire Chief Tracy Pansini says. He recommended calling off fireworks at the Starlight Bowl because they're launched from a mountainside covered with vegetation that's "all dead."

    The record droughts around the country have nixed fireworks in a half dozen states. What will happen to 4th of July celebrations over much of the country if, as predicted in an April Science, article, we have "a permanent drought by 2050 throughout the Southwest"?

    Here are some of the places canceling fireworks this year:

  • Declining production and what comes next

    This week the Durango Herald discussed the steadily declining production of methane gas from wells in southern Colorado's La Plata County and what impacts there will be when the wells go dry.

    Unfortunately, the article focuses only on the economic implications and goes nowhere on the topic of what the landscape will look like when those companies pull up stakes for new pastures. Even if all the well pads are reclaimed, which would be a miracle, what kind of rangeland and habitat will these parts of the West be left with when the boom is over?