Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Global Warming

"Our Planet - It Is The Only One We Have (Discussion)" was posted on May 12, 2014.  While I received no further comments or discussion directly relating thereto, one of my readers, Leonard Levenson, of Manhattan, NY, raised question regarding a related subject, namely, global warming.

He asked:

Although it is politically correct to oppose the increase in greenhouse gasses and indeed it is clear that considerable harm results, there are some questions that have never been answered to my satisfaction.  Perhaps you can help.
     
1. The earth is clearly warming causing sea levels to rise and possibly diverting the Gulf Stream all of which could have devastating consequences to Mankind.  However, doesn't this very warming also increase the growing season for crops in places such as Canada, Russia, Alaska, Patagonia and Greenland?  Does this not benefit large segments of mankind?
      
2.  Doesn't the melting of ice in the Arctic open up the long dreamed of Northwest passage of shipping from the US and Canada to Russia and Japan? 
      
3.  The Greenhouse effect results in inordinate amounts of rainfall, at least in the NE US.  Isn't this beneficial to agriculture, hydroelectric power and the environment?

I responded after doing research on the subject and I set forth below my response based on that research.

In setting forth my response, I must caution my readers that if they read only my text they will have missed a great many facts relating thereto, since I did not want to quote from my sources at length. Therefor, I urge my readers to take the time to access the links and to read, at least large portions, of the source material. My full response follows.

Politically correct or PC has nothing to do with the science of Global Warming, any more than the question of whether the earth is round (and yes there is a Flat Earth Societyor whether the earth is the center of the universe.

Global Warming is a scientific fact, and the fact that certain ignorant people, or shortsighted billionaires, and politicians who cater to them, prefer to pretend is doesn’t exist, doesn’t make it a political or controversial issue.

Nor is PC a way of censoring ideas that are not liberal, as our right wing blogosphere would have people believe, though there have been instances where misguided college students have used it that way.

Without doubt there may be some areas that benefit from Global Warming, such as the Northwest Passage, but they are few. You mention an increase in the growing season in a number of countries, assuming that cold climates would benefit from warmer weather. Alas that is very simplistic. See for example the following which has the sub-headline: 

"Insect infestations, forest fires, floods and drought reflect the devastating impact global warming is already having on the vast Canadian landscape, according to experts from all 10 provinces and two territories."

BY THE GAZETTE (MONTREAL) NOVEMBER 30, 2005

Please note that this was almost a decade ago. A more recent assessment for Canada can be found here

As for Russia, see here but you are right it would have some beneficial effects, See here.

As for more rainfall, Hurricane Katrina is an example: See here and don’t forget Hurricane Sandy which devastated the Northeast and we still have nowhere near recovered. But we know that the next one will be worse and we are being forced to spend billions on raising coastline infrastructure and getting ready for next time, which is inevitable.

But it isn’t just more rainfall. It is also less. See this New York Times article where the lede is:

"LOS ANGELES — The fire season here in the hot, dry West now lasts roughly 75 days longer than it did a decade ago, and nearly three dozen fires have been burning up and down California in the last two days, weeks before a normal season begins."

You think of it as more rainfall. But that isn’t it. It is the rise of the sea level that will wipe away huge swath of land. How will it effect the Mid-Atlantic region? See an EPA report here.

See how it is effecting our nations’ capital. Here is today’s (May 16, 2014) weather forecast.

As for Florida (Marco Rubio’s state) See here and allow me to quote from the assessment: 

"The map clearly shows that a sea level rise of only a few meters would inundate thousands of acres of highly developed land and beach communities along Florida's Atlantic Coast, the Florida Keys, and the Florida Gulf Coast. Significant flooding and environmental change would also be experienced in the Everglades. Zoom in on Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor or another area to see the impact of sea level rise in more detail. Florida is a low-elevation state and would feel the impact of sea level rise associated with global climate change much more strongly than other areas.”

In the Pacific whole islands will become uninhabitable: See this headline in Business Insider (not a “liberal source or a PC source) "Sea Level Rise Will Make Several Islands Uninhabitable Within A Decade."

See here and here.

And finally, here is a summary for the United States, which to be sure takes us quite far out. 

But maybe the worst part would be the endless migration of people from negatively effected area to less effected areas - a migration that would make the present immigration problems look puny. The result would likely be war and the killing of immigrants to protect the interest of the haves from the impinging hordes trying to find shelter where they are not wanted.

I pity my grandchild and even more the generation after that. My advise to my grandchild would be “Don’t have children. They will be born into Hell on Earth.”

If it isn’t already too late - it is certainly very close to that.

As usual, comments or questions are welcome!


1 comment:

Unknown said...

I'm afraid that many of the people who oppose either the fact of global warming or the fact of the human contribution to global warming do so because they oppose the implied interventions required. Some of these range from changing light bulbs to radically changing our dependence on fossil fuels. The government may have to get involved and that is simply anathema to some. The South, where most of the opposition to which I refer, is still resentful of the War of Northern Aggression from 1861-1865 which ended the States' Right of holding slaves and they remain suspicious of government intervention of any kind.