The environment thread

[StrangeSox]

There was a huge chemical spill in West Virginia last week that has left 300,000 residents without clean water.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Elk_River_chemical_spill

 

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401100100

Environmental regulators in the state found that the chemical company took ”no spill containment measures” to stem the leak, according to the Charleston Gazette.

 

Regulators say the company violated the Air Pollution Control Act and the Water Pollution Control Act, the Gazette reported.

 

…State regulators said Friday that the company never told them of the leak, and found out only after residents complained of a strange smell, according to the State Journal.

[greg775]

1.) Sounds like sinkholes are becoming a major problem.

 

2.) A few people got on me on here recently for b****ing about the unbelievably cold weather that gripped the country for about a month straight. I made a crack about global warming and people attacked me for suggesting it was not real. My question to you then is: "What's with the f***ing 10 below temperatures all over for a month???" They were real and they were here and I froze my ass off and even had to buy long underwear cause I could take it no longer!

[BigSqwert]

1.) Sounds like sinkholes are becoming a major problem.

 

2.) A few people got on me on here recently for b****ing about the unbelievably cold weather that gripped the country for about a month straight. I made a crack about global warming and people attacked me for suggesting it was not real. My question to you then is: "What's with the f***ing 10 below temperatures all over for a month???" They were real and they were here and I froze my ass off and even had to buy long underwear cause I could take it no longer!

 

The key word is "Global" warming. Half the US doesn't equal the entire globe. There were temps in Australia and South America in the 120s this past month.

 

And this is about trends over time, like months, years, and decades. You can't use a few days here and there and dispel it all.

Edited January 15, 2014 by BigSqwert

[StrangeSox]

parts of United States of America and Canada doesn't equal the entire globe. At the same time we had a cold week or two, Australia is having record heat.

 

It's also much longer term than "weather in your area over the last month or so."

 

I don't see any recent posts of yours in this thread though so I don't know what you're referring to.

 

eta: bs delete your post right now

 

Edited January 15, 2014 by StrangeSox

[BigSqwert]

If there are so many scientists who reject climate change/global warming, then where are their papers?

 

Only 1 of 9,136 Recent Peer-Reviewed Authors Rejects Global Warming

 

I have brought my previous study (see here and here) up-to-date by reviewing peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals over the period from Nov. 12, 2012 through December 31, 2013. I found 2,258 articles, written by a total of 9,136 authors. (Download the chart above here.) Only one article, by a single author in the Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, rejected man-made global warming. I discuss that article here.

 

My previous study, of the peer-reviewed literature from 1991 through Nov. 12, 2012, found 13,950 articles on “global warming” or “global climate change.” Of those, I judged that only 24 explicitly rejected the theory of man-made global warming. The methodology and details for the original and the new study are described here.

 

Anyone can repeat as much of the new study as they wish--all of it if they like. Download an Excel database of the 2,258 articles here. It includes the title, document number, and Web of Science accession number. Scan the titles to identify articles that might reject man-made global warming. Then use the DOI or WoS accession number to find and read the abstracts of those articles, and where necessary, the entire article. If you find any candidates that I missed, please email me here.

 

 

LINK

Edited January 15, 2014 by BigSqwert

[NorthSideSox72]

2.) A few people got on me on here recently for b****ing about the unbelievably cold weather that gripped the country for about a month straight. I made a crack about global warming and people attacked me for suggesting it was not real. My question to you then is: "What's with the f***ing 10 below temperatures all over for a month???" They were real and they were here and I froze my ass off and even had to buy long underwear cause I could take it no longer!

You have to be trolling.

 

But if not, let me put it a simpler way, without all the science mumbo jumbo...

 

If global warming meant we couldn't have 10 below anymore... the record low in Chicago is 24 below, so that means we'd be warming by say 30 degrees... that means your expectation of what "global warming" is would make the AVERAGE July day in Chicago about 115 degrees.

 

No one is saying the average July day in Chicago is going to be 115 degrees. No one is saying we are warming that much. If we were warming that much, that quickly, we're all dead in a year. What they are saying is we'll warm by a few degrees, maybe 5 or even 10, over decades. Which is plenty to do a LOT of bad things.

 

And yeah, then there's the whole... Chicago is not the world. Thing.

 

You have to be trolling.

 

 

 

 

[Jake]

This is why people want it to be called climate change. It won't always be warmer where you are, but it will always be more extreme

Edited January 15, 2014 by Jake

[StrangeSox]

This is why people want it to be called climate change. It won't always be warmer where you are, but it will always be more extreme

 

FWIW "climate change" was a Frank Luntz GOP messaging invention because it sounds less threatening.

Edited January 16, 2014 by StrangeSox

[iamshack]

Didn't SS post something that pointed to global warming being responsible for the freezing temps in the Midwest?

[StrangeSox]

No, I saw some speculation that it could but I don't think I posted anything here. It's hard to link any specific weather phenomenon to global warming.

[Balta1701]

No, I saw some speculation that it could but I don't think I posted anything here. It's hard to link any specific weather phenomenon to global warming.

There is research suggesting that it could be easier to knock big waves into the jet stream as the arctic warms and the contrast between the arctic and the mid latitudes declines, however I'm not 100% convinced and it is controversial.

 

If you look at it a different way, this cold snap wasn't bad at all. It broke almost no all time records anywhere, and cold snaps on that scale typically happened once a decade or more. That one was very weak compared to actual historic ones and it's been like 2 decades since the last one. From that perspective these snaps have gotten less common and all that's happened is that people aren't used to them any more.

 

That of course doesn't mean that things couldn't change again in 5 years and suddenly North America gets those all the time, but I'm leaning the other way at present.

[NorthSideSox72]

It's hard to link any specific weather phenomenon to global warming.

 

If you add "or lack thereof" to the end of that quote, right there... That is what I wish everyone would keep in mind when discussing global warming, no matter where on the scale of the argument you reside. If everyone understood that simple point, you could have a decent discussion about it.

 

[EvilMonkey]

If you add "or lack thereof" to the end of that quote, right there... That is what I wish everyone would keep in mind when discussing global warming, no matter where on the scale of the argument you reside. If everyone understood that simple point, you could have a decent discussion about it.

So in other words, weather happens.

[BigSqwert]

So in other words, weather happens.

And yet, global warming is in full swing.

[NorthSideSox72]

So in other words, weather happens.

Pretty much. Individual events, short term fluctuations, localized phenomenon are just not proof for or against global warming.

 

[Y2HH]

Other than light reading here and there, I still won't pretend to know much about the actual science behind global warming/climate change, but would it be fair to say that seeing as that we're coming off an ice age (~11k years ago), this warming period is expected, however, perhaps we've accelerated it during the industrial age?

 

To put it another way, it's like winter changing to summer -- it's going to get warmer -- but we've made this change happen faster than it normally would have?

[cabiness42]

Other than light reading here and there, I still won't pretend to know much about the actual science behind global warming/climate change, but would it be fair to say that seeing as that we're coming off an ice age (~11k years ago), this warming period is expected, however, perhaps we've accelerated it during the industrial age?

 

To put it another way, it's like winter changing to summer -- it's going to get warmer -- but we've made this change happen faster than it normally would have?

 

The earth's average temperature is most definitely rising. How much of that is natural and how much is due to humans is very difficult to quantify.

 

That said, there are plenty of things that we know are bad for the earth and we should stop doing regardless of how directly we can correlate those things to climate change.

[Balta1701]

Other than light reading here and there, I still won't pretend to know much about the actual science behind global warming/climate change, but would it be fair to say that seeing as that we're coming off an ice age (~11k years ago), this warming period is expected, however, perhaps we've accelerated it during the industrial age?

 

To put it another way, it's like winter changing to summer -- it's going to get warmer -- but we've made this change happen faster than it normally would have?

No. In fact it's the exact opposite.

 

Over the last 800,000 years, there have been cycles of 100,000 years of ice cover followed by about 20,000 years of melting before the ice sheets refreeze.

 

This cycle has clocked perfectly with "solar insolation over canada" - the amount of sun hitting Canada. When that peaks, it changes the stability of that ice sheet, ocean currents change in response, CO2 spikes, and the ice sheets collapse. It has happened >5 times on this cycle.

 

The peak of solar insolation over Canada was 8,000 years ago. It is actually declining right now and has been for a long, long time. If the globe were repeating what it had done in the last 5 cycles there would be the beginnings of advancing ice sheets in Canada and in mountainous regions in Europe right now. They wouldn't be at their peak, but at this time in previous cycles there is clear evidence for the beginnings of ice sheet formation (changing compositions of ocean water, requiring removal of enough ice to change the composition of the ocean).

 

There is good research to suggest that the reason why we're not in that cycle is humanity. Starting when the ice sheets collapsed, humanity became a feedback in the climate system. When humans expanded too far, cut down too many trees or put too much CO2 into the atmosphere, the end result wound up being climate shifts and droughts that killed off a lot of people or forced them to leave areas.

 

The climate of the last 8000 years has actually been remarkably stable compared to what we see in the geologic record and it's very unique compared to the processes controlling the climate over the last million years.

[Y2HH]

No. In fact it's the exact opposite.

 

Over the last 800,000 years, there have been cycles of 100,000 years of ice cover followed by about 20,000 years of melting before the ice sheets refreeze.

 

This cycle has clocked perfectly with "solar insolation over canada" - the amount of sun hitting Canada. When that peaks, it changes the stability of that ice sheet, ocean currents change in response, CO2 spikes, and the ice sheets collapse. It has happened >5 times on this cycle.

 

The peak of solar insolation over Canada was 8,000 years ago. It is actually declining right now and has been for a long, long time. If the globe were repeating what it had done in the last 5 cycles there would be the beginnings of advancing ice sheets in Canada and in mountainous regions in Europe right now. They wouldn't be at their peak, but at this time in previous cycles there is clear evidence for the beginnings of ice sheet formation (changing compositions of ocean water, requiring removal of enough ice to change the composition of the ocean).

 

There is good research to suggest that the reason why we're not in that cycle is humanity. Starting when the ice sheets collapsed, humanity became a feedback in the climate system. When humans expanded too far, cut down too many trees or put too much CO2 into the atmosphere, the end result wound up being climate shifts and droughts that killed off a lot of people or forced them to leave areas.

 

The climate of the last 8000 years has actually been remarkably stable compared to what we see in the geologic record and it's very unique compared to the processes controlling the climate over the last million years.

 

So...we've made things slower/more stable than they otherwise would have been? Not sure I'm understanding.

[Balta1701]

So...we've made things slower/more stable than they otherwise would have been? Not sure I'm understanding.

Yes. From neolithic times until 1800, the climate was exceptionally stable compared to what appears in the geologic record of the last million years. As a species we're used to a stable climate but that's not the norm geologically - the geologic record is one of much more dramatic climate shifts than we're used to.

[StrangeSox]

Freedom Industries, the company behind the W.Va chemical spill, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy today.

 

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401170030

 

The company lacks umbrella insurance and does not appear to have adequate coverage to pay the many claims that will be heading its way.

 

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401160158?page=1

[southsider2k5]

No. In fact it's the exact opposite.

 

Over the last 800,000 years, there have been cycles of 100,000 years of ice cover followed by about 20,000 years of melting before the ice sheets refreeze.

 

This cycle has clocked perfectly with "solar insolation over canada" - the amount of sun hitting Canada. When that peaks, it changes the stability of that ice sheet, ocean currents change in response, CO2 spikes, and the ice sheets collapse. It has happened >5 times on this cycle.

 

The peak of solar insolation over Canada was 8,000 years ago. It is actually declining right now and has been for a long, long time. If the globe were repeating what it had done in the last 5 cycles there would be the beginnings of advancing ice sheets in Canada and in mountainous regions in Europe right now. They wouldn't be at their peak, but at this time in previous cycles there is clear evidence for the beginnings of ice sheet formation (changing compositions of ocean water, requiring removal of enough ice to change the composition of the ocean).

 

There is good research to suggest that the reason why we're not in that cycle is humanity. Starting when the ice sheets collapsed, humanity became a feedback in the climate system. When humans expanded too far, cut down too many trees or put too much CO2 into the atmosphere, the end result wound up being climate shifts and droughts that killed off a lot of people or forced them to leave areas.

 

The climate of the last 8000 years has actually been remarkably stable compared to what we see in the geologic record and it's very unique compared to the processes controlling the climate over the last million years.

 

So we are just saving humanity!

[StrangeSox]

No, we're doing a good job of kicking the earth out of that nice, relatively stable climate.

 

edit: unless you're going with a "the only way to save the village was to burn it to the ground" angle...

Edited January 17, 2014 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

So we are just saving humanity!

In 1800 you might well have been correct.

[Balta1701]

Freedom Industries, the company behind the W.Va chemical spill, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy today.

 

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401170030

 

The company lacks umbrella insurance and does not appear to have adequate coverage to pay the many claims that will be heading its way.

 

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201401160158?page=1

And so the businesses who lost money because of their failure will wind up being the ones who are screwed. Because freedom.