It's been a busy year personally, with a relocation to Yorkshire and associated house renovation, but I have found time to keep a close eye on global weather news and how it is reflecting underlying climate trends.
2017 was definitely an eventful year from a climate perspective. In particular the very active Atlantic hurricane season attracted my interest and I became a follower of the Bob Henson's WU blog. Fascinating (but concerning).
I have also been taking a (maybe) less than healthy interest in the climate change sceptic/contrarian scene. My attempts to map out what's going on, in the UK particularly, will eventually be documented here. If, as Willard says, we can't beat 'em, then we might as well know who they are and what they're up to.
Looking forward to the taking part in the next climate change MOOC from the University of Exeter which starts on Monday. Notes, reflections and "workings out" to follow via my ExClimate page (tab above).
Saturday, 20 January 2018
Sunday, 5 February 2017
Chilean Wildfires
If you've come here for my #ExClimate reflections please see the tab in the title bar above (but I don't mind if you read the rest).
In the meantime I have had to put the main part of my blog on hold until after I complete this course - it is so interesting that it is taking up all my spare time. Lots of info and links over at my Exclimate page)
I'm also now following a further FutureLearn course on Climate Change Leadership from Uppsala University but expect to be back here by the summer - a little older, but hopefully much wiser. :-)
Robert Scribbler - Chilean Wildfires are the Worst to ever strike the country
Wildfires Today
Wikipedia on the economics of climate change
In the meantime I have had to put the main part of my blog on hold until after I complete this course - it is so interesting that it is taking up all my spare time. Lots of info and links over at my Exclimate page)
I'm also now following a further FutureLearn course on Climate Change Leadership from Uppsala University but expect to be back here by the summer - a little older, but hopefully much wiser. :-)
Chilean Wildfires
Chile suffered the worst wildfires in its history during January. The link between global warming and wildfires is very intuitive (unlike some other types of extreme weather) and as such does not require much explanation. Extended periods of drought coupled with high temperatures and earlier snowmelt mean out of control fires are increasing across many parts of the globe - they burn more than twice the area they did in 1970. The Canadian coal tar region and Tennessee also suffered in 2016
Here's an excellent article from Climate Central if you want to learn more.
Discussion Point - The Economics of Climate Change
"Since 2000, 10 forest fires in the United States have caused at least $1 billion in damages each, mainly from the loss of homes and infrastructure, along with firefighting costs." (Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions)
The economics of climate change seems to me to be a particularly opaque subject. There is the argument that we may be doing more harm than good by spending on aggressively reducing carbon emissions (especially by developing nations) rather than spending on mitigating the effects and raising the general living standards of the world's poorer citizens. The problem with this is that the consequences of continuing along the path we are following now carries such a high risk for future generations. In any case do the calculations regarding the cost of switching to renewables include all the costs for putting right the damage done by extreme events (unlikely as there would be bound to be much dispute over which weather events and their effects could be directly attributed to climate change) and the cost we are currently paying in subsidising carbon?
"Fossil fuel companies are benefiting from global subsidies of $5.3tn (£3.4tn) a year, equivalent to $10m a minute every day, according to a startling new estimate by the International Monetary Fund." (Guardian 2015)
One for more research I think.
CNNThe economics of climate change seems to me to be a particularly opaque subject. There is the argument that we may be doing more harm than good by spending on aggressively reducing carbon emissions (especially by developing nations) rather than spending on mitigating the effects and raising the general living standards of the world's poorer citizens. The problem with this is that the consequences of continuing along the path we are following now carries such a high risk for future generations. In any case do the calculations regarding the cost of switching to renewables include all the costs for putting right the damage done by extreme events (unlikely as there would be bound to be much dispute over which weather events and their effects could be directly attributed to climate change) and the cost we are currently paying in subsidising carbon?
"Fossil fuel companies are benefiting from global subsidies of $5.3tn (£3.4tn) a year, equivalent to $10m a minute every day, according to a startling new estimate by the International Monetary Fund." (Guardian 2015)
One for more research I think.
Further Reading
GuardianRobert Scribbler - Chilean Wildfires are the Worst to ever strike the country
Wildfires Today
Wikipedia on the economics of climate change
Sunday, 29 January 2017
Big Freeze Across Europe
During January 2017 Europe suffered extremely low temperatures (as low as -26 degrees C) and heavy snow fell across the continent. Over 60 deaths were reported.
Harsher winters in Europe are thought to be one of the probable consequences of climate change due to two factors:
Slowing of the Gulf Stream.
This video explains what the Gulf Stream is and how climate scientists think warming could affect it:
Wavy Jetstream:
The artic is warming faster than the rest of the globe which is causing the Jet Stream to move slower and form bigger "waves". As a result weather patterns across Europe (and the rest of the world- especially the Northern Hemisphere) are changing and becoming more "persistant". Dr Francis explains how this all works in the video below (published 2014). She also ties some recent extreme weather events in the UK directly to their causes, as explained by climate change science.Discussion Point - Climate Refugees
Below are some further links discussing the refugee issue during the recent extreme weather in Europe. Displaced people and communities and how we deal with them are likely to become a very significant issue as climate change advances. In countries like the UK, with natural borders how and how much, we help is a big question which divides society. Politicians are currently failing to formulate policy that citizens can agree on and the humanitarian issues that arise are already proving to be a challenge. A much bigger problem is on its way ...
BBC News
The Guardian
The Guardian
Friday, 23 December 2016
January 2017
New Years's Day 2017 turned out to be warm and wet. Apart from Storm Barbara which hit North West Scotland on Christmas Eve, the weather over the holiday period was far less "newsworthy" than that of the preceding year. Christmas 2016 had been very different. Floods had been making life a misery for thousands of people in the North of England since storm Desmond in early December and Boxing Day brought yet more extensive flooding across Yorkshire and Lancashire.
This year things have been a lot quieter and it's possible that many people have "forgotten" about last year, or put it out of their minds (unless they were directly affected, of course.) It's also possible that a proportion of the British public are of the opinion that the floods of 2015 were "just weather", albeit a particularly nasty bout of it. This collective amnesia and ability to "turn a blind eye" to how our weather is being driven by climate change is very dangerous. It is now a matter of urgency that we put pressure on our politicians and change our lifestyles in order to drastically reduce our carbon emissions. This is the only way we can avoid leaving the legacy of a much damaged world to our children and grandchildren.
I believe that public apathy is being supported by a lack of clear information in mainstream information sources about the increasing number of extreme weather events that we are seeing, both at home and across the globe and what is causing them. (Although plenty is to be found in the scientific and activist press). The public are not having the conclusions drawn for them in a forceful enough manner, it's easy for us to carry on with business as usual.
Because the weather is something we see every day it is a pretty powerful influence on our beliefs. If weather events are allowed to become the territory of the denier, as seems to be the case at the moment, then deniers have an exclusive hold on a pretty powerful tool. For this reason it is vital that weather "events" can be seen in the context of climate change. A connection rarely made by main stream weather reporting.
This is particularly important here in the UK because although we may be pretty obsessed with the weather, we are lagging behind most of the rest of the world in making the connection between our changing weather patterns and the reality of climate change caused by man-made global warming. If there is going to be any kind of effective grassroots action this needs to change, deniers cannot be allowed to have a voice that is capable of instilling doubt by using weather as a weapon.
In addition politicians need to be persuaded that we're serious about this, and that means that we need to be taking action. In order to be spurred into that action, whether as individuals or as communities, people have to know that what they see today is evidence that the snowball is already rolling.
I hope to be able to help, in however small a way, by bringing together information about the weather that has the potential to provoke such action, and by giving pointers as to what that action might be.
In essence this blog is an attempt to make the case that weather matters.
 |
| River Aire in Flood at Kirkstall Bridge 2015 |
This year things have been a lot quieter and it's possible that many people have "forgotten" about last year, or put it out of their minds (unless they were directly affected, of course.) It's also possible that a proportion of the British public are of the opinion that the floods of 2015 were "just weather", albeit a particularly nasty bout of it. This collective amnesia and ability to "turn a blind eye" to how our weather is being driven by climate change is very dangerous. It is now a matter of urgency that we put pressure on our politicians and change our lifestyles in order to drastically reduce our carbon emissions. This is the only way we can avoid leaving the legacy of a much damaged world to our children and grandchildren.
I believe that public apathy is being supported by a lack of clear information in mainstream information sources about the increasing number of extreme weather events that we are seeing, both at home and across the globe and what is causing them. (Although plenty is to be found in the scientific and activist press). The public are not having the conclusions drawn for them in a forceful enough manner, it's easy for us to carry on with business as usual.
Weather Events and Climate Trends
Coverage of the 2015 floods did include some discussion in the mainstream media about the link to climate change, but scientists are currently hampered by the fact that tying local weather events to global climate trends with statistic supported certainty can only rarely be achieved. (Although ongoing research is making inroads into changing this).
However, on the opposite side of the "debate" (if it can be taken seriously enough to be called that) using weather "spin" is a fairly standard practise for climate change deniers, an extreme example of this type of rhetoric being the "Snowball in the Senate" incident in 2015.
A more recent, and more insidious example is that of an article in the Mail Online (David Rose Nov 2016) which claimed that a new study of the data had established that the high temperatures of 2016 were down to El Nino, not climate change, ie 2016's record temperatures were due to a weather event, not a climate trend. The article, and the resulting "noise" it generated across the media were, in fact, reporting on snapshot data which had been cherry-picked in an attempt to attempt to mislead the public and has been much criticised in the serious press but damage can easily be done that the rebuttal cannot so easily fix.
However, on the opposite side of the "debate" (if it can be taken seriously enough to be called that) using weather "spin" is a fairly standard practise for climate change deniers, an extreme example of this type of rhetoric being the "Snowball in the Senate" incident in 2015.
A more recent, and more insidious example is that of an article in the Mail Online (David Rose Nov 2016) which claimed that a new study of the data had established that the high temperatures of 2016 were down to El Nino, not climate change, ie 2016's record temperatures were due to a weather event, not a climate trend. The article, and the resulting "noise" it generated across the media were, in fact, reporting on snapshot data which had been cherry-picked in an attempt to attempt to mislead the public and has been much criticised in the serious press but damage can easily be done that the rebuttal cannot so easily fix.
Because the weather is something we see every day it is a pretty powerful influence on our beliefs. If weather events are allowed to become the territory of the denier, as seems to be the case at the moment, then deniers have an exclusive hold on a pretty powerful tool. For this reason it is vital that weather "events" can be seen in the context of climate change. A connection rarely made by main stream weather reporting.
 |
| Ipsos MORI Global Trends, 2014 |
This is particularly important here in the UK because although we may be pretty obsessed with the weather, we are lagging behind most of the rest of the world in making the connection between our changing weather patterns and the reality of climate change caused by man-made global warming. If there is going to be any kind of effective grassroots action this needs to change, deniers cannot be allowed to have a voice that is capable of instilling doubt by using weather as a weapon.
In addition politicians need to be persuaded that we're serious about this, and that means that we need to be taking action. In order to be spurred into that action, whether as individuals or as communities, people have to know that what they see today is evidence that the snowball is already rolling.
I hope to be able to help, in however small a way, by bringing together information about the weather that has the potential to provoke such action, and by giving pointers as to what that action might be.
In essence this blog is an attempt to make the case that weather matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)