Earthsky Interviews
Private: Is global warming already affecting the natural world?
09-06-2006 - Earth
The question now is shifting to how much global warming is already affecting the natural world.
This week on our radio show, we described a new study, which claims that the dramatic increase in large wildfires in the western U.S. over the past few decades are part of a chain of reactions to climate warming. If true, it’s a shocking idea: world ablaze due to climate warming.
You can check out what the scientists say for yourself. Read or listen: “Warming climate sparks wildfires, say scientists.”:http://208.96.63.114/?p=2712
And wildfires are not the only possibility for climate warming effects. Also this week on Earth & Sky, we talked about a new study showing that global warming might already be affecting forests at far northern latitudes. Read or listen: “Expert says northern forests affected by warming.”:http://208.96.63.114/?p=2707
Plus … check out this Earth & Sky interview: “Will a warming world bring more or less rain?”:christopher-potter-interview
How about you? Do you see signs of global warming in your yard, neighborhood, or town?
It’s hard to remember what it was like 20 years ago or when we were kids! But it seems hotter now, and the weather seems to act crazier.
Prior to the “Little Ice Age”, England was growing wine grapes and Greenland had enough land and warm weather for people to actually live there and grow some crops. I don’t think we’re back to those temperatures yet. On the other hand, I did read last night that the Three Rivers Dam in China is changing the regional climate. I think we’re adding some to the warming cycle but I think we’re reinforcing a natural cycle. Linda
I wonder about other factors (ie. other than human induced) such as inter galactic clouds. If one looks at almost any of the Hubble images two things become apparent: 1)that clouds are everywhere in the galaxies (ours is even classified as “smokey” because it has so many) and 2)that these clouds are enormous and yet fairly this when looked at up close. So my question is: are the global warming alarmists taking this into account, or are they convienently ignoring the fact of these cosmic dust clouds—which do exactly what clouds do to you here on Earth; that is they have a cooling effect, as they block some portion of the sun’s energy. Conversly, leaving the effect of a cloud would have a warming effect. Many scientists are convinced that coulds account for the Ice Age(s) perhaps the mini-Ice Age as well.
This is true even though the cloud need not be visible—it only need block a few percent of the sun’s energy. Of course, the ‘clouds’ here on Earth are much more dense;
also as we are changing the chemical nature of the Earth’s atmosphere, via the pollutants etc., the relative effects of these
‘clouds’ (such as the ozone cloud—which protects us from ultraviolet radiation) may vary.
There are many natural reasons for climate change. But I wonder why people are so resistant to the idea that humans can change the climate on a global scale?
Since the 1950s, scientists have been measuring an increase in carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere, due to burning fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide in the air is known to cause an increased “greenhouse effect,” contributing to global warming.
Yes, the are natural cycles, many of them astronomical in origin. But what if humans ARE changing the climate? Why is that so hard to believe?
I have been doing some ‘informal’ research about global warming lately and I agree that the information shows that we are in a warming cycle. However, there seems to be considerable debate about what is causing this warming. Carbon dioxide doesn’t seem to be that big a factor compared to water vapor.
Hi Dave,
That’s a good point about water vapor, and not necessarily just carbon, being of concern as a greenhouse gas.
Water vapor contributes to the majority of the greenhouse effect, anywhere from 36 percent to 70 percent, compared to CO2, which causes about 9 percent to 26 percent of global warming.
Unfortunately, humans cannot directly control the amount of water vapor going into the atmosphere, according to University of Virginia atmospheric scientist Michael Mann.
What determines how much water evaporates from our oceans and over land into the atmosphere gets a little complicated, but it has to do with the dew point temperature and relative humidity at Earth’s surface.
Most water vapor, about 84 percent, comes from the oceans. Scientists have tracked water molecules riding Earth’s atmosphere, going 6,000 miles east or west and 600 miles north or south, and staying up for about a week before they fall as precipitation.
“Tinkering” with the complexity of Earth’s water cycle is probably much more technically daunting than limiting other forms of greenhouse gases such as CO2 or methane. That’s most likely why most scientists who study Earth’s climate have focused on the effect of human-caused greenhouse emissions.
Mitch:
Personally, I believe the Earth to be a living, sentient being. We as humans have a number of chemical, pressure and autonomic sensors within our bodies that regulate hormones, heartbeat, breathing, etc. So, our bodies are never really at rest, temperature, blood flow, pupil size constantly fluctuate and adjust to changing internal and external conditions, why not the Earth as well?
Are we having an impact on things? Of course we are. One need only look at the Dustbowl days of 19th and 20th century America, or the pollution being spewed forth by developing countries to answer any doubt there. But I don’t consider our presence here any more aggravating than a case of acne on a teenager. Not that we’re parasites, God created this world for us. We do have a responsibility as stewards, but this is bigger than us.
It’s colder now than when I was a kid. But please note that when I was a kid I lived in Oklahoma and now I live in Wisconsin . . .
Yes, the are natural cycles, many of them astronomical in origin. But what if humans ARE changing the climate? Why is that so hard to believe?
The earth is a pretty big place is probably a good reason.
The larger questions might well be ‘what are we going to DO about it all” and my answer is “as little as possible”.
Ruby, your feeling is that human activity is possibly responsible for climate change. Take that as a given.
We should work against the change? I suggest that we don’t know enough to say that anything we do will be beneficial or make things much much worse.
Now, I’m not talking about basic sanitation measures or to allow unrestricted dumping of waste. It seems apparant that the healthier your environment the healthier the species (and that’s us among others) that inhabit it.
But grandiose plans to dump iron into the ocean or erect a giant sunshade seem off the mark; we just don’t know enough about what we’re doing.
I agree that large-scale projects seem, as Brian says, “off the mark.” A giant sunshade? Right ….
If I’m understanding the scientists interviewed by Earth & Sky correctly, one important aspect of climate change is that all of the infrastructures we humans need to live comfortably – for example, dams or aquifers – are dependent on a particular climate system in a particular locale.
And with climate change, the most difficult thing might be the fast rate of change over the coming decades. In other words, suppose your town depends on a certain amount of rainfall into an aquifer to supply water for the town’s inhabitants.
Then suppose, as climate changes, the average amount of rainfall to your area decreases, so that the overall amount of water available from your aquifer decreases.
Then maybe that town figures out a way around that problem. Maybe they set up a system for importing water from somewhere else, for example, so their human population can have enough. But then maybe the climate keeps on shifting, so that, after a decade or so, that other place – the place they were trying to import from – doesn’t have water either. Or maybe the first town has water again, but by then they haven’t maintained their internal system of piping water from the aquifer. And then maybe a decade after that, the local climate pattern shifts again.
What’s difficult about the climate change predicted for the century ahead is that it’s not just one climate change. It’s lots of local shifts … and a continual shifting, over many decades … into the foreseeable future.
Personally, I’m hopeful. I think people are really really smart and will solve all these problems. But it’s definitely daunting.
Dr. Potter’s comment ”,more clouds, more rain” seems to be a personal evaluation and in contrast to A. Soja comment “lack of moisture as temperatures rise”. My own emperical observations the past 27 years of going to sea, primarily across the North Pacific and spending the time on land in Hawaii. The coastal areas are getting less rainfall, the clouds that form do not release the same amount of rainfall as they have in the past. As the temperature of an atmosphere rises its moisture holding capacity rises. Generally, I see more suspended moisture in our global atmosphere below 10,000 feet, than was indicated visually 20 years ago. More research needs to be done, and quickly.
brian dunbar, “we just don’t know enough about what we’re doing”, hitting the nail on the head. So keep up the feverish neurotic fossil burning system, conjecture rules with regard to the state of affairs, and we’ll just keep doing what we are doing and God will pull us out of any mess that might result. Ignore all the obsevations, an old engineering saying was don’t fix it until it breaks. Over the years that has changed, now preventative maintenance is the method of choice for optimizing operational productivity. I think we need to take a step back and see the human behavior aspect, and realize that the first response to a sickness or problem is denial.
I still have to comment about this ridiculous correlation between the burning of fossil fuels and global warming. Ponder this profound thought: The closer the earth physically approaches the sun, the warmer the planet will become. The gravitational attraction of large planetary bodies opposite the earth from the sun can actually draw the earth into a tighter orbit. Ever notice the greater intensity of the sun over the last decade? How does that relate proportionately to carbon dioxide? Ever wonder why trees stop growing at a certain elevation? It’s called the timberline. There’s insufficient carbon dioxide at higher elevations to promote plant growth. Personally I havn’t seen young trees beginning to sprout on the Trinity Alps where I’ve backpacked for the past 37 years. Carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas? Sure. And the earth is flat and the solar system revolves around the earth. Scientific conventional wisdom of late has a serious myoptic perspective of relativity and reality. Enough said.
OK…I just can’t leave without one more comment…the close proximity of the earth to the sun of late is causing an increase absorption of solar energy into one of the largest…no…the largest heat capacity body on the earth….the world’s oceans…this increase in thermal energy , coupled with the angle of the earth’s rotation now at 24 degrees is seriously altering the coriolis forces affecting both ocean thermal currents and atmospheric conditions…I suspect this winter along the Pacific Northwest will see increasing violent wind forces resulting from energy absorbed in the pacific ocean during this time of the year as the earth passes closely to the sun and equatorial waters of the pacific are now increasing in thermal energy…I’ll check back in in late December through February….
Earth’s orbit around the sun isn’t a perfect circle so our distance from the sun changes slightly throughout the year. But the average Earth/sun distance doesn’t change.
I don’t know of any scientific study suggesting that Earth is moving closer to the sun.
Deborah
Heck yeah global warming is already affecting the natural world? Doesn’t anybody notice how much longer the summers are? Do you ever remember being able to play golf in January? I can now in New Hampshire.
In reply to Deborah’s comments to my thoughts, engineers used slide rules to design the Golden Gate Bridge. That’s using three significant digits to predict stresses in members spanning thousands of feet. So Ms. Bryd, what is the order of accuracy of an astronomer’s ‘estimate’ of distances across the solar system? Forget it. That was a rhetorical question if there ever was one. The reality of the matter is astronomers are incapable of detecting significant changes in the earth’s distance to the sun and are thus blinded to any perspective they are incapable of observing or measuring.
Dear Ms Deborah
I wondered can I have archive broadcast program on this new page?
?
ef … not sure what you mean by that …
Can you ask anoher way?
Deborah
The sun does seem stronger than 20 years ago. Along with CO2 greenhouse gas affecting temperature, the increase in water vapor in the general atmosphere would help to conduct the heat. Is it possible that the sun has increased the average BTU output ? How much might the general global decrease in the ozone layer influence total solar energy reaching the earth surface ? How do the hygroscopic properties of the lower atmosphere change with the increase of suspended particulate matter in the form of CO2, NO2 and other small molecules ? Would this increase the ability of the ambient atmosphere to hold suspended moisture with out forming rain ? Why do plants transpire less as the concentration of CO2 increases in the atmosphere that the plants are in ?
Has anyone read the “layman” articles in the New Yorker titled “The Climate of Man” by Elizabeth Kolbert ? It seems that the director of Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) director James Hansen has a good grasp as to what we might expect. Your thoughts and comments would be greatly appreciated.
This issue is obviously generating a lot of comment by scientist and non scientists. Unfortunately, from my perspective, I see little comment on the issue that provides a balanced perspective. I worry that “we” are impulsively rushing to “corrective measures” even though there are significant issues unresolved. I have seen a lot of comment on Milankovitch cycles, but no one has provided a clear correlation of these cycles with historic glacial events. So, what does the rational person do in this uncertain environment (I cannot advocate elimination of SUVs based on the available information!!!).
I agree that we cannot control water vapor that is the principal greenhouse gas. Can anyone truthfully tell me that control of the man-induced gases will make any difference???
Definetly have noticed a change in weather, I live in north massachusettes and yesterday january 6th, it was 65 degrees out and we have not seen any serious snow since “winter” has started. Usually it is blistering cold always below 30 degrees and it has consistantly been well above 45-50 degrees, normal? I think not. I have wondered about the affects that the general population can have on the earth and it is really terrible that no goverment will step up to the plate with a program to work against all the polution and such that is happening today. Also I was watching a t.v. show about the planet mars, whenever we decide to explore would happen scientists were saying that they have a way to re-build there atmosphere with machines that do the same thing that trees to take in c02 and replace with o2 now I dont know if that was just faction but people really need to start brainstorming about what we can do to start to reverse the affects of global warming. I highly doubt that our greedy goverment will ever try to fund something that wont make them a direct and quick profit. Some one needs to think of something!
-just another consered citizen of earth
Here in central Texas, we’ve been in sleeveless shirts and flip-flops for a lot of the past few months … I know we’re in the south, but we usually have SOME winter. Meanwhile, Britain’s Meteorological Office said last Thursday that 2007 – the coming year – could be the warmest on record.
Global Warming is also occuring in Venus, Mars, and Pluto. Last time I checked, there have been no EXXONs or SUVs driving around in Venus, Mars, and Pluto.
Dear Dr. Robert Townsend,
Surely, you jest?!?
Steve