[Revi]

I was awakened by the president of the World Bank talking about over 7 degrees of warming by mid century this morning. He says that this could be a real problem for world economies. duh.

Thank god that someone is taking this seriously. He mentioned the drought last summer and Sandy.

Maybe someone is awake up there in the corridors of power after all. D'ya think?

http://climatechange.worldbank.org/

[Revi]

Here's a piece about what it would be like in a warmer world, but unfortunately it doesn't say.

http://forumblog.org/2012/11/how-would- ... mer-world/

[Lore]

We're beginning to realize that the world's scientists are underestimating climate change fallout.

Sea Level Rise: Faster than Projected

A new paper by Rahmstorf et al. compares observed climate changes, specifically global temperature and sea level rise, to projections from IPCC reports. The result: temperature is rising in outstanding agreement with IPCC projections, while sea level is rising faster than expected.


The new research doesn’t reveal any new data to supplant older observations. It simply compares data which are already freely available, to projections which were made years ago in previous reports from IPCC, namely the 3rd and 4th IPCC assessment reports.

When it comes to temperature, some of the computer models which form the basis of IPCC projections can realistically simulate factors like the el Nino southern oscillation (ENSO) which cause short-term fluctuations in temperature. But even though the events themselves can be realistically simulated, their timing doesn’t coincide with actual observed timing. It’s like correctly simulating how often it will rain, and how much — but not getting the actual dates of rainfall correct. The IPCC models also don’t include the volcanic eruptions which also cause fluctuations in temperature, or short-term variations in the energy output of the sun.

In short, they can’t be expected to get the short-term fluctuations right but can (we hope) correctly characterize their average influence. And that’s the best we can hope for. We don’t expect computer model simulations to predict the weather years, decades, or centuries in advance, but we do hope that they will correctly simulate what the average and variation of weather will be — which is the definition of climate.
----------------------
Like it or not, sea level is rising and it’s probably going to be worse than the upper limit given in recent IPCC reports. Like it or not, it’s even possible that this century the oceans will rise even more than the not-so-conservative 1 meter many researchers expect. Like it or not — and nobody likes it — sea level rise has devastating consequences, not just for low-lying areas in third-world countries but for urban centers in the industrialized world. Let’s hope that our society has the wisdom and foresight to do something about it.

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/12/01/ ... projected/

[evilgenius]

In Colorado there was recently a study suggesting that climate change will trim something like 2 billion from the ski industry coffers. Immediately someone refuted that, citing differing calculations of cost and profit between the study and the industry. The refutation sounded a lot like the nit picking between event and climate, as laid out above. They made it sound like there was nothing to worry about. Like if there were no climate change the ski industry could expect a line with little slope, representing mature growth, to be more like a steep slope, something more like exponential growth. Such is the case when the optimism bias rules and reason is looked at as pessimism rather than the rudder that it actually is.

[Keith_McClary]

I have this faint hope that the Banksters will publish a map of places where they wont provide long term financing for private development or public infrastructure, due to AGW flooding, drought, etc. and that this will be a reality check for some people.

[IanC]

Right, Keith. Likewise, look to insurance companies being very clear about projects they will and will not insure based on relative risks related to Climate Change, flooding, etc. It's ironic to me that it will probably be guys in suits sitting in board rooms that sound the most audible alarm about Climate Change! The rest of us can at least say we were ahead of the curve, eh?

[evilgenius]

Right, Keith. Likewise, look to insurance companies being very clear about projects they will and will not insure based on relative risks related to Climate Change, flooding, etc. It's ironic to me that it will probably be guys in suits sitting in board rooms that sound the most audible alarm about Climate Change! The rest of us can at least say we were ahead of the curve, eh?

I suppose, in this capitalist system, that the real initiative will always come from finance. The only overriding player is the government when it comes to finance and they aren't the least bit interested in bucking this trend. I don't want to judge the efficacy of carbon taxes, but in order to entertain the idea government has got to step back from regulating finance as it pertains to rate adjustments and other things pertaining to calculating net present value of projects. Here on this site it might be a good idea to start a conversation as to whether we think this type of increased opacity for investors will stifle energy exploration or not. Government has good reason to make exceptions for energy while deliberately ignoring the plight of other investors. Will they? If so, are there any other types of investment that will receive the same type of 'kind' reception at the regulatory or supplemental level?

[Keith_McClary]

I found this from a private analyst:

It evaluates exposure to climate related natural hazards; the sensitivity of populations; development; natural resources; agricultural dependency; research and development; government effectiveness and education levels.

Here is a screenshot

POP_DENSITY.jpg

of a nice world population density zoomable Google map (browse to map #10 and click).

[Ibon]

I suppose, in this capitalist system, that the real initiative will always come from finance.

The consequences that will act on this sector will be profound. But not only the financial sector...... all aspects of our way of life will be profoundly molded by the consequences of overshoot. Think of the financial sector as becoming leaner, less parasitic and more focussed on some of the more essential elements of the economy in order to maintain social stability. The algorithms of greed that have driven the financial sector in times of "false abundance" will be with enough consequences viewed like semi automatic weapons are viewed today. This is one of the silver linings of the coming lean times as overshoot starts to squeeze down.

[Keith_McClary]

This map of drought potential 2060 makes N. America look worse: