Environmental Outlook: Extreme Weather
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-09-07/environmental-outlook-extreme-weather
Several parts of the world are coping with severe weather related events, including a record heatwave in Russia, severe flooding in Pakistan, mudslides in China, droughts in sub-Saharan Africa, and record high temperatures in parts of the U.S. For this month's Environmental Outlook Series, climate scientists explain what we can learn from weather extremes.
Guests
Captain Tim Gallaudet
Deputy Director of the Navy's Task Force Climate Change.
Heidi Cullen
senior research scientist with Climate Central, a nonprofit research organization through which she reports on climate change for news outlets, including PBS NewsHour, Time.com and the Weather Channel.
Gavin Smith
Executive Director, Center for the Study of
Natural Hazards and Disasters and Associate Research Professor in the Department of City and Regional Planning at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I'm not surprised-I was listening to warnings 20 years ago we were pushing our environment to the limit. Countries have redirected the natural flow of water, cleared land to build in places that were never meant to built on and the popultion has exploded and we have to use more chemicals to produce food. All the actions from the supposidly 'smarter' humans are destroying the environment and creating problems that are getting out of control.
I'm not surprised-I was listening to warnings 20 years ago we were pushing our environment to the limit. Countries have redirected the natural flow of water, cleared land to build in places that were never meant to built on and the popultion has exploded and we have to use more chemicals to produce food. All the actions from the supposidly 'smarter' humans are destroying the environment and creating problems that are getting out of control.
Almost any human tragedy "caused" by weather is a result of humans putting themselves at risk then blaming weather for doing what it's been doing since before humans migrated out from the Rift Valley.
The more places were large populations of humans live the more likely a weather event is to be newsworthy because some humans were killed or displaced. Are tornadoes in "Tornado Alley" extreme or normal central states weather? Are Atlantic hurricanes "extreme weather"? Are the South Asian Monsoons "extreme weather"?
The sad part of this type of "extreme weather" mongering is that it gets conflated with the real issue of human induced global climate change which is a long term trend that can't be correlated with a given year's weather events but has serious long term implications for the rising human population.
Climate change has often been described as loading the dice. These days we appear to be rolling 13s.
Diane, thank you -- and your staff -- for having the wisdom and courage to suspend your longstanding policy of inviting guests on "opposite" sides of an issue.
We are rushing toward a range of terrible outcomes in both climate and weather; to have wasted more time on denial fantasies would be foolish. Intelligent people appreciate the sanity of focusing on reality, rather than giving a soapbox to politically motivated obstructionists.
I was glad to hear Diane ask her guests about population issues as they affect climate change, but was disappointed to hear all her guests completely ignore the question by talking about infrastructure planning instead of the underlying solutions of stabilizing population growth and eventually reducing the human population on the planet. What is behind this "censorship" of discussing population problems and solutions? I can only assume that religious influences are at play here, and I only hope that these influences abate before it is too late to have a gradual, planned population decline instead of a calamitous decline brought about by natural disasters such as flooding and famine.
Thank you Diane and staff for a great show which I have followed for many years.
This is just to let you know that the links for today's climate change program are not all working properly.
This is how I think of the apparent contradiction between global warming and more severe winters: Climate and weather are all the result of an atmospheric heat engine. Increased global warming is going to drive that heat engine more strongly and will have diverse effects based upon complex and interacting factors such as winds, humidity, and local temperature in at times non-intuitive ways.
We in public health have a new discipline of conservation biology which studies the interactions, effects of climate, human health, environmental health and the health of the world's flora and fauna. Soon, as the earth warms we will have more "global weirding" in weather, but will also see new diseases emerge as well as crop problems and other imbalances. They may happen rapidly, we don't know. Also many of the world's growth in population will occur in cities. This is a set up for diasters. We must study and alter our path before the problems occur. But this is not the way it is usually done. Historically there has to be several auto accidents before we put up the stoplight at the intersections.
Kathrynkuppers: I agree with you that the present population exceeds carrying capacity. There are two barriers to such a discussion. 1)Not religion so much as racism and classism in that the minority with political power decide who stays and who goes. (but you are correct about "right to life " having preferential affinity for fetuses of particular ethnicity)
2) The problem of ageing crops up as the demographic shifts under low birthrates and slow attrition. There are difficulties in having so many too old to work who need care and too few younger people to provide support. Japan has this problem already and is even trying to automate assisted living with devices such as washing machines for the less mobile. Social Security in the US without fast immigration presents some similar trade-offs.
Even with the current numbers of people we need not live in sensitive areas or take such an unnecessary toll on natural assets. The individualistic freedom to exploit and explore about which we are indoctrinated is not only an anachronism, but it is also a partial truth. The average human being owns very little. It is a tiny minority with the power to pursue profit over sustainability who always decide to despoil rather than sustain. In fact, the average person has little decision making choice in their daily activities to affect climate change or environmental quality. We need to reign in the uber-owners and set new limits and caps before we blame consumers. This mistake is very much akin to blaming children in poverty for their lack of good health habits.
The definitions of climate sciences to open the show today were helpful and informative. Diane and team, the next time you get on the fossil fuels topic see who knows what happened with that Gulf gas well blowout last week. I haven't heard much since. What happened and who will be blamed?
Population control fanatics need to realise that 1) once the imbalance of resource use between the wealthy and the poor is reduced, the stress to our environment will also be reduced and 2) people are fully capable of making their own family planning decisions once they have been lifted from the ravages of poverty and are able to pursue educations and provide for their families.
I don't see any need to focus on population issues. I see every need to focus on reducing poverty and eliminating the imbalance in the use of the world's resources. I am so not ok with the government - or ANYONE - in my bedroom telling me what to do with my body and my family.