One part of my answer would have been to describe how the warming of the Arctic is changing the air masses and weather being experienced in Nebraska. Without a frozen Arctic, no Siberian Express weather types. That may sound good, but it is the outflow from the Arctic of very cold air masses that keeps the moist tropical air down near the Gulf coast instead of causing 2-foot December snows in North Dakota, a January tornado in Wisconsin (and basically allowing a northward shift of the tornado belt), and heavier precipitation in the northern Great Plains where the river channels can¹t handle it and so flood. And with the continent not really chilling in the winter, it warms faster in the spring, and dries out faster (and the summer cold fronts don¹t make it very far into the US, so are less able to trigger the needed precipitation from summer thunderstorms over the coastal plain east of the Appalachians.
And then there is what climate change is going to do to the Mississippi Delta‹eating it away, and more often requiring shutdown of the river barge traffic that takes the grain the farmer in Nebraska grows to markets around the world. Quite clearly, climate change is going to have big effects on Nebraska. So, limiting or reversing climate change generally, or even just re-icing the Arctic or moderating hurricane intensification, would have a beneficial effect for the farmer in Nebraska. Best, Mike On 11/15/09 8:43 PM, "Ken Caldeira" <[email protected]> wrote: > Folks, > > I've been waiting for the transcript of the Nov 5 House Science and Technology > Committee's hearing on geoengineering to come out, so I could re-enact just > the questions with my class as either a civics lesson or an example of > self-parody. Unfortunately, the transcript is apparently still not available. > > Although I would imagine it would be somewhat painful to watch, for those who > cannot wait for a transcript, there is streaming video of the hearing > available at: http://science.edgeboss.net/wmedia/science/scitech09/110509.wvx > > I think the most interesting line of questioning was (to paraphrase): "Why > should a cattle rancher in Nebraska care about this?" > > At the time it seemed like self-parody, but the more I think about it the more > I realize it is a quite sensible question. If we cannot clearly and > compellingly explain why the average citizen should want to invest tax dollars > in researching climate intervention options, we will not be performing our > public communication roles adequately. (I think the second time I tried to > answer this question, I was closer to the mark.) > > Best, > > Ken > > PS. Interested persons who are not gluttons for punishment might better wait > for the transcript. > > > ___________________________________________________ > Ken Caldeira > > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > > [email protected]; [email protected] > http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=.
