On my blog (there I go again...) [sorry!], I have suggested that we
should be looking at 2040 as a benchmark date, rather than 2100, for a
variety of very good reasons, most of which I fail to explain there,
but I trust you will all appreciate.
Tamino has already offered some odds for a range of changes likely by
this date, and I've proposed a couple more to consider today. The
point is that it makes a lot more sense to talk to the public in terms
of thirty-three years hence, rather than 100 years away.
I reckon we are now in a position to posit a range of realistic
climate impacts by 2040 which, taken as a package, represent a 'clear
and present danger' to our society, especially if the procrastination
about action continues.
What I want to ask is, what should/could we realistically posit as the
likely numbers for the various CC metrics? If you want to consider the
ones on Open Mind, or 'in the cave', there's a starting point. here
are a couple of suggestions:
* more than 0.3C warmer than now;
* 10% loss of sea ice;
* 10% increase in drought-effected land (by the PDSI measure);
Are these realistic numbers? What about the other metrics?
Regards,
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
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/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
