Heat Waves Could Be Commonplace in the US by 2039

Source: Science Daily

ScienceDaily (July 9, 2010) — Exceptionally long heat waves and other hot events could become commonplace in the United States in the next 30 years, according to a new study by Stanford University climate scientists.

"In the next 30 years, we could see an increase in heat waves like the one now occurring in the eastern United States or the kind that swept across Europe in 2003 that caused tens of thousands of fatalities," said Diffenbaugh, a center fellow at Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment. "

In that scenario (examined by the study) , the mean global temperature in 30 years would be about 3.6 degrees F (2 degrees C) hotter than in the preindustrial era of the 1850s. Many climate scientists and policymakers have targeted a 2-degree C temperature increase as the maximum threshold beyond which the planet is likely to experience serious environmental damage. For example, in the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Accord, the United States and more than 100 other countries agreed to consider action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions "so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius."

"Our results suggest that limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial conditions may not be sufficient to avoid serious increases in severely hot conditions," Diffenbaugh said.

Read more: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100708122617.htm

---

A recent NASA report, which concluded that the previous decade, January 2000 to December 2009, was the warmest on record. The latest computer model suggests that even modest increases in global temperature may have drastic climate effects.

This computer projection predicts harsh effects in the American West: From 2030 to 2039, most areas of Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico could endure at least seven seasons equally as intense as the hottest season ever recorded between 1951 and 1999. This doesn't even take into account of what could happen in Mexico and the possible mass emegration from the country as crops fail. And there could be really large effects even before 2039, according to the study.

and we went into the 100's -- and looks like we have very hot 90 degree days still

ahead of us.

As I've said in another post here -- no one knows how all of this will accelerate and

compound.

It's the Twilight Zone --

loving the mid-high 70's in Los Angeles!

Halfway between the 0 and 90deg north latitude should not feel like Central America (not Quayle's CA of Kansas)

Your descendants will thank you.

40% of the stuff that came up with the oil "spill" is methane gas which creates

Global Warming! We just don't stop!

We've known about Global Warming since 1950's ... that was our chance.

The original view was that Global Warming had a 50 year delay -- that means we

have reached about 1960 on the human activity scale which created Global Warming --

and the effects we have been feeling and seeing so far.


I'd also throw in my pitch for NOT building any more nuclear plants --

Global Warming will produce more intense hurricanes, more cyclones, tornadoes,

earthquakes -- according to the Pentagon.

From what I've read, it takes at least 6 months to shut down a nuclear power plant

properly.

If anything nuclear power is needed so we can stop releasing stuff that heats the atmosphere.
It is our love of burning stuff for energy and releasing the end product into the atmosphere that is catching up with us and causing global warming. Nuclear energy doesn't do that.

Consider the damage that a nuclear event could do vs what has just happened in the

Gulf which is horrific enough!

Wow!

11 people that we know of have directly been killed because of that gulf oil alone. It has sickened many thousands more. It has basically killed off an entire ecosystem in the gulf. And this doesn't include other 'accidents' at various refineries in the last year alone.

No one has died because of nuclear power in this country. No ecosystems have been wiped out. So which is really greener and safer?

Plus it uses petroleum -- and involves leaking -- and HUGE WASTE PROBLEMS --

It's so dangerous it's uninsurable except by taxpayers!!

So why would anyone be recommending anything so dangerous?


No one has "died" immediately from nuclear power -- nor do we know what effect

nuclear may have had on our environment or humans -- and that's only because there's so much

money involved that no serious studies are being done by government.

Was Chernobyl "greener" -- was it "safer" --

How about three mile island --

Keep in mind how assuring the corporations are when they want a pass -- and how

impotent they are when something actually goes wrong --

In the case of BP something quite predictable!!

Nuclear power plants are also in the hands of private corporations --

and they have many problems with maintenance and security -- we shouldn't be adding

more plants.

And certainly taxpayers shouldn't be being asked to fund or insure them!

Sixty-three accidents have occurred at nuclear power plants. Twenty-nine of these have occurred since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and 71 percent of all nuclear accidents (45 out of 63) occurred in the United States.<2><3> There have been comparatively few fatalities associated with nuclear power plant accidents, but there has often been significant property damage.<1>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents

Nuclear power plants inevitably have accidents. Nuclear accidents are NOT green. Nor is nuclear waste.

:shrug:

too many people look at the date and say, "well, it won't affect me" and be fine with it.

:P

If greenhouse effect is essentially irreversible, what's the point of saving for retirement? What's the point if you are going to save money and retire, to live in a super-heated environment, a Venus-like hellish atmosphere? There is no sustainable future on the road we're going. Whether it happens 50 years from now, or 500 years from now isn't important. What is important is to imagine a long-term sustainable future which would necessarily have to be radically different from what we are living today.

I wish I could afford a summer home in Greenland.