It is so easy for scientists to get their five minutes of fame these days. Say something scary about global warming and they win the jackpot - fame + funding.

I like this line : "flooding risks across the Northeast could be lowered if Global Warming gas emissions are cut 80% by the year 2050."

The oceans are responsible for the vast majority of both H20 and CO2 emissions - the two primary greenhouse gasses. Perhaps we can put a giant cover over the oceans? Anyway, the world's supply of oil will be largely depleted by 2050, so we will likely have an 80% reduction in anthropogenic CO2 - whether we like it or not.

And please don't throw the oil shale argument back at me. I worked on oil shale development under the Carter administration, and if we ever get that desperate our environment is doomed anyway. Once they start large scale oil shale development it will be the largest environmental catastrophe in the history of the world. I doubt it will ever happen.

If you look at the NOAA data, most eastern states have been cooling over the last 70-80 years anyway. Temperatures in the Northeast have been well below normal this year.
http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/products/current.php

You don't have to worry about the loss of Hemlocks, Ash or Sugar maples in the Northeast because of Global warming by the end of the century. I can say that because there are 2 bugs that foresters say within 20 years they will pretty much wipe out all the Ash and Hemlocks in New York. These critters were imported courtesy of trade with the Chinese. The hitched a ride on pallets and are spreading across the nation. NO global warming just lax controls by the USDA. The high deer population has reduced the number of sugar maples being able to reach maturity. This has lead to less desirable species taking over their ecological niche.
But it is nice to see that the AGW folks are taking credit for this too.
Up to now Acid rain has been the culprit in the demise of the brook trout in the Adirondacks…but on page 5 of the NE Report it is now caused by AGW.
I was disappointed when the report did not blame the collapse of the NY Yankee season on AGW. Heck that would have gotten George Steinbrenner on their side. (They missed a big donor with that faux paux)
As for this paper being peer reviewed…..when you review it with others from your circle of friends…..never mind…. I guess that is peer reviewed.
Sorry too many qualifiers are written in this paper to call this science fact.
ted

Brett,

I think you should inform the readers of this blog about the liberal bias of Reuters and the Union of Concerned Scientists to put things in perspective.

For those who are interested, you can read up on some of the Union of Concerned Scientists' scare-mongering over at www.activistcash.com.

LOL this article was so funny I almost fell off my seat when I read it! What a joke. Does anyone still believe these dire predictions?!?!

Even if you accept that global warming is for real, predictions of the consequences are extremely complex, subject to all sorts of errors. Then to do this on a regional basis really compounds those complexities, i.e. is the Gulfstream shutting down, slowing down or not?

I'm just surprised they didn't try to scare us also with periods of drought & fires in the Northeast, like the West.

Patrick,

Its not five minutes of fame its five million more in funding ....LOL

Brett,

Does is not concern you one bit that ZERO evidence has been found that CO2 is causing GW? If you know of any please share because pointing to wild treatments for an unknown cause of an illness is wreckless. How would you like it if you paid for a very expensive operation that did not fix your illness? Furthermore, how about if you were misdiagnosed and had no illness? We are experiencing a ONE degree increase which followed a ONE degree decrease which followed a ONE degree increase. Knowing that many Temp Stations are within or directly next to heat islands and that NOAA is attempting to prevent correction also leads me to believe we are seeing a false positive.

My predictions.

1. 2007 ends up cooler than 2006, and 2008 will be cooler than 2007, Nice, it's an election year :)
2. The next two peaks of the Solar Cycle will cause it to be warmer than 2008 and it will cool slightly after those peaks.
3. Mark will never explain any of his harebrained ideas in this or any other blog, ever. He will however continue to amuse us on occasion, especially if he talks politics or Bush. Hint Hint.
4. There will be a Congressional Hearing on the NOAA Temp Station fiasco.

Thanks,

Steve

What if the known laws of physics are correct and the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is far too little to affect GW significantly? Is it not clear that 750 billion tons of CO2 is a drop in the ocean when compared to the "ocean"?

With the septillions of Watts we get from the Sun every year, where do you think all that energy is stored? In the CO2?

Wikipedia says that the annual mean rainfall for the planet is 1 meter. That makes 508 trillion tons of rainfall annually. With water vapor able to absorb 2.17 times as much energy as CO2, that makes 1.2 quadrillion tons of water. That means that water from rainfall absorbs ~1470 times the amount of energy that CO2 does annually. So for every 1 Watt absorbed by CO2, 1470 are absorbed by Water Vapor.

This does not include water that does not vaporize. A great deal more energy is absorbed into the oceans that does not result in water vapor forming. Another source has rainfall at 220 trillion cubic meters annually so that is ~637 times the amount CO2 absorbs.

Anyone care to check my figures and or reasoning?

Regards,

Steve

New Orlean is just the first city that will end of grappling with flooding. In time, just about every coastal city in the World (and yes, that includes the US) will be faced with a rise in sea level of about 20 feet.

No doubt, there will be attempts at building dikes and all type of optimist running around. However, the cost will be extreme.

True; it's not going to happen right away, but within the next 250 years, the problems will occur.

One of the reasons why the report singled out NYC, Boston and Atlantic City for flooding is that Global Warming is affecting weather patterns in the North East in a unique fashion.

The polar jet stream is strengthening and gaining a tendency to transport a lot of cooler air from the arctic towards the North East US. At the same time, the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean are warming up resulting in increased water vapor. This is being transported via stationary monster North Easters that are beginning to dump very large amounts of rain in the region. Couple this with the storm surge and all the ingredients for a perfect storm are coming together.

The IPCC report states with high confidence that increased precipitation will occur in the North East US (and eastern Canada) and while this has been accompanied by slightly lower regional temperatures, there is still an overall warming of the globe (recall it is "Global Warming" meaning that the world on average is warming, not that every region or city is warming).

Also, the shifting of arctic air southward isn't helping that area remain cool. Instead, warmer air flowing northward from Asia and Europe part of the overall patterns. It's already resulted in significant melting of the sea ice in that part of the arctic, which is chronic.

Bottom Line: Global Warming isn't uniform. Instead there's a pattern.

Somebody better tell BT, he lives up that way.

Say, whatever happened to the claims that winters would be colder because of AGW?

OOP, I forgot it is summer and we have to trot out the heat, flood, storm, and hurricane threat. The bad winter stuff, cold temps, failed crops, heavy snow, and blizzard threats are trotted out in 6 months when we are all cold.

Andrew,

Your claim that sea level will rise 20 feet over the next 250 years doesn't seem to have any scientific backing. (Al Gore's movie?)

Furthermore, we will be out of oil long before then. So even if the AGW theory was accurate, it will soon be irrelevant.

At current population growth rates - there will be about 100 billion people on the planet in 250 years. Perhaps all that extra weight will make the continents sink a few millimeters.

Andrew-

"The IPCC report states with high confidence that increased precipitation will occur in the North East US (and eastern Canada) and while this has been accompanied by slightly lower regional temperatures,"

Check the topic of this thread. It is about extreme heat in the Northeast US.

So if the Northeast is hot, it is due to global warming. If the Northeast is cool, it is due to global warming.

If we have a lot of hurricanes, it is due to global warming. If we have few hurricanes it is due to global warming.

This is like debating a three year old. Cover all scenarios and wriggle out when cornered.

Andrew,

New Orleans is below sea level now. The idiotic French built the place on an active river delta which basically sinks due to the sediment load from the Mississippi.

Tell me why I should be worried about New York City and Boston, again.

You weather forecasters? cannot predict this afternoons weather correctly, so how do you expect us to believe what will happen in 40 or 50 years??

What of the legitimate scientists who say we are closer to an ice age than global warming??

Clearly there are no legitimate scientists who truly believe we may be heading toward an ice age. They were all bought and paid for by either:
EXXON, Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Beck or Hannity.

There you go Mark, took care of that one for you.

Me, I'd rather have warm floods than cold ice. Since I live in Ohio, I doubt that the flood will reach us here, and it will make the beach just that closer so my SUV will not have to burn so much gas getting there.

Well, if these are "dire" situations, then I guess global warming is not so bad after all. If people in Atlantic City get flooded every 2 years, and they don't think about moving, then they're dumber than a bag of rocks. And they need to be taken out of the gene pool. Ditto for the other cities. These cities, which are gigantic heat sinks, are of course going to get hotter because they keep building higher and more buildings and more asphalt and keep spreading out to the suburbs which are then becoming cities. If you create so-called "villages" (clustered homes-ugh) so close to each other, guess what, they eventually link up to become cities. I live in a semi-rural area (for now) and they are asphalting and building wall-to-wall large buildings in a growing shopping center near me (southeast Pennsylvania). The other day the temperature was 84 degrees in my front yard (lots of trees and grass) and 99 degrees at the shopping center. (15 minute drive) You keep linking up these shopping centers increasing the size of the cities and you are going to get more and more days of over 100 degrees!!. Hello people. Also, I think the trees and shrubs in my area have more to worry about from the deer than global warming. The inconvenient truth is that we need to reduce the size of cities, or build them more earth friendly, and we need to encourage people not to have so many little CO2 emitters.

Yep, Dire! I am really sweltering here in Pittsburgh in this 70 degree weather brought on by another $#@&%-ing cold front. Why I am all a tither with panic! Oopsy, there I go again, associate the climate with the WX. Silly me!

Andrew,

Sweetie, New Orleans flooded because of the levies failing. It was below sea level and with a big hurricane hitting, it will flood. I live in South Texas and hurricane Allen did similar damage due to levies not being able to help stop the water.

New Orleans is not still under water which will show you that the ocean is not swelling up and covering it. Quit being such a doom cryer, you'll live a happier life.

Oh, and one other thing. I was on the Union for Concerned Scientists web site yesterday after this idiotic story broke. I find it facinating that these pointed heads have been instrumental in asking congress to stop any spending on this countries defense from the real threats to this country. Of course any organization that starts out with the word "union" should have their political motives observed with raised eyebrows immediately!

Mary,

I'm a geologist and rocks are my friends. I take exception to you calling folks in Atlantic City who refuse to move "dumber than a bag of rocks". I demand an apology, now. These rocks have been deeply offended.

Darren,

You fool, you forgot Haliburton.

Rats,

I apologize to Halliburton for leaving them off of the list. Without their generous gift of a scientist or two and gratitious support, we could not afford to have near as grand of a conspiracy.

Thanks the reminder, rbnyc.

Ignore this "study", please.

The "Union of Concerned Scientists" is a union of concerned people, but they are not scientists.

80% reduction in our ghg emission is a worthy and reachable goal. We should get cracking!

Darren:
Your foolish and ignorant.

Plenty of evidence suggests ice age.

Scientist from Canada and Europe have not been bought and paid for.
Your ignorance is sad

Ignore this "study", please.

The "Union of Concerned Scientists" is a union of concerned people, but they are not scientists.

Why ignore it, you just have to remember it is overinflated badly. Like the nuclear winter scenario that failed to account for the Earth's oceans OR the antiSDI paper that required three different sets of satellites (only one needed and planned) positioned so that the entire earth was covered (not allowing for orbiting of the satellites relative to the Earth) and assumed that a credible defense for the US and our allies required a "No Sparrow Shall Fall" worldwide system.

They are voting now on their GW toon contest. Consists of two major groupings of humor: direct attacks on Bush and claims that all science is being corrupted by the feds. You know, I thought that was the oil companies thing. Especially with the way the NASA post below got busted in the comments with being "massaged" to give the results.

Thor-

"80% reduction in our ghg emission is a worthy and reachable goal. We should get cracking!"

Go for it. No need to wait for Congress. Simple steps required are.

1. Only drive to work one day a week.
2. Cut