Global Warming is Only A Modest Problem

Announcement:  Potential for a Major Aurora Tonight!

------------------------------------

Human-forced global warming (also called "Climate Change" by some) is only a modest problem.   

The scientific facts are clear:

It is NOT an existential threat to humanity.   It is NOT a crisis.

Huge amounts of money are being wasted (such as the unfortunate Washington State Climate Commitment Act), governments are putting great efforts into non-productive activities, and people are suffering unnecessary anxiety and fear.

Why should you at least consider what I say on this topic?  

 I have published dozens of papers on climate topics.   I  studied with and published with one of the leading climatologists of the past century (Steven Schneider of NCAR and Stanford).  When Jay Inslee (then a congressman) sought a tutorial on climate change, he came to me. I have received several NSF grants to work on climate topics.

Climate "Journalism" at the Seattle Times

Let's consider a few of the unfounded claims of climate activists.  

Extreme Weather, Enhanced by Climate Change, Is Causing Increasing Numbers of Deaths

You have heard the claim multiple times:   increasing extreme weather resulting from climate change is resulting in many more extreme weather-related deaths.

This is simply untrue.   Deaths from extreme weather (extreme heat/cold, hurricanes, extreme windstorms, flooding, etc.) are down...a LOT (see proof below).

Such deaths are down even though there are a lot more people on the planet.  

Why?   Much better forecasts allow people to get out of the way or prepare.  Many nations have invested in making themselves less vulnerable to severe weather--including some of the poorest.

Want an example?  In 1970, Cyclone (Hurricane) Bhola hit Bangladish and nearly 500,000 people died.

In 2020, a more powerful storm (Super Cyclone Amphan) hit virtually the same location, with only 133 deaths.

Severe storm deaths are profoundly down.....is this a "crisis"?

What about Northwest flooding and heavy rain?  

Average rainfall over the region is not increasing; if anything, it is level (see SEATC annual precipitation.

Winter daily extreme precipitation is up slightly (see sample for SeaTac below)

Regional climate models suggest a small decrease by the end of the century (the change in the annual highest 5-day precipitation is shown below)

There is little reason to expect more severe flooding over Washington State by the end of the century. 

 With better management of our rivers and development, there could be LESS flooding even with the very modest increases in precipitation.

Extreme Temperature Deaths Will Decline

There is a deep literature showing that cold waves kill far more people than heat waves.   For example, a 2015 article in The Lancet found 17 times more deaths from cold than heat (see figure from that article below).

Thus, global warming will REDUCE deaths from extreme temperatures.  

Furthermore, it is generally much easier to protect from heat than cold, with air conditioning being effective for taking the edge off of generally shorter head waves, compared to the extended cold waves that result in most of the deaths.

Northwest Snowpack

Global warming is causing the region to slowly warm, which will cause a slow decline in snowpack.  A very slow decline.  

As shown by the data, Washington State has warmed by about 1°F over the past 125 years during the winter snow accumulation season (October through March).  Human greenhouse gas emissions were the key contributor to the recent warming.

This modest warming has only produced a very small decline in April 1 snowpack at the official (SNOTEL) observing sites (Figure below produced by past Washington State Climatologist, Mark Albright)

High-resolution regional climate models suggest a continued slow decline in Northwest snowpack, dropping by ~15% by mid-century.  Not the end of the world.

Wildfires

Probably the most irresponsibly hyped aspect of global warming is the connection with wildfire.    The truth is that human alteration of the surface, increasing population, and human ignition of fires are FAR more important than climate change.  

Consider a plot of wildfire acres burning across the U.S. (below).  A LOT more fire acreage a century ago, when global warming was very small.

Considering only Washington State during the past ten years...a period when global warming was supposedly the greatest... wildfires are actually down.

The truth is that human ignition and wildfire management are central.  That human modification of the surface is critical....and far more important than climate change.   

The development of the technology of fire suppression and the funding of a massive suppression infrastructure led to a big drop in fires during the middle of the 20th century.  

Human mismanagement of forests and human introduction of flammable grasses contributed to the recent modest fire increase.  There has a huge increase in human ignitions (e.g., powerlines and arson) and the massive intrusion of flammable structures into the wildland/urban interface.

Warming temperatures are a very minor contributor to the modest increases in wildfires during the past decades.

Sea Level Rise?

Sea-level is slowly rising with NO acceleration as claimed by climate activists.  Here is the long-term trend at Seattle--about at 8 inch rise over a century.   Very typical.

Climate Economists Set the Record Straight

There have been a number of studies of the impacts of global warming on the world economy.   The general conclusion:  even unfettered global warming would only have a very small impact on economic growth across the planet.

Without or without global warming, humanity will be immeasurably richer and better off by the end of the century.

William Nordhaus, who received the Nobel Prize for his analysis, found that even unfettered global warming would decrease global economic growth by a few percent.  The entire world will be MUCH richer and healthier by the end of this century, even with global warming.

Willian Nordhaus

Final Words

Why are so many groups hyping and exaggerating the impacts of global warming?  Claiming disaster and existential threats without a factual basis.

For some, it may give them the satisfaction that they are "saving the world", giving meaning to their lives.

For others, it may be a political tool to undermine the opposing political party.  Or a way to gain political power (e.g., certain prior governors)

For others, it may be a way to gain money and resources.  The Washington State CCA is a poster child for such greed.

Whatever the reason, climate change hype and exaggeration are both destructive and counterproductive, often hurting the very people advocates claim to be concerned about.