Posted by John Goetz
CNN had the following AP article on their website today. NOAA says that shorter-term pollutants from Asia may raise U.S. heartland temperatures by three degrees in about 50 years.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Smog, soot and other particles like the kind often seen hanging over Beijing add to global warming and may raise summer temperatures in the American heartland by three degrees in about 50 years, says a new federal science report released Thursday.
These overlooked, shorter-term pollutants — mostly from burning wood and kerosene and from driving trucks and cars — cause more localized warming than once thought, the authors of the report say.
They contend there should be a greater effort to attack this type of pollution for faster results.
For decades, scientists have concentrated on carbon dioxide, the most damaging greenhouse gas because it lingers in the atmosphere for decades. Past studies have barely paid attention to global warming pollution that stays in the air merely for days.
The new report, written by scientists with NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, makes a case for tackling the short-term pollutants, while acknowledging that carbon dioxide is still the chief cause of warming.
That concept is also the official policy of the Bush Administration, said assistant secretary of commerce Bill Brennan.
In the United States, this approach would mean cutting car and truck emissions perhaps before restricting coal-burning power plants. In the developing world, especially Asia, it would mean shifting to cleaner energy sources, more like those used in the Western world. Much of this type of pollution in Asia comes from burning kerosene and biofuels, such as wood and animal dung.
In addition to soot, smog and sulfates, other short-lived pollutants are organic carbon, dust and nitrates. While carbon dioxide is invisible, these are pollutants people can see.
Projected increases in some of these pollutants and decreases in others in Asia will eventually add up to about 20 percent of the already-predicted man-made summer warming in America by 2060, the report said.
“What they do about their pollution can affect our climate,” said study co-author Hiram “Chip” Levy, a senior scientist at NOAA’s fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, New Jersey.
This pollution will likely create three “hot spots” in the world: the central United States, Europe around the Mediterranean Sea, and Kazakhstan, which borders Russia and China. In the United States it’s “a big blob in the middle of the country” stretching from the Rocky Mountains to the Appalachians, Levy said.
The same analysis also shows about an inch less of yearly rain in middle America because of Asian emissions by about 2060.
As far as American-produced pollution, smog is the main problem. Reducing diesel emissions and increasing mass transit would prove a more effective and immediate strategy over limiting power plants, said study co-author Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.
The report make sense, but should also include a strategy for man-made methane, a greenhouse gas which lasts 10 years in the atmosphere, said Michael MacCracken, chief scientist at the Climate Institute in Washington.
Methane mostly comes from landfills, natural gas use, livestock, coal mining and sewage treatment, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The article is not clear if the temperature increase will apply equally across the calendar year, or be tilted toward one season over the others. If the Chinese manage to raise winter temperatures, then perhaps thanks are due. Otherwise, our next president needs to consider the emerging threat in his foreign policy agenda. Fortunately, NOAA stopped short or recommending we invade China to put a stop to the threat.
…to follow the logic, the next market crash will be caused by Climate Change.
The following top – after a big, big while – will be caused by Climate Change, too.
I’ve, somehow lost my database of collected phrases – really, no joke – Climate Change must be the reason!
I’ve missed a visit to my doc early today, cancelled the date, did come home from work tonight by far after midnight, was bone tired. Hummm – Climate Change – obviously was the reason.
I don’t look on TV anymore, since about three years – can’t swallow that s**t anymore – this is climate related, I am pretty shure.
I am nearly 55 years now, my – former – black hairs are getting greyish, partly white already. Due to Climate Change, of course.
Our ten yrs old Mitsubishi Space Wagon is getting the first specks of rust. Hummm, Climate Change?
My oldest son has black hairs, the second one has brown hairs, with here and there
some blond strains, the third one has ‘copper’ hairs, which did change from birth until now from copper-blond to dark-copper, going to brown, sooner or later.
Very obviously, all related to Climate Change, no question!
I’m getting tired, whilst writing this sermon. This MUST BE related to CLIMATE CHANGE. Anybody, who offers other expainations, can only be one out of the nasty deniers.
OK, folks, have fun.
KlausB
Ahhh, but, there is one easy solution to all of that problem.
Spray neurotoxic agent over the populated areas of China, United States, India, Africa and Europe. Reduce the population to less than 500 million people and the pristine Nature will come back again (after the 5.5B corpses have finished rotting)
It seems that the fear campaign is not being effective enough so the have called in the CIA to help them up the pressure. Except now its someone else’s fault, where’d the guilt trip go?!
Politicians want to save us from global warming/climate change.
Everything mankind does contributes to AGW.
Therefore, give the politicians {Repubs/Demos/ UN} all your money as restitution for detroying the planet so the politicians {and the environmental lobbyists & their Hollywood elitist buddies} can save the planet. No money left for food or houses? Live under a bridge and go dumpster diving. And if such harsh conditions become untenable to your continued life, then consider that the ultimate restitution for your sin of living. This will also support the radical environmentalists’ ultimate goal of reducing the population by 4 to 6 billion. Save the planet for the ‘right’ kind of people and let us uppity serfs just die off.
JFA in Montreal,
yout don’t talk serously, you don’t!
Because, if you really do it, what are you doing here?
Provide hate?
So if the US mainland is getting pollution from China, is not Mona Lowa in Hawaii getting is CO2 measurement from China’s exhaust pipe?
‘This pollution will likely create three “hot spots” in the world: the central United States, Europe around the Mediterranean Sea, and Kazakhstan, which borders Russia and China. In the United States it’s “a big blob in the middle of the country” stretching from the Rocky Mountains to the Appalachians, Levy said.’
Oh No Not more “Hot Spots”. I’m still looking for upper troposphere’s “Hot Spot”.
‘This pollution will likely create three “hot spots” in the world: the central United States,’ Maybe the ” boys” have a new source. Page 80 in Old Farmer’s 2009 Almanac.
Perhaps all the particle China has been spewing the last couple of years is the source of the lower temps we are now seeing.
I’m not a scientist and I’m hoping one of the many knowledgeable people on this site can answer a couple of questions that I have in relation to this article. First, regarding this claim “For decades, scientists have concentrated on carbon dioxide, the most damaging greenhouse gas because it lingers in the atmosphere for decades.”
I’ve seen this claim made elsewhere and it always puzzles me because the Mauna Loa CO2 Chart clearly shows seasonal drops in CO2 levels. There seems to be widespread agreement that the seasonal drops are from natural sources (northern hemisphere forests primarily). It’s also evident that this natural carbon cycle *nearly* wipes out the entire “surplus” of CO2 that was previously in the atmosphere. Doesn’t this demonstrate that CO2 is not long-lived but is actually rather short lived? Maybe I’ve missed a crucial factor; I’m hoping someone can explain this to me.
My other question relates to the yearly average increase in CO2 as reported by the same Mauna Loa site. It’s fairly obvious (I think) that the yearly rate of CO2 increase (in ppm) has been fairly constant at about 2 or 3 molecules per year. Why would the rate of increase remain relatively constant year after year when the human contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere has not held constant but has been rapidly increasing? Please help me understand this because I haven’t had much luck googling for an answer.
Thank you.
I am not a scientist but only an old engineer and I don’t think they know neither the earth’s CO2 level nor its surface temperature; however, the satellite data is different.
Nathan Stone (11:40:11) :
The smog from all the smouldering cook fires was extremely thick and looked like a fog over the valley all day. I know it wasn’t from transportation because aside from the occasional mafioso in his Ferrari, everyone is walking or pedalling (or riding around in tin cans with lawnmower engines). That town needed a good, clean, coal fired plant which offered cheap electricity. The air would have been so much nicer, but the pizza probably wouldn’t be as good
this is so right… right on man!!!!
[…] from the full story on: Watts Up With That? ____________________________________________ Please Don’t Rain On My Parade… Uh… […]
Excuse me…Richard North Sept 5 2008 12:27:07
Since when is Yorkshire not a part of England??? [and I don’t mean linguistically, sorry bad joke, Alan Partridge aka Steve Coogan’s fault…LOL]
But seriously electricity power black-outs can also make people pay higher bills…
jdaniels, you’re jumping to conclusions from the Keeling Curve. CO2 has a residency time in the atmosphere of 8-10 years. In lay terms, you should think about it this way – If one molecule of CO2 is pumped anywhere into the atmosphere, it will take about 8-10 years on average for it to be removed. The bi-annual fluctuation of the Keeling Curve is not related to this; the fluctuation illustrates the “breathing” of the biosphere – the alternation of which hemisphere’s plant life is dominating interactions with the atmosphere.
The Keeling Curve says nothing about individual molecules, it only deals with the concentration of those molecules (this is your “crucial factor). Gases are dramatically dispersed due to the natural circulation within the atmosphere.
As for your other query, the increase hasn’t been relatively constant; there is a slight exponential shape to it if you look carefully. But that’s irrelevant, because we’re not dealing with linear systems. Yes, we often boil down the relationship such that CO2 goes then Temp goes up, but it’s a ton more complicated than that. However, the Keeling Curve will take on a much clearer shape on various time scales.
Brian D, yes, I’ve noticed unusually “red” sunsets here just recently, and I haven’t read or noticed anything about it in the MSM.
Funny how the obvious gets missed.
In a world battered by global warming and global cooling reports, my tractor lurches violently out of control as it pushes through the particulates from China. Meanwhile, we usually plant about 100 to 105 day relative maturity corn here in Wisconsin, near LaCrosse. Global warming had promised a climate like northern Illinois where we could grow perhaps 110 to 115 day corn and gain maybe ten or fifteen bushels per acre yield. Then the cycle of a less active sun threatened us with a northern Wisconsin climate where it would no longer be profitable to grow corn. Now the particles will send us on a detour back to northern Illinois?
Due to the somewhat cool summer, the corn and soybeans need a warm September to mature and an early frost would hurt. We had no 90 degree days here this summer, although LaCrosse recorded two 90s in August and a 91 and 93 on September 1 and 2. I think that weather station is located just north of the airport and strong southerly winds will improve the temperature a little.
I wonder if the global warming publicity changed the mix of hybrids sold by the seed companies in recent years to later maturing varieties?
‘Yes, we often boil down the relationship such that CO2 goes then Temp goes up, but it’s a ton more complicated than that.’ counter words
Or As Temp go up CO2 goes up or as temp goes down CO2 does not incease as expected (GHG models) or as temp goes down, CO2 goes down. Cherry pick your data.
In couple more weeks, we will know how well CO2 is mixed in the atmosphere.
The amplification number of 2.5 is nothing more than a figment of someone’s imagination.
The whole issue of CO2 is completely bogus.
Google “McClenney The Sky is Falling” for an entertaining, informative look at what is really going on with climate change. Should answer many questions I’ve seen here.
[…] China’s pollution will warm U. S temperature by 3 degrees in the next 50 years, so says this article. […]