By PAUL C. “CHIP” KNAPPENBERGER and PATRICK J. MICHAELS
The Obama Administration this week is set to release the latest version of the National Climate Assessment—a report which is supposed to detail the potential impacts that climate change will have on the United States. The report overly focuses on the supposed negative impacts from climate change while largely dismissing or ignoring the positives from climate change.
The bias in the National Climate Assessment (NCA) towards pessimism (which we have previously detailed here) has implications throughout the federal regulatory process because the NCA is cited (either directly or indirectly) as a primary source for the science of climate change for justifying federal regulation aimed towards mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Since the NCA gets it wrong, so does everyone else.
A good example of this can be found in how climate change is effecting the human response during heat waves. The NCA foresees an increasing frequency and magnitude of heat waves leading to growing numbers of heat-related deaths. The leading science suggests just the opposite.
Case [in] point. Last week, we had an article published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature Climate Change that showed how the impacts of extreme heat are often overplayed while the impacts of adaptation to the heat are underplayed. And a new paper has just been published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives that finds that the risk of dying from heat waves in the U.S. has been on the decline for the past several decades.
By now, this should be rather unsurprising as it has been demonstrated over and over again. Not only in the U.S. but in Europe (and yes, Stockholm) and other major global cities as well.
The idea that human-caused global warming is going to increase heat-related mortality is simply outdated and wrong. In fact, the opposite is more likely the case—that is, a warming climate will decrease the population’s sensitivity to heat events as it induces adaptation. We described it this way in our Nature Climate Change piece:
Some portion of this response [the decline in the risk of dying from heat waves] probably reflects the temporal increase in the frequency of extreme-heat events, an increase that elevates public consciousness and spurs adaptive response. In this manner, climate change itself leads to adaptation.
…Our analysis highlights one of the many often overlooked intricacies of the human response to climate change.
But this information often falls on deaf ears—especially those ears responsible for developing the NCA.
Here is what the Executive Summary of the draft version had to say about heat-related mortality:
Climate change will influence human health in many ways; some existing health threats will intensify, and new health threats will emerge. Some of the key drivers of health impacts include: increasingly frequent and intense extreme heat, which causes heat-related illnesses and deaths and over time, worsens drought and wildfire risks, and intensifies air pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency takes the same outlook (of course since it is based heavily on the National Climate Assessment). The EPA leaned heavily on heat-related mortality as one the “threats” to public health and welfare in its justification for pursuing greenhouse gas emissions restrictions. From the EPA’s Technical Support Document for its greenhouse gas “Endangerment Finding”:
Severe heat waves are projected to intensify in magnitude and duration over the portions of the United States where these events already occur, with potential increases in mortality and morbidity, especially among the elderly, young, and frail. [emphasis in original]
Now compare the Administration’s take with the latest findings on the trend in heat-related mortality across the United States as published by a research team led by Harvard School of Public Health’s Jennifer Bobb. Bobb and colleagues found that the risk of dying from excessive heat events was declining across the U.S. And further, that most of the overall decline was coming from declines in the sensitivity to extreme heat shown by the elderly population (75 and older). In fact, the Bobb team found that the risk in the older population has dropped so far that it is now indistinguishable from the risk to the younger populations. Adaptation is a beautiful thing!
From Bobb et al.:
While heat-related mortality risk for the ≥75 age group was greater than for the <65 group at the beginning of the study period, by 2005 they had converged to similar levels.
In other words, all the EPA’s talk about an increasing threat from heat waves and a growing elderly population combining to negatively impact the public health and welfare has been wrong up to now and almost assuredly will be so into the future as we continually look for ways to avoid dying avoidable deaths (e.g., those from heat waves).
Bobb and colleagues summarize this way:
This study provides strong evidence that acute (e.g., same-day) heat-related mortality risk has declined over time in the US, even in more recent years. This evidence complements findings from US studies using earlier data from the 1960s through mid-1990s on community-specific mortality rates (Davis et al. 2003a; Davis et al. 2003b), as well as European studies that found temporal declines in heat-related mortality risk (Carson et al. 2006; Donaldson et al. 2003; Kysely and Plavcova 2011; Schifano et al. 2012), and supports the hypothesis that the population is continually adapting to heat.
As a note, we (Knappenberger and Michaels) were co-authors on the two Davis et al. studies cited in the above paragraph. Our work, first published more than a decade ago, was some of the first research into the declining trends in heat-related mortality across the U.S.
Clearly we have been saying all this stuff for a long time and even more clearly, the federal government hasn’t been listening for a long time. It is not what they want to hear.
From Cato@Liberty, May 5, 2014
References:
Bobb, J.F., R.D. Peng, M.L. Bell, and F. Dominici, 2014. Heat-related mortality and adaptation in the United States, Environmental Health Perspectives, http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307392
Davis, R.E., P.C. Knappenbergre, P.J. Michaels, and W.M. Novicoff, 2003a, Changing heat-related mortality in the United States. Environmental Health Perspectives, 111, 1712–1718.
Davis, R.E., P.C. Knappenbergre, P.J. Michaels, and W.M. Novicoff, 2003b, Decadal changes in summer mortality in U.S. cities. International Journal of Biometeorology, 47, 166–75.
Knappenberger, P.C., P.J. Michaels, and A.W. Watts, 2014. Adaptation to extreme heat in Stockholm County, Sweden. Nature Climate Change, 4, 302-303.
@E.M. Smith – and then you get the older folks who move down there when they retire! Just ask my mom and her 2 sisters. 😉
Here in Miami there is a 30 degree difference between night and mid-day. Yet they claim we can’t adapt and will go extinct from a 0.2 degree/decade rise. Yea….. don’t think so….
Indeed. Global warming was supposed to make itself felt most in the higher latitudes, in winter and at nights. Yet today we are promised daytime killer heat everywhere! Where is that (still missing) hot spot by the way? Warmists at the Guardian now tell me that the hot spot failed garbage was not necessary after all, just like the northern warming at night in winter I suppose.
Here is some other aspects about our climate that the NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT never tell the American public.
Winter temperatures in United States have been declining now for 17 years at about 1.78F/ decade according to NCDC/NOAA, CLIMATE AT A GLANCE data. In United States, 8 out 12 months of the year are cooling. Winters, spring [2months] and fall are all cooling while only 3 months, namely March, June and July are still warming. ANNUAL US temperatures are declining at (-0.36 F/DECADE) since 1998.
Not only have winters been getting cooler since 1998 in Contiguous US [48 states] and Canada, but winters have been getting colder for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole and for the Globe as a whole. .. The winter temperatures in United States were colder in every region except the West and the long term trend since 1998 is that winters are getting colder. Overall, for United States the past winter was the 34th coldest since 1895. The period from January through April will show to be the coldest in US history . North America is experiencing a cold cycle currently like they had 1895-1920 and again 1955-1979 and hence I see this cooler pattern to continue for several decades. Very cold winters bring cooler than normal spring and summer. These events have nothing to do with global warming or man’s influence.
in many hotter countries around the world you barely hear a murmur.
=====================
The local population in countries like Malaysia and Thailand where we lived for many years go around in long pants and long shirts, while we were sweating in shorts and t-shirts.
We lived a year in Papua New Guinea. It is not unusual to see the fishermen dressed in insulated jackets, long pants, hats, gloves and balaclavas while fishing in winter – they find it that cold. Only thing is, 24C / 75F is the coldest it ever gets in winter in PNG. In PNG your average white person can stand outside naked at midnight on the beach on coldest day of the year and still be warm. Yet you don’t find people dying of the heat in PNG.
Mikey Mann told us in 2006 that … This would be no different than asking Microsoft to release the code for its latest operating system
=================
China Gets A Peek At Microsoft Source Code
Government review stems from an agreement which allows China access to the source code for Windows 7 and other software.
http://www.informationweek.com/software/operating-systems/china-gets-a-peek-at-microsoft-source-code/d/d-id/1089702?
Any other AGU members out there?
This was in my e-mail box.
On Tuesday, 6 May, after years of work, the U.S. Global Change Research Program will release its third National Climate Assessment (NCA). That afternoon, at 5:00 P.M. EDT, on a conference call exclusively for AGU members, join National Climate Assessment authors who will take your questions about the report, its findings, and its implications for the U.S. and beyond.
Details about the NCA:
The third NCA is a thorough and comprehensive report that synthesizes and summarizes years of scientific research about climate change and the ways in which all regions and sectors of the U.S. are being, and will continue to be, affected. The NCA provides us with a means of identifying vulnerabilities, assessing risks, and using science to inform our plans for the future. The report was written by 240 authors drawn from academia; local, state, and Federal government; the private sector; and the nonprofit sector.
Details about the Call:
When: Tuesday, 6 May, 5:00-5:30 P.M. EDT
Dial:
U.S. (855) 894-7486
International (970) 315-0555
Conference ID: 41-79-79-64
Joining the Conference:
Please join 10 minutes before the call begins to avoid wait times calling in.
Helpful keypad commands:
*0 – Operator Assistance
*6 – Self Mute/Unmute
2000 Florida Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20009-1277
Another week, another dire climate change report.
I get the feeling that the Obama regime and policy makers who are pushing climate change policies (to enrich foreign countries are our expense) are pummeling the public with these weekly doom-and-gloom stories in order to soften us up to soon to be announced executive actions.
In PNG 27 C at night is doona weather.
Time for the House Republicans to step up to the plate and defund the EPA!
/Mr Lynn
The U.S. midterm elections will be long over when the lights start to go out, next winter. Our creaking electric grid just barely made it through last winter and with even more coal- fired generation stations getting the axe, many who will be unable to heat their homes will perish. What will this government’s rationalization be? “It’s still Bush’s fault”?
It seems to me that if it’s still below freezing, then melting should be an issue. Again, somebody please correct me if I’m wrong.
Either income inequality or the war on women.
What the national climate assessment doesn’t tell you is how much more the government intends to collect in taxes, fees, and higher prices and pass the collections along to the favored wealthy. The second thing not mentioned is that for all of this activity the effect on Earth’s atmospheric temperature, to the nearest whole number, will be Zero.
Alan Robertson says:
May 5, 2014 at 7:04 pm
“. . . Our creaking electric grid just barely made it through last winter and with even more coal- fired generation stations getting the axe, many who will be unable to heat their homes will perish.”
Who is meant by “our; many”?
In the USA some places had very cold temps and price spikes for fuel and electricity, but not all places did. If the electric grid barely made it through (where?) the utilities will better prepare for next year, many places are heated with gas or oil or wood, and “regression toward the mean’ suggests the winter of ’14-15 will be less severe than the past one. Further, as a society’s wealth increases, there are more “friends of the poor” that work hard to keep people from perishing.
The issue of winter energy supply is quite complex. As an example, when it is extremely cold, trains are run with fewer cars and sometimes with distributed power (additional locomotives at intermediate points) – a braking and control issue. But companies are building additional equipment and expect to offer better service next winter. Even Senator Edward Markey (Dem) is in favor of improving infrastructure.
Further reading:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/01/10/natural-gas-prices
[bad link. Mod]
Richard I am having the same problem, we experienced the lowest temps ever here on the Northern Tablelands, (NSW) and Jack Frost and his brother snow has been spotted. We are doomed (sarc) Surely it’s not the weather!
Where are human’s soft underbelly?Always vulnerable to attack and control. Money, energy supply, and cold and hot weather, as if we haven’t adapted yet to this inconvenient truth (LOL)
As my grandma would say “The world is going to hell in a hand basket – chitty chatty bang bang”. Succinct and to the point.
There is a general tone to the article I disagree with. It talks of the National reports “projections” of increasing heat waves, and then mentions adoption, almost as if the “predictions have come true.
In climate science they are wrong far more then right. There has been a decrease in tornados and hurricanes. There has been no change in NH snow cover. There has been no increase in droughts. Did they get heat waves right? How does one define and track heat waves. Has there ben a global increase in Heat Waves How is that tracked?
Adoption, beyond common sense, is dependent on the economy and the price of energy. This US administration is doing all possible to lower our ability to adopt. If not now, sooner or later there will be an increase in heat waves, and all else to. It will likely have nothing to do with CAGW; it will likely be just climate. And we will adopt poorly due to insane economic policy.
@ur momisugly more soylent green! says:
May 5, 2014 at 9:07 pm
“Either income inequality or the war on women.”
MSG – you may be right. Try this for a giggle:
“Income Inequality Institute Will Pay Paul Krugman $25,000 Per Month”
http://gawker.com/income-inequality-institute-will-pay-paul-krugman-25-0-1563245534
John F. Hultquist says:
May 5, 2014 at 9:48 pm
Alan Robertson says:
May 5, 2014 at 7:04 pm
“. . . Our creaking electric grid just barely made it through last winter and with even more coal- fired generation stations getting the axe, many who will be unable to heat their homes will perish.”
Who is meant by “our; many”?
In the USA some places had very cold temps and price spikes for fuel and electricity, but not all places did. If the electric grid barely made it through (where?) the utilities will better prepare for next year, many places are heated with gas or oil or wood, and “regression toward the mean’ suggests the winter of ’14-15 will be less severe than the past one. Further, as a society’s wealth increases, there are more “friends of the poor” that work hard to keep people from perishing.
The issue of winter energy supply is quite complex. As an example, when it is extremely cold, trains are run with fewer cars and sometimes with distributed power (additional locomotives at intermediate points) – a braking and control issue. But companies are building additional equipment and expect to offer better service next winter. Even Senator Edward Markey (Dem) is in favor of improving infrastructure.
________________________________
Hello John,
I was referring to the US electric grid, which was severely tested last winter. According to information in a recent WUWT article, last winter, the grid experienced 8 of 10 of the worst demand peaks and just narrowly missed widespread blackouts. We may hope for milder winters, but will US electric generating capacity and grid- tie improvements increase fast enough via other methods to compensate for the shutdown of many coal- fired generators due to government fiat? What happens when there is a blackout and there is no power available to hundreds of thousands of homes? Many US homes require electric power to operate the home’s heating system, regardless of fuel type. Deaths in Great Britain due to people’s inability to afford to heat their homes have been reported to be in the tens of thousands over the past few years. Has the wealth of the general US population been increasing over the past several years?
ferd berple says:
May 5, 2014 at 4:53 pm
OK, I’ll bite. US casualties in WWII occurred all over the world. In marine services (Navy, Merchant Marine) many of the dead went down with the ship and were unavailable for a autopsy. US logistical services were strained keeping scattered operations supplied with men, equipment and supplies; medical personnel were busy with trying to save the wounded. Many of the dead were buried in the combat theater where they died, and I doubt autopsies were ever performed on most of them.
Total combat+non-combat deaths in WWII were 405,400. Total wounded were 670,850. Deaths as a percentage of total casualties was therefore 38%.
The Korean War was a single theater of operations, with logistical supply through Japan and no hostile navy to interdict shipping. Total combat+non-combat deaths were 36,500; total wounded were 153,300. For the first time wounded were evacuated to hospitals by helicopter. The effects of faster and better trauma care are clear in the deaths as percentage of total casualties: 19%. All (almost all) recovered remains were returned to the US and I suspect a much higher percentage were autopsied.
I claim the autopsy samples between WWII and Korean war are not comparable.
In addition, a good portion of US soldiers in WWII came out of the Depression to one degree or another malnourished. A significant number from rural areas had never seen a toothbrush before entering service; they had to be taught dental hygiene along with marching and small arms. And during the war in some theaters the troops were not far from starving for months at a time because we lacked the means to keep them adequately supplied (Guadalcanal for example, where US Marines survived on capture Japanese supplies).
The US military personnel for the Korean war came from a populace which was much better fed on to begin with and they were much better supplied during the war.
[Also, many Korean War combat troops, Air Force and Navy support troops, and most officers WERE WWII veterans, so an ageK = ageWWII comparison can’t be assumed either. Mod]
Mod.,
I used a text page and the end of my link went to page 2 and got lost;
for the link at May 5, 2014 at 9:48 pm – #comment-1629669
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/01/10/natural-gas-prices-spike/H8d7cjyAbnE8cnNliWzEHN/story.html
Sorry about that. Need to do this more: Here it is.
Eric Worrall says:
May 5, 2014 at 2:20 pm
Well, that is the thing. If the morons at the White House and EPA have their way, coal plants are gone, resulting in reduced generation capacity which means your air conditioner is out. And if they had their way on water, your pool would be empty because they are withholding water (like in California, to farmers) to save some obscure species of blind fish, or shrimp, or somesuch. So just enjoy wearing shorts. Who says you can’t adapt? /sarc
When PBS News Hour came a-knocking with the latest shrieking phantods from the Haunted White House (“We’re not trying to alarm anybody, but…”) I frantically pawed around on the cushions for my remote control mute button, resolved to deny myself another delicious Stephen King spine-tingler. I was surprised a minute later to see the name Chip Knappenberger identifying one of the interviewees and made a mental note to check it out online. Well,here I am. If you read your own thread, perhaps you would be good enough to confirm you were there, because, using their search engine, there is,no record of anyone by that name ever having appeared on the News Hour. Seth Borenstein, yes. John Holder, yep. Other pathological poltergeists predicting pestilence and plagues? You bet.
Seriously, media disappearing acts (of dissenting views on AGW) seem to be getting increasingly heavy-handed.