“Rivers of Rain” Could Wreck China, Unless We Reduce CO2 Emissions

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to an AGU study, this might be our last chance to save the Chinese Communists from a climate catastrophe.

Climate Change Could Open Up ‘Rivers in The Sky’ Over East Asia 

DAVID NIELD 23 JANUARY 2022 

We know that the climate crisis is already having a profound effect on global weather systems, altering temperatures, rainfall, wind patterns, and more – and a new study predicts likely deluges over the mountainous parts of East Asia in the future.

The pouring rain will be brought on by atmospheric rivers, scientists predict. These narrow corridors of concentrated moisture can quickly cause flooding when they hit a barrier such as a mountain range, releasing vast amounts of water in a short space of time.

According to the researchers’ models, rainfall events in East Asia will be more frequent and more severe in the coming decades as the planet warms up. More water will be transported through the air, and more precipitation will land on the ground.

“We find that both the atmospheric river-related water vapor transport and rainfall intensify over the southern and western slopes of mountains over East Asia in a warmer climate,” write the researchers in their published paper.

“Atmospheric rivers will bring unprecedented extreme rainfall over East Asia under global warming.”

Read more: https://www.sciencealert.com/climate-change-could-open-up-rivers-in-the-sky-over-east-asia

The abstract of the study;

Atmospheric Rivers Bring More Frequent and Intense Extreme Rainfall Events Over East Asia Under Global Warming

Y. KamaeY. ImadaH. KawaseW. Mei
First published: 01 December 2021

Portions of East Asia often experienced extremely heavy rainfall events over the last decade. Intense atmospheric rivers (ARs), eddy transports of moisture over the middle latitudes, contributed significantly to these events. Although previous studies pointed out that landfalling ARs will become more frequent under global warming, the extent to which ARs produce extreme rainfall over East Asia in a warmer climate remains unclear. Here we evaluate changes in the frequency and intensity of AR-related extreme heavy rainfall under global warming using a set of high-resolution global and regional atmospheric simulations. We find that both the AR-related water vapor transport and rainfall intensify over the southern and western slopes of mountains over East Asia in a warmer climate. ARs are responsible for a large fraction of the increase in the occurrence of extreme rainfall in boreal spring and summer. ARs will bring unprecedented extreme rainfall over East Asia under global warming.

Read more: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL096030

Naturally the study embraces RCP 8.5.

The study authors predict increased water vapour transport and concluded that will lead to increased rainfall. “Increased water vapor in the warmer air alone can lead to increased AR [Atmospheric River] occurrence“. But where does the power come from, to evaporate and transport all that additional water vapour?

The following is one of the few studies I have read which questions the assumption that warmer temperatures automatically lead to a significantly intensified water cycle.

Constrained work output of the moist atmospheric heat engine in a warming climate

Incoming and outgoing solar radiation couple with heat exchange at Earth’s surface to drive weather patterns that redistribute heat and moisture around the globe, creating an atmospheric heat engine. Here, we investigate the engine’s work output using thermodynamic diagrams computed from reanalyzed observations and from a climate model simulation with anthropogenic forcing. We show that the work output is always less than that of an equivalent Carnot cycle and that it is constrained by the power necessary to maintain the hydrological cycle. In the climate simulation, the hydrological cycle increases more rapidly than the equivalent Carnot cycle. We conclude that the intensification of the hydrological cycle in warmer climates might limit the heat engine’s ability to generate work.

Read more (requires registration): http://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6221/540.full

The point is, climate intensity is not related to surface temperature, it is related to how quickly solar energy passes through the climate system. This is nothing to do with the debate about whether CO2 or solar variations drives global warming, because I’m not talking about variations in surface temperature.

What I am talking about is the energy flow, from sunlit daytime to interstellar space, which drives the entire global weather system.

You can have more storms, or more intense rainfall, but not both. If water vapour transport and rainfall does intensify, the energy to power that rainfall intensification has to come at the cost to the intensity of another atmospheric phenomenon, to keep the thermodynamic books balanced. Climate change could redistribute the intensity of extreme weather – but any rise in extreme weather intensity in one location has to be more or less counterbalanced by a reduction in intensity elsewhere.

Lets just say I’m not going to lose any sleep over the predictions of this study.

4.7 22 votes
Article Rating
122 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
January 26, 2022 2:08 pm

Anyone using RCP8.5 as a premise should be defunded.

RickWill
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 26, 2022 2:29 pm

Anyone using CO2 as a temperature control knob should be defunded.

As far is climate irrelevancies are concerned, RCP8.5 and SSP5 are tracking/forecasting the current increase in CO2 quite well.

Bryan A
Reply to  RickWill
January 26, 2022 2:58 pm

IF CO2 is a problem, and IF China stands to bear the brunt of CC induced rain, THEN China should reduce their vast percentage of global emissions prior to seeking assistance for any “Hasn’t Happened Yet” climate catastrophes

Ron Long
Reply to  Bryan A
January 26, 2022 5:35 pm

“…according to the researchers model…” you guys are all deniers. I wonder if the researchers model is a lingerie model?

Bryan A
Reply to  Ron Long
January 26, 2022 6:35 pm

That would make it a SUPERMODEL

MarkW
Reply to  Bryan A
January 26, 2022 8:13 pm

That would be a model worth paying attention to.
Close attention.
Maybe even hands on?

Last edited 3 months ago by MarkW
The Saint
Reply to  MarkW
January 27, 2022 5:26 pm

Was this study done by the same researchers who came up with the Global Warming temperature models that where completely wrong?

markl
January 26, 2022 2:10 pm

So we’re back to global warming or did the “researcher” fail to check the approved catastrophes on the narrative list?

Peter W
Reply to  markl
January 26, 2022 2:43 pm

Any catastrophe will do, as long as it is blamed on the human race.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Peter W
January 27, 2022 12:47 am

“Any catastrophe will do, as long as it is blamed on the Western Free-Enterprise Capitalist human race.”

There, all fixed for you!!!

Coeur de Lion
January 26, 2022 2:11 pm

And if it gets cooler? Current ‘pause’ is seven years and counting

Peter W
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
January 26, 2022 2:46 pm

Then find some way to claim our emissions are blocking the heat of the sun, and we are going to bring about the next ice age.

TRM
Reply to  Peter W
January 26, 2022 4:37 pm

It’s like Deja Vu all over again (I grew up in the 70’s ice age scare)

Bryan A
Reply to  TRM
January 26, 2022 5:22 pm

Perhaps it’s time to roast a few climate prognosticators

john harmsworth
Reply to  Peter W
January 27, 2022 8:44 am

I’m waiting for some “scientific reasons” why the Tonga volcano caused a pause before it even went off, and why it will also make global warming even worse once it resumes. You read it here first!

TonyG
Reply to  john harmsworth
January 27, 2022 10:28 am

I’ll give it a try john:

The Tonga volcano was absorbing all the extra heat from the atmosphere for 7 years, and that extra heat is what caused it to erupt. Now that the extra heat has been released back to the atmosphere it’s going to ADD to the warming already present and make it hotter. Like lava.

Sad thing is, there are people who would buy that.

PCman999
Reply to  Peter W
January 27, 2022 11:46 pm

All that extra coal burning going on, due to the success of the energy transition, will certainly lead to lots of extra SO2 in the atmosphere to block the Sun ⛅. Climate change, crisis or emergency solved.

Philo
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
January 27, 2022 10:04 am

It’s highly likely temperatures are very likely to continue dropping for at least anther 10 years. After that it “may” start recovering or it “may” not. Solar scientists have predicted the current Solar Grand Minimum is quite likely to last until 2050. That is similar to the “Maunder Minimum”, which was in the middle of the “Little Ice Age”. Fortunately no one is predicting That.

Robert Arvanitis
January 26, 2022 2:13 pm

Light the bonfires!

Interested Observer
Reply to  Robert Arvanitis
January 26, 2022 5:31 pm

Only if they are fueled by Communists.

Why would anyone want to save Communists? Let them drown and the world will be a better place.

Unfortunately, it will just be average Chinese people who will suffer from any environmental disaster, not the Communists – same as it ever was.

RickWill
January 26, 2022 2:24 pm

As the NH summer sunlight trends upward, NH land masses will get less net precipitation in summer. Of course the reducing sunshine during boreal winters will lead to more precipitation falling as snow.

The current cycle of glaciation began 400 years ago; the last time perihelion occurred before the austral summer solstice.

The climate is changing but has nothing to do with CO2. It is all to do with the distribution of surface water and land and the variation in sunlight due to orbital changes and solar output.

Peter W
Reply to  RickWill
January 26, 2022 2:49 pm

But whatever happens, we need to find some way to blame it on the human race!

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Peter W
January 26, 2022 4:52 pm

especially the white race heterosexual older male conservatives

Richard Page
January 26, 2022 2:28 pm

So if they predict far more water content in the atmosphere, does that mean a corresponding sea level decrease will occur? That’s a win in my book!

Peter W
Reply to  Richard Page
January 26, 2022 2:53 pm

But we will have to start dredging all the harbors, and maybe even relocating them! Think of the expense, and all the ships running aground!

Mike McMillan
Reply to  Peter W
January 27, 2022 5:42 am

Relocating harbors…

Interesting concept.

Rud Istvan
January 26, 2022 2:35 pm

“We know that the climate crisis…”

What crisis?
ECS is 1.7C so Schellnhuber’s dreaded 2C cannot be reached.
Sea level rise is not accelerating.
Arctic summer ice has not disappeared.
Children still know snow.
Pacific Islands areal extent is growing, not shrinking
GBR is thriving despite JCU contrary claims, so JCU fired Peter Ridd.
Polar bears are thriving, even hunting and eating Attenborough’s walrus.
Planet is greening, so food production is up—most food plants are C3 so do better with more CO2. Corn is the main exception.

OTOH:
Renewables turn out to be ruinables; intermittent, no grid inertia, expensive.
China and India are sensibly going coal generation.
COP26 predictably failed.
Now THAT sort of stuff is a real crisis for the climate alarmed like Greta.

M.W.Plia
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 26, 2022 2:56 pm

All very true Rud, but not part of the AGW narrative which has the best lies. And only the best lies get published.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  M.W.Plia
January 26, 2022 3:25 pm

I’m published, so now mainly working on the Alinsky ridicule stuff.

M.W.Plia
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 26, 2022 5:10 pm

Yes, I know…apologies.

“Published” is the wrong word. “Reported” would have been more accurate.

MarkW
January 26, 2022 3:00 pm

We know that the climate crisis is already having a profound effect on global weather systems,

No need to read any further. We already know that the authors of this study don’t even have a passing relationship with reality.

Climate believer
Reply to  MarkW
January 26, 2022 10:58 pm

The “profound effect” is that extreme rainfall records for Greatest 1min, 1hr, 12hr, 24hr and 48hr rainfall are all last century.

1 min…………1956

1 hour………..1947

12 hours…….1966

24 hours…….1966

48 hours…….1995

… and none of them are in China.

bonbon
Reply to  MarkW
January 27, 2022 5:37 am

The authors are surely in bed with their models, though.

Rud Istvan
January 26, 2022 3:00 pm

Another more ‘sciency’ comment on this paper after some quick general circulation fact checking. The transport of atmospheric heat from the equator poleward via the Hadley, Walker, and polar cells generally involves west to east winds. This is because of Earth’s rotational direction (Sun rises east and sets west) and the corresponding Coriolis force. That is why California experiences ‘Pineapple Express’ atmospheric streams from ‘Hawaii’. (West to east).

This paper claims atmospheric rivers in the OPPOSITE general circulation direction, from the Pacific to China. So CO2 can reverse Earth’s spin momentum? WOW. Truly a magic molecule, even able to overcome basic laws of physics.
Or, the models they rely on are just more BS.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 26, 2022 5:28 pm

I had a similar question, Rud: How can China receive massive atmospheric rivers (oceans provide the moisture) from the Asian interior? Easterly winds along the Equator result in Westerlies in the mid latitudes which carry moisture from the Pacific Ocean to the western Americas.

Mactoul
Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 28, 2022 1:58 am

In Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea, the cyclones tend to move east to west.
The north India gets summer rain from easterlies as well.
China is to the west of Pacific Ocean and it gets summer monsoon from east-to-west winds as well.

RevJay4
January 26, 2022 3:01 pm

Covid proved out to be a bust for the alarmist and NWO types, gotta get back to climate porn fear. Which will be a bust as well. And the bs wheel keeps on spinnin’.

griff
Reply to  RevJay4
January 27, 2022 1:12 am

Oh I see, covid and climate change are both ‘plots’…

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 1:57 am

At least one of them is.

jeffery p
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 5:21 am

Climate change is real. It’s also natural and happening since the beginning of time. So let’s all panic about it because the climate is always changing.

Covid is caused by the Chinese virus and is such a threat to mankind that most people who haven’t don’t even know it.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 8:37 am

Climate change is real, it’s also been happening since the planet first formed an atmosphere.
Catastrophic climate change has always been a plot.

January 26, 2022 3:09 pm

Sounded like a good reason to light our fire pit this weekend, until Eric debunked the notion. Ah, well, I’ll do it anyway.

H. D. Hoese
January 26, 2022 3:43 pm

Just ran across this showing that the science was never far from settled. From a scholarly treatment on the Els.J. Javier Díez. About “El Niño” and Other Concomitant Phenomena. Journal of Coastal Research (2005) 21(6):xiii–xviii.
https://doi.org/10.2112/05-0544.1

“So, there we have it; we have identified the “enemy” in this millenary and antiphilosophical world, in the same manner as we have dealt with the infamous, malignant carbon dioxide (CO2). There is a tendency to treat both “El Niño” and carbon dioxide purely and solely in negative terms.”

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  H. D. Hoese
January 26, 2022 3:47 pm

I think I might have better said “…was always far from settled.”

AndyHce
January 26, 2022 3:51 pm

Poor China. New York and California are (pretend) doing their part. If China is worried, it knows what to do.

Last edited 3 months ago by AndyHce
January 26, 2022 3:55 pm

They forgot the locusts.

Scissor
Reply to  Mike O'Ceirin
January 26, 2022 6:05 pm

I told my Chinese boss about plagues of flies, lice, locusts and frogs. He said that he likes rice and fries.

alf
January 26, 2022 3:56 pm

If the global temp is going up there would be less cold air; less cold air would mean a lower rate of condensation. Humidity would go up but less cold air would have a counter reaction to the total rain produced; Not?????

Chris Hanley
January 26, 2022 4:17 pm

A study found China warming 1850 – 2010 however there was no significant change in precipitation totals over the same time-frame.

Last edited 3 months ago by Chris Hanley
john harmsworth
Reply to  Chris Hanley
January 27, 2022 10:04 am

“significant temperature rise since 1850” 0f .05C. 5/100ths of 1 degree, with the initial reference data taken in a not very advanced nation 170 years ago. Bringing new significance to the word significance.

TRM
January 26, 2022 4:35 pm

“Rivers of rain could wreck China” – You say that like it’s a bad thing?

Deano
Reply to  TRM
January 26, 2022 10:01 pm

Yes exactly! … the anticipation intensifies….

jeffery p
Reply to  TRM
January 27, 2022 5:23 am

Imagine rivers of alligators. That could wreck China, too.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  jeffery p
January 28, 2022 2:25 pm

hahaha, what would they do?
Eat Peking duck?

Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 4:37 pm

Quote:”Here, we investigate the engine’s work output using thermodynamic diagrams computed from reanalyzed observations and from a climate model simulation with anthropogenic forcing.

As we are all aware, this is really advanced science at work here, so let me introduce you to a much clearer and easy to understand translation via a video on the Utoob…

Preamble introduction:”Here at Rockwell Automation’s world headquarters, research has been proceeding to develop a line of automation….
The video

Last edited 3 months ago by Peta of Newark
Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 5:01 pm

very funny, I’ve passed it along

Rich Davis
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 5:23 pm

Did he say encabulator? I thought it would be a frantabulator if no muffler bearing is encapsulated?

Confused help pls

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Rich Davis
January 28, 2022 11:56 am

No, no! it’s the “retroencabulator”.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 5:35 pm

It looks like Michael Mann has slimmed down, got some hair and dresses better.

Philo
Reply to  Dave Fair
January 27, 2022 10:15 am

I’m glad he got better dresses to suit his slimmer figure!

Clarky of Oz
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 7:29 pm

I had one of those but the wheels fell off

Deano
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 26, 2022 10:04 pm

Hahaha!! This is an oldie but a goodie. Love the retro encabulator, and the more updated and powerful turbo encabulator. These days we really need that panametric fan, and the marzel vanes!!

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 27, 2022 1:28 am

I call BS. Every schoolboy knows that Exeter’s Interocitor did all that and more over 65 years ago.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 27, 2022 4:25 am

I suspect like many of us here @WUWT we stop reading at the sight of the word “model”!!! Unless it is of an interesting layout, say 36″,24″, 36″!!!!!!!!!!!! 😉

Philo
Reply to  Alan the Brit
January 27, 2022 10:16 am

Think there are places near the equator experience that change on a daily basis, at least for part of the year.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Alan the Brit
January 28, 2022 11:55 am

Change the first measurement to 38″ and then you have my attention.

Shoki Kaneda
January 26, 2022 4:43 pm

We know…”

Any monologue that starts with these words is bullshit. An honest argument presents evidence.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Shoki Kaneda
January 27, 2022 4:42 am

Unfortunately for the author, there is no evidence to present concerning Human-caused Climate Change, so he has to settle for assuming it exists, and then asserts to others that it exists. This is alarmist climate science in a nutshell.

Joseph Zorzin
January 26, 2022 4:50 pm

The title-
“Rivers of Rain” Could….
I saw the “could”- stopped there.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 27, 2022 4:47 am

“I saw the “could”- stopped there.”

It’s all predicated on the temperatures rising to 1.5C or 2.0C above their average. But the temperatures are currently cooling on the order of 0.5C below the warmest year in the satellite era, 2016.

So those Chinese atmospheric rivers may be a long time coming.

You see, these climate scientists just assume the temperatures will climb. If they don’t climb, then you can throw their studies out the window along with all the other similar studies that assume continuing warming.

Last edited 3 months ago by Tom Abbott
Allen Stoner
January 26, 2022 5:25 pm

Is there a downside to not cutting back on CO2?

griff
Reply to  Allen Stoner
January 27, 2022 1:10 am

Pollution, extreme weather, damaging levels of heat rise… all clearly demonstrated by observed events, never mind the models.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 4:56 am

go watch some Tony Heller videos- he proves otherwise- those events happen- and always have – it’s as if the climatistas want to go back to some golden age, some Paradise that humans have been evicted from- where the weather was always just right

jeffery p
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 5:26 am

Against my better judgement, I’ll bite — how does pollution cause global warming? How is it related to climate change? Besides, pollution is much better than when we were children, isn’t it?

MarkW
Reply to  jeffery p
January 27, 2022 8:40 am

Despite the US burning many times more fossil fuels today compared to the 70’s, the US is much cleaner.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 8:39 am

Fascinating how weather events that have been happening for as long as we have had climate records, are now all being caused by CO2.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 9:51 am

“all clearly demonstrated by observed events”

You are easily impressed, Griff.

john harmsworth
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 10:09 am

Yeah, it’s taking the shine off the snow in my yard! C’mon man!

Philo
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 10:23 am

I agree, those are extreme events that have been observed. They’ve even been observed in “”models”. Unfortuately, there there is no connection between the “models” and the actual weather, since ALL the models are “tuned” to produce specific results. THAT is quite a lot like getting ahold of the prof’s answers for all the tests!.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
January 28, 2022 2:28 pm

oh F k.
Here goes nutter griff again!!

Andy Pattullo
January 26, 2022 5:27 pm

According to the researchers’ models” should be the title and then we can all save some time and move on to something scientific.

Rah
January 26, 2022 6:20 pm

If China doesn’t give a crap, then why should we? At least it will wash some of the pollution out of the air. And perhaps Dilute some of the arsenic leaching into the ground water from the bottom ash from their coal fired power plants.

griff
Reply to  Rah
January 27, 2022 1:09 am
Rah
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 1:58 am

The US has been on to that mitigation wagon for decades. You don’t know squat about It Griff. Many stations have gone to pneumatic systems, others just close. Depends on the market, local conditions, and a whole host of other factors.

So what about the US? They’re dealing
With the problems in one way or another as is obvious.

But communist Loving morons try to pretend that those mitigation efforts show some kind of systemic corruption while ignoring, or trying to divert attention from the rampant and unregulated destruction of the environment on a massive scale in the largest communist country on earth. As you just did.

Thanks for exposing what you are really all about here for all to see Griff.

jeffery p
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 5:27 am

The US has steadily reduced pollution and “carbon emissions” (not the same thing) over the last half-century. So what about US coal plants? We have some of the cleanest in the world.

Last edited 3 months ago by jeffery p
MarkW
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 8:41 am

Ridiculous levels of regulation can kill anything.
There was no need for the new wastewater rules. There only purpose was to kill coal, not clean up waterways.

Martin
January 26, 2022 6:46 pm

Considering who is producing the CO2 sounds like a them problem all around. If you believe in the whole CO2 is evil problem.

observa
January 26, 2022 6:48 pm

Don’t worry be happy with your Chinese solar panels and batteries abnormals-
Low-carbon ambitions must not interfere with ‘normal life’, says Xi Jinping (msn.com)

observa
Reply to  observa
January 26, 2022 6:56 pm

PS: Oh and don’t forget to keep on enhancing our ambition doomsters and useful idiots-
Los Angeles City Council approves ban of new oil and gas wells (msn.com)

DMacKenzie
January 26, 2022 7:41 pm

What the study says…”the extent to which ARs produce extreme rainfall over East Asia in a warmer climate remains unclear”

What David Nield reported…”We know that the climate crisis is already having a profound effect ……and a new study predicts likely deluges over the mountainous parts of East Asia in the future.”

A clear case of media misrepresentation.

observa
Reply to  DMacKenzie
January 26, 2022 8:18 pm

A clear case of media misrepresentation.

Nah just the usual loyal footsoldiers pumping out the dooming message and the study authors won’t be ringing up urgently to request a correction. That’s pretty lightweight stuff but here’s your typical classic from the propaganda machine-
U.S. corn production is booming—but not for the reasons scientists hoped (msn.com)

Isn’t it great how we’re growing all that food nowadays BUT…. don’t forget dooming ahead folks!

Deano
January 26, 2022 9:51 pm

You can find me out in the back burning up all the used tires tossed back there to contribute to this unfortunate result for the Chi-Coms…

Doonman
January 26, 2022 11:37 pm

According to the researchers’ models, rainfall events in East Asia will be more frequent and more severe in the coming decades as the planet warms up.

We know what happens under model simulations.

Big deal. The GCM models do not represent the observed reality after a few days.

In other words, we know what future fantasy is but refuse to stop confusing it with reality.

griff
January 27, 2022 1:07 am

They already had one ‘river of rain’ last year in Henan… why couldn’t there be another?

And Germany had one last year and so did the area near Vancouver – three in one 6 month period.

bonbon
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 6:05 am

Of course such rains occur, China’s Yangtze River, the river of tears, regularly killed 15,000 per year until China built the Three Gorges Dam. Germany did no water infrastructure for decades, and look what happened. The world leader in water infrastructure is Holland with its storm surge barriers.
If the silly authors are trying to scare China, they are barking up the wrong tree!

MarkW
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 8:42 am

Rivers of rain have been around forever. Just like every other weather phenomena that you whine about.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 8:53 am

The Yangtze River has naturally flooded for thousands of years and, yes, humans have played a part in making the flooding worse. They did this by cutting off, over centuries, many of the lakes and marshes that once provided flood control by building levees and converting areas to cropland.

One of the worst recent floods was in 1931 which covered some 30,000 sq miles (77,700 sqkms), killed over 300,000 people and left 40m homeless.

Gives you some context for judging last years rain.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 9:54 am

They are called severe thunderstroms, Griff. It’s just weather.

Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 10:00 am

Griff

How many 1 in 1000 year events are there?
if you break the world up into 400 sq mile parcels you know how many 1 in 1000 year events you could expect?

Roughly 1.3 per day.

john harmsworth
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 10:12 am

See below, Griff. God, you’re tedious.

Lrp
Reply to  griff
January 27, 2022 12:17 pm

Man, you’re not just an idiot, you’re a boring idiot.

Ed Zuiderwijk
January 27, 2022 1:54 am

But, but, but. Weren’t those countries going to run out of water because of melting glaciers? Or does the rain only fall on the plain and not as snow in the mountains?

Increased water vapour content? By how much? Have they figured out what determines the water vapour content?

Tom Abbott
January 27, 2022 4:23 am

From the article: “We know that the climate crisis is already having a profound effect on global weather systems, altering temperatures, rainfall, wind patterns, and more”

“We” don’t know any of that. It’s all untrue. There is no evidence CO2 is having a profound effect on Earth’s weather. This author demonstrates his lack of knowledge by claiming there is evidence.

bluecat57
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 27, 2022 5:07 am

We do know that. The premise is false. Remove the word “crisis” and read it.

bluecat57
January 27, 2022 5:06 am

Where’s my light switch?
And for the sarcastically challenged, I’m asking so I can turn them all ON.
https://hackaday.com/2022/01/26/turn-on-sarcasm-with-the-flip-of-a-switch/

bluecat57
Reply to  bluecat57
January 27, 2022 5:09 am

I’m looking for the car keys too. And firing up the gas generator. Don’t need it, my power is on.

bonbon
Reply to  bluecat57
January 27, 2022 5:52 am

Without hardware,

https://www.browserling.com/tools/text-randomcase

I got this :

wHeRe’s mY lIGHt SwItcH?
AnD For the SARCasTIcallY ChALleNgeD, I’m AskINg so I cAN tuRN theM aLl oN.

There is a FF add-on, rAndoM capitAliSAtiOn , not tested…

Last edited 3 months ago by bonbon
Bruce Cobb
January 27, 2022 5:43 am

Just imagine rivers of space aliens and flying pigs. Ok, maybe not at the same time. But still.
Hey, it could happen.

Shoki Kaneda
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 27, 2022 5:29 pm

What if the space aliens were flying pigs?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  Shoki Kaneda
January 28, 2022 2:34 pm

I have the monopoly on flying pigs with Cpt Hogthrob, Miss P, Dr. Julius Strangepork aboard the Swinetrek.

john harmsworth
January 27, 2022 8:40 am

China has scientists. They are probably subject to less political pressure than those in the West. China has about 300 million people living on the coasts, not to mention industry and infrastructure.
Yet China is building coal fired power plants as fast as possible. What is it that China understands differently from the West about “climate change”? Why?
The questions that never get asked.

Teewee
January 27, 2022 9:17 am

Rivers of rain could wreck China? Good news is always welcome in the morning.

Bruce Cobb
January 27, 2022 9:30 am

The Climate Caterwaulers “know” all sorts of things.
None of which are remotely true.

Last edited 3 months ago by Bruce Cobb
Trying to Play Nice
January 27, 2022 9:54 am

Why would we want to save the Chicomms? What have they done for anybody else?

Art
January 27, 2022 9:56 am

Considering how China is ramping up coal use and CO2 emissions, they don’t seem worried about it, so why should I?

Joel O'Bryan(@joelobryan)
January 27, 2022 12:03 pm

As soon as someone invokes the term “climate crisis” as a justification for some policy action, you can be assured they have no idea what they are talking about, and are just regurgitating propaganda talking points.

Joel O'Bryan(@joelobryan)
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
January 27, 2022 12:09 pm

About David Neld (from his online bio) as supporting proof to my above assertion:

“Dave currently lives in Manchester in the northwest of England, having previously got a 2:1 English Literature degree from the University of Durham in the UK – though sadly he doesn’t have as much opportunity to read Shakespeare and Dickens as he used to. Outside of work, he spends most of his time watching either movies or football.”

Neo
January 27, 2022 1:50 pm

See, reducing CO2 causes less rain .. take note Caifornia

Shoki Kaneda
January 27, 2022 5:27 pm

I’ve seen a lot of outgassing coming from climate alarmists in the form of superheated CO2.

Michael Carter
January 27, 2022 7:46 pm

Help me here. I am trying to figure out why it is that everything will get worse because of climate change.

jChaney
January 29, 2022 3:04 pm

Honestly, who cares what happens to China?

H B
February 6, 2022 10:35 am

The “Mandate of Heaven” will wreck china

%d bloggers like this: