Scientists predict Southwest mega-drought – Environment – MSNBC.com — FYI.
Changing climate will mean increasing drought in the American Southwest — a region where water already is in tight supply — according to a new study.
“The bottom line message for the average person and also for the states and federal government is that they’d better start planning for a Southwest region in which the water resources are increasingly stretched,” said Richard Seager of Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory.
found by Mad Dog Mike
I hope it is not as severe as the catastrophic hurricane season that they had us all prepared for last year.
Arizona routinely goes through 30 year droughts every century or so, based on tree ring data going back over 1000 years. I’ve been saying we are in just such a 30 year period now.
This is for John Dvorak: [edit: pls use tinyurl – even when you’re on topic]
I found this comment earlier and wanted to send it to you, I know it doesn’t have anything to do with the current topic but….. didn’t see an email directly for your email.
#2, I agree with you & the data.
The problem, is that the human & bovine population is not the same numbers as the last drought, meaning the effects will be more severe.
If they could only hurry up with inventing anti-gravity, then icebergs can be airlifted out of shipping lanes and ferried to Arizona. What a sight that would be.
Of course, famous SF authors Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven have a more practical method. Simply place iceberg in a huge Zip Lock bag, tow the iceberg to LA or SD, insert giant straw.
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1139
Question: Would an iceberg melting in LA or SD harbor, have a positive or negative effect on wildlife? Even if in a huge plastic bag, the heat/cold transfer will have an effect. Good or bad?
Does no one know how to use the anchor tag on this blog? Cripes!
#3
As usual… Microsoft is yelling: ME TOO! ME TOO! ME TOO!
ArianeB, haven’t you learned yet that everything in the climate that we’re not used to is cause by global warming?
*nan nan nan, nan nan nan* This just in, breaking news!
Do not live in the dessert if you need large amounts of water. Congregating in large groups is not adviced.
End report.
For all who like to point to failed predictions of the past, and even if this also turns out to be a failed prediction, I would say very strongly that LOCAL PREDICTIONS ARE VERY DIFFICULT. This is why Katrina cannot be definitively blamed on global climate disruption (a more accurate term than global warming, as it will not be even around the globe).
The facts are that globally, our fresh water supply is shrinking. Some places may get more rain. But aquifers are being depleted overall world wide. Lakes are drying up, as in Darfur. Mountain glaciers are shrinking.
Fresh water is a precious resource. It is also a renewable one if used properly. But instead of sustainably harvesting it, we are mining it.
As for towing an ice-berg, think of the fuel spent to haul a Rhode Island sized hunk of ice around. How long would that help anyone? Perhaps we could just air condition the great outdoors, as many retail stores in New York City try to do.
Oh, and let’s try to live stacked on top of each other to reduce our impact on the land. Suburbia is not the answer to anything. Nor is having lawns in the desert, as some people actually do.
People, we do not need to make changes that will make our day to day lives worse. In fact, we need to make changes that will actually improve our live styles. Bicycle riding or walking is more enjoyable than being stuck in traffic. So is public transportation. Smaller cars will still get us where we want to go. Few of us ever drive our enormous gas guzzlers off road. Fewer ever encounter 50 yard long tracts of knee deep mud.
We need to make adjustments that will make our lifestyles more enjoyable. But, we need to make them fast.
Our lives depend on it.
The drought is actually closer to 9 years. We happen to be lucky enough to have our ranch and farms sitting on one of the largest aquifers in North America. But most farmers(not all unfortunatly) understand that water conservation in the Southwest is the difference between life or death. It’s the state and local goverments that don’t get the connection. All our state and local gov’s can see are dollar signs from tax revenue and all the other sources of growth(uncontrolled growth). Phoenix has a baseball team, they play in an Air conditioned ballfield. If the outside temp is in the 70’s or low to mid 80’s they will open the roof and forego AC….other wise they crank it up and the guys at AEP power company say you can actually see the power being sucked out of the lines. Once, AEP wasn’t ware there was going to be a day game, it was August, the temp was 109…..when BOB(the nick name of the field) turned on the AC…..it caused blackouts in 4 other parts of the city.
We have 3 million people now living in the greater Phoenix area….most of them have green lawns and water hungry shrubs and trees…..but all efforts to stop this charade are voluntary only….the goverment is afraid to force the developers and the ordinary citizens to go native and return to desert landscaping.
If you came to our ranch, you will see the same landscaping that has been there since my Great-grandfather bought the original homestead in 1888. There is not a blade of grass, not one water dependent tree or bush….everything is natural desert.
But, we farmers have become the minority in Arizona and can no longer force the issue……..we have been taken over by Californians and Kansians.
This land(Arizona) is already a desert…..for those of us who know how to live in a desert the coming changes won’t be a problem……but it should be fun watching all the *ferigners* panic and and stomp on eachother in their rush to clear out. 🙂
Drought, yeah that’s a problem I suppose. But if I lived there what I’d be concerned about is whatever carved out the Grand Canyon, and will it return.
Easy to say when I live a couple miles from Lake Michigan.
#9, There you have it, to fight global warming, you don’t have to make your lives worse. You just have to undergo substantial restrictions that actually make your life better. No matter how much you think otherwise, these guys just know what’s best. To do otherwise would be to invite catastrophe on the planet, but don’t you dare suggest nuclear power as a solution.
#11 – Olo Baggins of Bywater,
Do they have hobbit holes by Lake Michigan?
As for what carved the Grand Canyon, my understanding is that in the distant past, the Colorado River was much larger than in the not too distant past. Even in the not to distant past, the river was so powerful that it churned up the red clay and was therefore red, thus earning the name Colorado.
Since then, we have built so many damn dams that the river barely makes it to the ocean. Mexico has attempted to get the U.S. to allow more water to flow. Environmentalists have also attempted to get the U.S. to allow more water through, due to the destruction of the wetland of the delta that does not get enough fresh water.
So, if you’re worried about the flow of water, unfortunately, the correct fear is that it will be stopped completely to provide more water upstream. It’s a constant dispute in much of the world about whether the people upstream have any obligation to the people downstream to allow the water to flow freely.
A few clarifications:
a) Global warming is a measure of the average temperature throughout the globe, and has nothing to do with local areas. Historically the global temperature has been climbing steadily for decades, this is a measurement, not speculation.
b) The effect of global warming will be an almost complete lack of rain in areas that are currently driest (current deserts) causing those areas to expand, sometimes severely, also a decrease in rain in equatorial latitudes, and a large increase in rain in moderate areas. That is a fact… every computer model shows this effect.
c) Global warming will shift the agricultural areas northward, following the rain and the warmer climate.
d) The intensity of storms in moderate climate areas will be severe… Mediterranean Europe can expect some really wild weather, and so can the Gulf of Mexico and the Indian Ocean.
This is just plain science. A few cold days (like right now) has no pertinence to the longer term measurements.
Learn some more science Awake. The effects are not that simple.
Here’s a scientist with a comment on the current Arizona ‘threat’
http://tinyurl.com/2pty5m
#9
The facts are that globally, our fresh water supply is shrinking
Living next to the Great Lakes I figure in a few years we can sell our water for $80 a barrel to some of these bandits that are holding us up for their oil. Maybe even fake a shortage once in a while by cutting production.
#15 – MikeN,
Things are not quite as simple as Awake has stated them. But, this is a blog. It’s tough to do justice to 300 page IPCC reports in a blog. Awake has it mostly correct. Local effects may be a bit less certain than that.
However, your response, posting a link to another blog, is not really going to increase the scientific content of this blog. Stick to peer reviewed articles for reliable information. Anyone can say anything they want on a blog. As is usual with such blogs, the credentials of the author are placed prominently while the fact that none of the comments made it through the peer review process is downplayed.
This blog is a bit more honest than most though. For example, note the scientists own words, “I am, myself, not a climate expert”. OK, but the hundreds of scientists on the IPCC from over 100 nations are. And, every word that comes out of the IPCC has been agreed to by consensus, 100% agreement. This means that when the IPCC says something, it has been agreed to by, at least, China, Saudi Arabia, and the United States, the largest coal burner, oil exporter, and oil importer, respectively.
So, when IPCC says something, the likelihood is that things are at least as bad and possibly quite a bit worse than they say.
I see. Another reason not to move to Arizona. Riiiight.
As if the first couple thousand might not be sufficiently persuasive.
#15 – MikeN –
I can also provide links to professors that claim that the earth is 6000 years old, that the Holocaust never happened, that Dinosaurs lived side-by-side with humans, that there us proof of extraterrestrials living amongst us.
It is OK to be an eccentric in science (Galileo is a good example), but in this case it is difficult to take that path. Given the amount of data that points to a cause, those that want to differ from the majority need to show why the majority is wrong. Scientific evidence.
The majority of reputable scientists believe that ‘man generated climate change’ is a fact.
Your reference does nothing to disprove it… it basically says “maybe, but maybe not… I personally am not convinced.”
Show me some proof as to why the majority of the scientists that believe in climate change are wrong in their conclusions.
It’s easy to be a dissenter, but you better have something to back it up.
Why is it so hard for people to grasp that all of these models are flawed. They are based on hypotheticels and a lot of guess work…also temp records going back only 100 years.
Global warming is a fact…..whats NOT a proven fact is what is causing it. You can jump up and down and hold your breath until you pass out….but thats a fact. Too many people who may not be climatologists, but work in related fields and understand models and facts have been coming foreward and saying ***hold on….not so fast***……..and they are instantly attacked and villified. It’s no wonder that more honest, reputable scientists aren’t coming foreward with their views.
Global Warming caused by humans is the new orthodoxy, and anyone foolish enough to cast doubt will be literally slilenced for trying to kill the golden goose.
When I was in high school…..most scientists would gladly tell you that weather and climate models were and are notoriously inaccurate…..but then suddenly, with in 1 year….they are the new tablests from God on the mount…..I call BS.
#20 – joshua,
Global warming is real. What’s causing it is CO2 and methane. The uncertainties in the models are all about making local predictions of what will happen in specific geographic regions. The models are getting better, but are still imperfect.
But, there is no significant reason for doubt that global warming is human caused. The only factor I’ve read about in real science publications that may be adding to it is cosmic rays. They may account for around 5-15% of the warming we see. We are responsible for the other 85-95%.
Science continues to advance. We know more than we did when you were in High School, even if that was fairly recently.
As for your golden goose remark, that’s just plain ridiculous. Exxon has been funding deliberate studies with the stated goal of disproving global warming for many years. Just this year they offered $10,000 to anyone that could cast doubt on the IPCC report. Most of their funding is far larger. If you want the gold, you can get it from Exxon. They’re wealthier than any university and will fund this more gladly than the federal government. In fact, with oil executives at the top of the nation, you can probably get funding from both.
http://tinyurl.com/2rmy2u
The sun is a much bigger factor than greenhouse gases, but keep on telling people to change their lifestyle, since that’s your real goal, and everything else is secondary.
#14
Unfortunately, there’s way too many “my lawn must be green at all costs so I pour water non stop into it!” people…
Computer models are proof??? The only “proof” that links CO2 to global warming are COMPUTER MODELS. You can scream “consensus” and “peer review” all you want, REAL scientists who do not have an eco-axe to grind are not buying it.
#21….Misanthropic…..sorry man…but I’m calling a very big BS…on your figures for human causation…..there is no such proof…anywhere, by anyone……not even the most biased enviro-nut dosen’t claim it’s 80 to 85% human causation.
But you did mention the one thing that a lot of so-called **repbutable** climatologists don’t like having brought up….and that is the Sun. There is still a very large debate that needs to take place as more and more honest evidence is uncovered…..and the far left enviro groups are doing their best to keep that debate from happening. The far left enviro’s have another totally different agenda than the vast majority of enviromentalists, and they know if they can keep the pressure up and keep doing whatever is nessecary to discredit those who disagree with them, they will win.
Don’t get me wrong….I believe that we do need to find alternative sources of power and clean up our act. But knowing and believeing that is far from believeing that man is the cause of Global Warming.
joshua & smith,
Computer models are used to predict local conditions. They are not yet perfect. It’s hard to predict the weather next week, let alone in 50 years.
But, there is abundant proof in the form of ice cores and lake cores that links CO2 to global average temperature. Computer models are NOT where the information comes from that links CO2 to anthropogenic global climate disruption.
I’m not sure where you are getting your information, but I suspect it’s Exxon. I have had a number of skeptics send me information from such “real scientists”. It’s almost amusing how consistently they fail to get their papers published and just put up a web site from which to spew their crap. It’s even more amusing how consistently I have been able to tie their funding, directly or indirectly to Exxon.
Before you quote any of these so called scientists, follow the money.
Nice switch there. You state a link between CO2 and temperature, then you say it’s a link to anthropogenic climate disruption. I guess you’re saying man-made greenhouse gases are the cause of the warming detected in those ice cores. I think the dark ages were a little cool.
You’re right that there is a correlation between temperature and higher CO2, it’s just that the increase in CO2 happens AFTER the temperature increase with a gap of hundreds of years. The higher CO2 is being caused by the planet’s warming, not the other way around. The only question is what the human added CO2 is doing, and here those with an agenda of controlling people’s lives have decided that it is the primary causer of warming.
MikeN,
How does it feel to be so much smarter than all of the Chinese, Australian, Saudi, and U.S. climate scientists on the IPCC?
Can you explain to me why they know so much less than you? Clearly, the largest coal burner, coal exporter, oil exporter, and oil importers in the world have an interest in denying that climate change is human caused. Why is it that none of these countries have highered someone as smart as you to stand up for their interests?
Remember, it only takes one of the many scientists of the IPCC to reject the wording of any part of the report. And they do pore over every single word.
How about THIS…
I love you guys that derail a conversation by ADDING the CO2 thoery…
How about this one…
WE, humans, have put enough CRAP in the air to kill every animal on the planet… AND we are breathing MOST of the oxygen, compared to Every OTHER animal on the planet.
You name it and WE, have spew’d it into the air…
From LEAD to Radioactive materials. From Arsenic to Zinc…
man, you guys are dumber than dirt if you believe in globle warming. Globle warming is just another scam to take more tax payers money. And to all you stupided people that think you are saving the world and money by using solar panels for your home, how much has your electric bill gone down? Nine times out of ten, it goes up because that is how it is desigined to work and thats a fact. Man you dumb fucks need to get a life!!! Peace my brother!!!