Global Warming Could Worsen U.S. Pollution: Report

Yahoo News ^ | 2/19/05

[Libloather]

Global Warming Could Worsen U.S. Pollution: Report
Sat Feb 19, 3:57 PM ET Science - Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Global warming could stifle cleansing summer winds across parts of the northern United States over the next 50 years and worsen air pollution, U.S. researchers said on Saturday.

Further warming of the atmosphere, as is happening now, would block cold fronts bringing cooler, cleaner air from Canada and allow stagnant air and ozone pollution to build up over cities in the Northeast and Midwest, they predicted.

"The air just cooks," said Loretta Mickley of Harvard University's Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences. "The pollution accumulates, accumulates, accumulates, until a cold front comes in and the winds sweep it away."

Mickley and colleagues used a computer model, an approach commonly used by climate scientists to predict weather and climate changes.

She told a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that the model predicted a 20-percent decline in summer cold fronts out of Canada.

"If this model is correct, global warming would cause an increase in difficult days for those affected by ozone pollution, such as people suffering with respiratory illnesses like asthma and those doing physical labor or exercising outdoors," she said.

World temperatures have risen by an average of 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degree Celsius) over the past century.

Earlier this week 141 nations signed the U.N. Kyoto Protocol aimed at cutting the so-called greenhouse gas emissions that fuel global warming.

It imposes caps on carbon dioxide emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and cars, in 35 developed nations.

The United States, which produces the most pollution of any country, has refused to sign it.

The model used by Mickley and her colleagues incorporates things such as the sun's luminosity, topography of the planet, the distribution of the oceans, the pull of gravity and the tilt of the Earth's axis, as well as predicted warming.

They fed in gradually increased levels of greenhouse gases at rates projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. What they found surprised them.

"The answer lies in one of the basic forces that drive the Earth's weather -- the temperature difference between the hot equator and the cold poles," Mickley said.

In the middle latitudes, low-pressure systems and accompanying cold fronts help redistribute heat by carrying warm air to the poles and replacing it with cool air. Warming slows that process down, Mickley's team found.

[ex-Texan]

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

--From Hamlet (I, v, 166-167)

As I said before, I am just an observer. Oh, Whatever . . .

[Malesherbes]

I thought it was supposed to be the other way around. It seems that per the Enviros we are doomed whatever we do.

[thisiskubrick]

I realize the threat with greater regulation, but global warming is here. This isn't just a matter of computer models. Check out the story in the Financial Times (hardly a liberal toadie): http://news.ft.com/cms/s/8c151acc-81e8-11d9-9e19-00000e2511c8.html

"...a four-year examination of the Arctic by more than 250 scientists that found the ice cap was only half the thickness of 30 years ago."

That concerns me. I know proof of global warming will be an excuse for regulators to increase their grip internationally, but on the other hand.. I think denial and putting our collective heads in the sand isn't the solution either.

[BIGLOOK]

Since Chihuahua and Oaxaca and Sonora do not receive the Washington Post or NY Times, Mexico is unaffected by global warming at this time.

[thisiskubrick]

This isn't just a matter of computer models. Check out the story in the Financial Times (hardly a liberal toadie): http://news.ft.com/cms/s/8c151acc-81e8-11d9-9e19-00000e2511c8.html

"...a four-year examination of the Arctic by more than 250 scientists that found the ice cap was only half the thickness of 30 years ago."

[LRS]

Warms my globe!!!!

[ChildOfThe60s]

I'm sorry, that article is poorly written, expects the reader to take awful lot on faith, and basically backs up zilch. Do they happen to provide the credentials of these 250 "scientists"? If you seriously delve into the attendees of the various pro-global warming events you will see that a large percentage have poor or nonexistant qualifying background on the subject.

You want to see some real data for scientific sources?

http://www.globalwarming.org/index.php

And not mentioned in FT story is the fact that the cap is receding in some places and *growing* in others-and that the cap has waxed and waned throughout time. The article also fails to show the methodology used to determine that the cap is in fact shrinking. Further in depth study will show that most of the indicators cited by the global warming crowd, such as temperature, can be arrived at in multiple ways that vary a lot. They cherry pick from the end of the spectrum that advances their beliefs.

AND, as I said, their *predictions* are based on heavily biased models. In reality, one cannot make a model that will predict climate in the future. The variables are nearly infinite. And a minute movement in any of the *known* variables will make a huge swing the in the direction of a prediction 50 years hence.

Micro to the macro. Favorite "scientific" tool of the left to "prove" anything they want to prove.

Always look harder at the methodology than the so called results. There are usually lots of issues with the methodology of most studies, including ones where the people doing the study have no axe to grind. Which is certainly not the case with the studies cited by the global warming crowd.

[ex-Texan]

Solar Flairs and Geomagnetic Storms:

Monster Explosion on Sun Feb 20th

Lucky for all of us small creatures enjoying our happy lives here on our tiny planet -- this huge explosion was directed about 110 degrees away from our earth. If it had been pointed directly toward us yesterday . . . Who knows what would have happened? Perhaps all of us would still be here enjoying our lives, then again, maybe not . . .

Again, I believe the earth is heating up. But the cause is not our factory smoke stacks, or nasty chemicals, or emissions from all the SUVs. The prime cause is 'Space Weather.' In short, we are not in control of anything.

Click Here

[Always Right]

Who knows what would have happened? Perhaps all of us would still be here enjoying our lives, then again, maybe not . . .

I can't imagine being directed at us would have made much of a difference. I would imagine the force of an explosion like that spreads out more like a sound wave and is not all that directional.

[ex-Texan]

I do not know anything about the potential impacts of explosions from the sun. But I do know that last year there was another huge blast from the sun. Scientists said it would been the "Kill Shot" if it had been pointed directly at our planet. It would have ended all life on our planet as we know it. Luckily, that explosion was aimed 180 degrees away from us. Another way to consider the significance of this photo is to realize this new explosion was 70 degrees closer to us than last year's blast.

Peace be with you.

[stylin19a]

IF ? If I drank a gallon of vodka last night, I would have got drunk.

Interesting read about space weather.....
Has anyone included it in any of their models ?

Is warming occurring ? I think so.
Have we contributed to it ? Maybe... enough to make a difference ? I doubt it.

What has piqued my curiosity recently about some of these things, is the changing orbit of Pluto.

Is is possible the earth axis has tilted microscopically ?
Has the earth's orbit around the sun sun changed microscopically ?

Has our solar system's orbit changed microscopically ?

In general, has any orbit around something else changed at all ?

If so, what is the cascading affect ?

Sometimes I think we are too arrogant. we think that we alone can cause and affect things, and then fix them.