Climate Letter #1506

Expanded insights into the effects of Amazon wildfires (Phys.org).  This article is full of unusual information about the effects.  It also has a new satellite view of fire locations, the total of which has now exceeded 100,000 for the year.

–Writing for The Conversation, a professor explains why individual fires that are now of relatively small size in terms of area burned over will become considerably larger in the future as the landscape becomes more desiccated.

—–

In Queensland, Australia, rainforest acreage is being consumed by wind-driven bushfires that have gotten out of control (The Guardian).  Aggravated by dry conditions, the situation is said to be unprecedented—and it is still early in the dry season.

—–

A new marine heatwave has formed in the northeast Pacific, similar in appearance to the “hot blob” that started in 2014 (The Guardian).  Some are fearing it could persist for many more months, in which case the consequences could be devastating for many forms of marine life.

—–

There is no plan B for dealing with the climate crisis (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists).  Raymond Pierrehumbert is a veteran climate scientist with many journal articles to his credit.  Here he argues that there is no substitute for rapid decarbonization, and that we are already in deep trouble for lack of it.  “Let’s get this on the table right away, without mincing words. With regard to the climate crisis, yes, it’s time to panic.”  His explanation is thorough, including an analysis of all the weaknesses inherent in various plans for geoengineering.  “There is simply no good fix if we fail to stop pumping carbon into the atmosphere….. The only question is how much we will ratchet up the toll of human suffering, and the destruction of the ecosystems with which we share the Earth, before we finally achieve net zero carbon emissions.”

—–

The novelist Jonathan Franzen does not believe disastrous climate conditions can be avoided.  His article in the latest edition of The New Yorker has attracted considerable attention, including dissent.  For the most part he is critical of the weak human response, which is certainly his right as a novelist.  He also believes science, in the form of the IPCC and its adherents, has understated the risk.  That part is controversial.  Based on everything I have learned from doing the daily research for these letters I think he is quite accurate on both counts, which makes his advice, while not imperative, at least worth considering.

—–

How do you move a big city hundreds of miles in order to avoid flooding? (Climate News Network).  We’re about to find out by watching Jakarta, with a population over 10 million, where the decision has already been made.  In this case factors other than climate change ruled in favor of immediacy, but other city managers that are keeping a sharp eye on sea level will no doubt take an interest in the proceedings, and its cost.

Carl