Extreme rains will breach to unseen levels, says new science led by Dr. David Neelin from University of California. Our cities and farms are not ready. Arnie Gundersen on his trip to Fukushima Japan, and the risks of Trump with the nuclear codes.
Download or listen to this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality (56 MB) or Lo-Fi (14 MB)
MORE EXTREME RAINS – DR. DAVID NEELIN
It’s hardly a newscast these days without weather porn. In January 2017 it was Houston flooding, mudslides in California, and an Oregon town or two with canoes in the streets. Over 230 Americans have died in flooding since 2015. Many more perished around the world, as extreme precipitation events pop up on every continent.
But what if extreme precipitation gets even worse as the world warms? What if rains beyond our experience swamp the infrastructure of cities, or wipe out crops? A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences predicts that is exactly what will happen.
Our guest is the lead author, Dr. J. David Neelin. He’s a Professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, at the University of California in Los Angeles. Neelin has published over 150 papers during the past few decades. David Neelin is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Geophysical Union. He leads UCLA’s Climate Systems Interaction Group.
We’ll be talking about the paper “Global warming precipitation accumulation increases above the current-climate cutoff scale” at published by PNAS January 17, 2017.
Reading this work, I had to work through two stages. The first is the principle that there has been a limit to the amount of rain that can fall from the sky in a certain period. You call that a “cutoff” point. That sounds like a good thing, – maybe Nature’s way of keeping us from drowning. David explains what those limits are. The second stage, and this is the really worrying part, is that this cutoff limit will change as the world warms, allowing even more extreme rainfall events. Our city drainage systems are not ready, and crops will be damaged.
I remember just a couple of years ago Great Britain was hit with a string of super-storms. Drainage systems that worked since Victorian times completely failed. In fact, some villages that had not flooded since the Middle Ages went under. Don’t forget the massive rains that flooded Pakistan in 2010, and again in 2011. Huge parts of country went under and many people died.
Here is the significance of this paper, as written by PNAS:
“Large accumulations of rainfall over a precipitation event can impact human infrastructure. Unlike precipitation intensity distributions, probability distributions for accumulations at first drop slowly with increasing size. At a certain size—the cutoff scale—the behavior regime changes, and the probabilities drop rapidly. In current climate, every region is protected from excessively large accumulations by this cutoff scale, and human activities are adapted to this. An analysis of how accumulations will change under global warming gives a natural physical interpretation for the atmospheric processes producing this cutoff, but, more importantly, yields a prediction that this cutoff scale will extend in a warmer climate, leading to vastly disproportionate increases in the probabilities of the very largest events.”
David Neelin has done tremendous work on the relationships between ocean and atmosphere. He’s deeply into things like planetary waves and other forces that shape storms and weather. Frankly, his understanding of the workings of our climate are well beyond the comprehension of most people. He’s gone places you and I will never go. Neelin studies the workings of systems that are unpredictable at specific times and places, but understandable at larger views and longer times (the science of the stochastic).
I end by asking David Neelin this question: “Do you think the new Trump Administration will succeed in dampening American climate research?” He says his graduate students are asking that as well. But Neelin remains optimistic that science will proceed.
Download or listen to this 25 minute Radio Ecoshock interview with Dr. David Neelin in CD Quality or Lo-Fi
RELATED PREDICTIONS OF EXTREME RAINS
Other scientists have published predicting more extreme rains as global warming goes forward. For example, there is this study by the Potsdam Institute, among many: Record-breaking heavy rainfall events increased under global warming
EXTREME RAINS FALL UNEVENLY AS THE CLIMATE WARMS: HITTING SOME REGIONS HARDEST
The Potsdam Institute writes:
“The average increase is 12 percent globally – but 56 percent in South East Asia
An advanced statistical analysis of rainfall data from the years 1901 to 2010 derived from thousands of weather stations around the globe shows that over 1980-2010 there were 12 percent more of these events than expected in a stationary climate, a scenario without global warming. “Due to the upward trend, the worldwide increase of record-breaking daily rainfall events in the very last year of the studied period reaches even 26 percent”, Lehmann adds.
The record-breaking anomaly has distinct patterns across Earth’s continents with generally wet regions seeing an over-proportional increase and drier regions less so. In South East Asian countries the observed increase in record-breaking rainfall events is as high as 56 percent, in Europe 31 percent, in the central US 24 percent. In contrast, some regions experienced a significant decrease of record-breaking daily rainfall events. In the Mediterranean, the reduction is 27 percent, and in the Western US 21 percent. Both regions are at risk of severe droughts.”
For more, find this article: Lehmann, J., Coumou, D., Frieler, K. (2015): “Increased record-breaking precipitation events under global warming”. Published in the journal Climatic Change [DOI: 10.1007/s10584-015-1434-y]
You can see the rainfall is already very uneven, and will continue to be more uneven as climate change progresses. Just for fun, I looked up the heaviest recorded rainfall in the United States. That was 42 inches in 24 hours near Alvin, Texas, on July 26, 1979.
EXTREME RAINS ARE DEADLY, BEING THE SECOND BIGGEST WEATHER KILLER IN THE U.S., AFTER HEAT
Weather.com also says:
“Heavy rainfall and flooding should be taken seriously. Flooding has killed an average of 82 people per year, according to NOAA, making it the second most deadly weather-related hazard over the last 30 years, just behind heat.”
AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT SAYS EXTREME RAINFALL EVENTS HAVE INCREASED OVER AUSTRALIA
The technical report for that study is here.
EXTREME NUCLEAR DANGERS – ARNIE GUNDERSEN
Several Radio Ecoshock supporters suggest I go easy on the nuclear power industry. Maybe we should keep the existing old reactors going as long as we can to avoid burning more fossil fuels. Even if one reactor blows in America or Europe, says one of my correspondents, the impact and the number of dead will be far less than the millions of all species who will die in a rapid climate shift. So there’s the question. Should we keep old reactors going to reduce our damage to the atmosphere?
All through the Fukushima nuclear tragedy and some close calls in America, Arnie has been our repeat guest on Radio Ecoshock. He’s an expert who testifies in court cases connected to nuclear power. He’s been in the nuclear industry. He knows how it operates Arnie is the chief engineer and scientist for the nuclear education agency, Fairewinds.org, founded by his wife, Maggie Gundersen.
TOPICS YOU CAN FIND IN THIS INTERVIEW! (and a full transcript offered below)
We cover a wide range of topics, including:
- nuclear power as a solution for climate change
- the risks of keeping old reactors operating
- the high risks of keeping the Indian Point reactor going near New York City, and the deal Governor Cuomo made to shut them down
- news from Arnie’s trip to Fukushima in 2016 and the government cover-up there
- the work of Dr. Marco Kaltofen and his results at Boston Chemical Data to show radioactivity in worker’s clothes at Fukushima.
- Kaltofen offers open source results (anyone can use them) found here.
- the new 2 minute animation “Smokescreen” provided by Fairewinds (here on Vimeo) or here at the Fairewinds site.
- Donald Trump’s claims to develop new nuclear weapons
- the relationships between the nuclear power industry and nuclear weapons development
- harassment of nuclear whistle blowers by the nuclear industry and the government (outrageous!)
- THE DIABLO CANYON BRIEF
We didn’t cover the project Arnie was working on last week. He was preparing a brief for the group “Mothers for Peace“. They want the Diablo Canyon reactor in California shut down by 2019. Arnie used his extensive knowledge of the nuclear industry to list out the outmoded and outworn parts in that reactor. Operators who know a shutdown is coming eventually, tend to skimp on maintenance and replacements, hoping to keep going until the shutdown without a major failure. The public cannot bear the cost of that risk, because a major melt-down could affect a large area of California, and beyond, not to mention the food supply for the western United States (and Canada in the winter).
Listen to or download this 35 minute Radio Ecoshock interview with Arnie Gundersen in CD Quality or Lo-Fi
Or read the whole transcript of the interview, as prepared by Fairewinds Energy Education.
That’s it for this week. More science and activism to come. Thank you for listening!
GOD VERSUS CO2 BY STEVE FINNELL
Can God’s control over climate and weather be modified, or amended by made-made CO2 emissions? Is it possible to void the miracles of God by the actions of man-made CO2 emissions?
Genesis 7:12 The rain fell on the earth for forty days and forty nights. (NASB)
Could controlling man-made CO2 emissions have prevented forty days of rain and the great flood? Of course not.
Jonah 4:8 When the sun came up God appointed a scorching east wind, and the sun beat down on Jonah’s head so that he became faint and begged with all his soul to die, saying, “Death is better to me than life.” (NASB)
Would it have been possible for Jonah to be spared the scorching wind if men had controlled their man-made CO2 emissions? Certainly not.
Genesis 8:22 “While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease.”(NASB)
Can restricting man-made CO2 emissions determine cold, heat, the temperature in summer and winter. Can man-made CO2 emissions control the seasons. No it cannot.
If men who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ believe that man-made CO2 emissions can control weather, climate, and seasons, then, why would anyone look to them for spiritual guidance concerning salvation?
Psalms 148:8 Fire and hail, snow and clouds; Stormy wind, fulfilling His word; (NASB)
This fulfills God’s word, what does man-made CO2 fulfill?
Job 1:16 While he was still speaking, another also came and said, “The fire of God fell from heaven and burned up the sheep and the servants and consumed them , and I alone have escaped to tell you.” (NASB)
If men would have restricted their CO2 emission, could they have prevented God from destroying Job’s sheep, and servants? No, of course not.
2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up. (NASB)
No amount of man-made CO2 modifications, can cause or prevent the earth from be burned up.
Revelations 20:14-15 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Men need to stop worrying about the false doctrine of man-made global warming and start being concerned about the warming in the lake of fire.
How to get your name written in the book of life.
1. Faith: John 3:16
2. Confession: Romans 10:9
3. Repentance: Acts 3:19
4. Immersion in Water: Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38
YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG>> steve-finnell.blogspot.com
Perhaps you should take some time and read Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment and human ecology… Below is a link
Pingback: Ecoshock Interview: Extreme Nuclear Dangers – Coalition Against Nukes
I don’t get it… the first guest… states something about …. “so if we put off working on reductions of greenhouse gases …………………….It is something we could do… because we live in a democracy….” …. oh hum….. he’s acting like we have time…… BUT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY DYING FROM CLIMATE CHANGE…. but, you know, HE is probably and upper middle class white guy…. so, he can manage to escape if he needs to …. no biggy…
However, loved the next guest… Gundersen… great stuff…. Thanks for you work… I was a bit hot on the first part of the show… that guy bugged me….
Seriously, you’re going to blame Trump for increased tensions with Russia?! But that’s the one silver lining of his election: The fact that Trump, unlike the Democrats and their propaganda apparatus (Washington Post, New York Times, Rachel Maddow, ect.), is not actively trying to restart the Cold War and/or provoke Russia into World War 3. What do you think the current liberal demonization campaign against Putin (all Russians, really) and the whole, evidence-free “Russia hacking the election” nonsense is about, if not building support for such a war among the US population? (Just like with the WMD lies before the invasion of Iraq – it’s even the same ‘intelligence’ agencies involved in fabricating evidence-free reports to support the political goal, somehow expecting to be taken at their word despite the fact that everyone knows they’ve been lying several times in the recent past.) And who was it that’s been using last year to put as many US/NATO troops directly on Russia’s border as Eastern Europe hasn’t seen since World War 2? (And they have the gall to call Russia’s defensive reaction to this – that is, readying troops WITHIN its own borders in case of yet another Western invasion attempt, since, after all, Hitler also pretended that his troop gathering for invasion was just ‘practice maneuvers’ – “dangerous Russian aggression”.) And who pushed hard for a “no-fly zone” over Syria during the election season, knowing that the only planes in that area that could be shot down would be Russian, thus making a war-starting incident inevitable?
(To say nothing about the Democrat / Pentagon project of luring China into a war before they manage to update their military to US standards of technology, at which point such a war can’t be won by the US anymore, since China has a higher, and still rising, GDP and the higher GDP always wins unless there is a significant technology breakthrough that only one side has access to. Hence the various US Navy provocations that have been executed in the sea off China for at least the last 8 years. Unfortunately, Trump doesn’t seem interested in preventing a war with China the way he is with Russia. Thus proving that it’s just business interests that motivate him (in China, he mainly just has creditors), not actual prudence and sanity regarding wars with other nuclear powers.)
And Trump may have said that he’s going to continue with the plan to upgrade/expand the US nuclear bomb arsenal – but that trillion-dollar-plan was put into place by the Obama administration! Which was what started this renewed round of nuclear arms race that produced things like the Russian mega bomb you mentioned. And as for the “small players” that your interviewee is worried about: At least Iran and North Korea voted in favor of the UN negotiations to try and create a world-wide ban of nuclear weapons that are scheduled to start in March. (China, India and Pakistan abstained, but didn’t vote to block the resolution.) It’s only the Western powers and Russia who refuse to even consider giving up their nuclear blackmail over the rest of the world – and the US actively tried to sabotage the negotiations by refusing to help fund the event. This proves that countries like Iran and North Korea really only want/have their few bombs to avoid the fate of so many other militarily weak nations who dare to resist the US capitalist hegemony. (That’s what Democratic “humanitarian interventionism” is really about. Libya was bombed because its government dared to try and keep its oil resources from being exploited by US-based multinational corporations, and to stockpile gold in order to create the first ‘hard’ currency in Africa, which pissed off their old colonial overlords, the French, whose currency is still the basis of economic exchange and control in the area. The US support for supposedly ‘moderate’ Islamist extremist rebels in Syria has similar reasons – the hope is that when the dust settles, the new government will be far more religious than Assad’s relatively secular rule, but they’ll also be more willing to play ball regarding pipelines and such. Human rights violations really have nothing to do with it. You can be as brutal a dictator as you want, and the US establishment will be fine with it as long as you do what they want in economic matters. On the contrary, the dictatorships of countries like Uzbekistan and Saudi Arabia even get US weapons and tanks to control their oppressed population or invade their neighbors. US-support for Uzbekistan’s dictatorship is a bit difficult to google, so here’s a link-filled article on the matter: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/07/what-obama-doesnt-want-you-to-know-about-uzbekistan/ ) Besides, as far as I know, the US is the only country that still refuses to assure the rest of the world that it won’t make First Use of its nuclear bombs. (Well, Trump at one point during the election said he wouldn’t make First Use – in contrast to Clinton – but that probably was just a spur of the moment comment, and not something he will stick to under the influence of his many ex-military security advisory appointees.) And yet, the “small players” are always presented as the scary bad guys in conversations such as the one you were having. (Except Israel, of course – can’t ever say anything bad about Israel…) Talk about “overlooking the plank in your own eye for the splinter in the eye of your neighbour”.
Your interviewee may have a lot of important things to say about Fukushima and the nuclear plant industry in general, but on the topic of nuclear bombs and war with Russia, he sounds like he’s intentionally misrepresenting the truth in order to score partisan points for the Democratic Party. Or he’s been living under a rock these last few years – but nobody could be THAT uninformed about the political situation. I’m not, and I don’t even live on the same continent as this whole Republican / Democrat election theatre.
I’ve been an advocate for protecting the environment most of my life. A cause I’ve supported more than any other for the past several decades. And still do.
But something bothers me a whole lot. Those who lie in order to’ fear’ people into following their particular leanings. As both the Democrats and the Republicans did ad nauseam during the elections in the US.
The first line of the above post states: “Extreme rains will breach to unseen levels, says new science led by Dr. David Neelin from University of California. Our cities and farms are not ready.”
For the last many years we’ve been hearing that drought, the obvious outcome of an ever increasing temperature due to climate change, will devastate U.S. farms, as indeed it probably will.
But EVERY single time the weather takes an unexpected turn from the one predicted by some climate scientists, the increasing rains in the U.S. for instance, in an apparent attempt to keep people from losing faith in their disaster scenarios rather than own up to the fact that they might have gotten some information wrong, certain fear mongers among the climate scientists claim that these deviations were expected and should also be accepted as further proof of their claims. For the last 3 years, for example, we’ve been hearing that California is on the precipice of a 500 year drought. Now that the rains have come in force, that prediction has been quietly shelved. Now we’re hearing that rain in the winter is more proof of climate change.
Even when those who are familiar with the farming industry and understand the devastating effects of drought best, the farmers themselves, gladly welcome the rain.
Lying in order to instill an opinion has been used by folks in power for thousands of years and increasingly so these days.
It’s time to stop.