Moderately Future Climate
William P. Baird
got to listen in a paleoclimate conference. These were the folks
that model the climates of different times of our deep time past.
It was fscking awesome, at least the first day, because what
knowledge of the Permian time period was immensely expanded.
Esp wrt the PT Boundary. The second day was less interesting
from the PoV of knowledge quest and more from the PoV of
my professional life. However, there was one comment about
the reason to model the Pliocene that has stuck with me since
then.
The proposer of more modeling of the Pliocene was suggesting
that the CO2 levels and temperatures from then seem to
match what is projected for the end result of global warming. It
is supposed to be warmer, and if my perusal of websites is
correct, wetter than present, even in the arid areas compared
to modern arid areas.
So I did a little searching on the Pliocene climate. Unfortunately,
Dr Scotese[1] doesn't have any climate maps of the Pliocene.
However, there was an interesting tidbit on such from our rival
lab (ORNL)[2]. THere's an interesting site at the USGS to show
the sea levels during the Quaternary[3] and one specifically for
the Pliocene[4]. The total sea level rise is supposed to be 35 m.
If this is true, and that map is accurate, the country that would
really take it in the shorts looks like the US, frankly. All that
eastern seaboard gets, well, sunk. Florida becomes a handful
of small islands. Oh, poor New Orleans! However, I would
say the majority of US cities are really in trouble...and Mother
Nature tells the US 'Sorry about The South'.
Interestingly, Brazil develops a /huge/ inland sea! *boggle*
So does Australia. There's a small one in China too. The
Caspian Sea grows nontrivially too.
It really sux to be a Bangladeshi. China doesn't get off scott
free: Beijing and northern China get, well, swamped big time.
Anyways, if this shift happens over the next 100-200 years,
that makes a sea rise go from 3 mm/year right now to
something between 175-350mm/year (average). hrm. Ok.
Interesting. That's pretty dramatic though.
Obviously the effects are going to be massive. The population
displacement in the US (and Europe) is going to be huge (esp
the US). The economic upset is going to knock the US silly.
To me it looks like we (The US) are just plain screwed. It
doesn't look like /any/ of the great powers/potential superpowers
get off too well.
So, who in the self induced Pliocene climate future gets a boost
up? Who are the major losers from other people's PoV? What
do others think?
1. http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm
2. http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/pliocene.html
3. http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/pub/sea_level/
4.
http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/pub/sea_level/Core/raw/pliocene/images/chg05e.gif
Will
--
William P Baird Do you know why the road less traveled by
Home: anzhalyu@gmail. has so few sightseers? Normally, there
Work: wba...@nersc.go is something big, mean, with very sharp
Blog: thedragonstales teeth - and quite the appetite! - waiting
+ com/v/.blogspot.com somewhere along its dark and twisty bends.
Coyu
> For those of you that follow my blog, you know that I recently
> got to listen in a paleoclimate conference. These were the folks
> that model the climates of different times of our deep time past.
> It was fscking awesome, at least the first day, because what
> knowledge of the Permian time period was immensely expanded.
> Esp wrt the PT Boundary. The second day was less interesting
> from the PoV of knowledge quest and more from the PoV of
> my professional life.
Incidentally, I've put up a hypertexted version of the conference's
agenda with links to WB's comments at:
William P. Baird
> Incidentally, I've put up a hypertexted version of the conference's
> agenda with links to WB's comments at:
>
> http://www.bookcase.com/~claudia/mt/archives/000886.html
Ah ha! There that is. Sorry for the mess of some of the comments.
I was typing as fast as these gusy were talking and some of the
people were not so easy to understand. I was dialed into NCAR
which was video conferenced to UWis-Mad. Sometimes accents
and atypical inflection do not mix well with the above setup.
The real eye opener was the Permian. That was one wierd climate.
That said, thoughts on this post, Carlos?
Coyu
> > Incidentally, I've put up a hypertexted version of the conference's
> > agenda with links to WB's comments at:
> >
> > http://www.bookcase.com/~claudia/mt/archives/000886.html
>
> Ah ha! There that is.
I waited for a bit so that Doug and Claudia could get the Yerevan
news out.
> Sorry for the mess of some of the comments.
> I was typing as fast as these gusy were talking and some of the
> people were not so easy to understand. I was dialed into NCAR
> which was video conferenced to UWis-Mad. Sometimes accents
> and atypical inflection do not mix well with the above setup.
>
> The real eye opener was the Permian. That was one wierd climate.
>
> That said, thoughts on this post, Carlos?
Yeah: I would be very careful about using that estimated Pliocene
sea level data. You see those spots around the lower Mississippi,
Bangladesh, the central Amazon, lower Mesopotamia, and northeast
China? That's all been filled in with river silt since three
million years ago. A lot of silt in that time. I am also thinking
that much of the Low Country in the South has been shaped by
hurricane erosion of the mainland onto the continental shelf
(although Florida is probably wet toast, yes).
Also, I'm not sure what effects hydrostatic equilibrium will have
on the freshly melted lands Up North and Down South.
William P. Baird
> I waited for a bit so that Doug and Claudia could get the Yerevan
> news out.
Wish I was a faster typist...actually wish I was there, damnit!
> Yeah: I would be very careful about using that estimated Pliocene
> sea level data. You see those spots around the lower Mississippi,
> Bangladesh, the central Amazon, lower Mesopotamia, and northeast
> China? That's all been filled in with river silt since three
> million years ago. A lot of silt in that time. I am also thinking
> that much of the Low Country in the South has been shaped by
> hurricane erosion of the mainland onto the continental shelf
> (although Florida is probably wet toast, yes).
True. I wish I had the time to pull down the data that these guys did
and run a 35 m[1] sea level rise rather than the 150 m that they did.
I really ought to go to the terraserver and click around abit just to
get
some ideas. The central valley of cali filling up somewhat is ...
interesting.
> Also, I'm not sure what effects hydrostatic equilibrium will have
> on the freshly melted lands Up North and Down South.
There's lotsa debate on that one, honestly. I will simply
state that. I am not an authority, but a very curious and looking
to be involved individual.
1. http://www.clockwk.com/waterworld/index.html
Oh Yea!?
"William P. Baird" wrote:
I think you miss the obvious. The rich get richer. The poor screwed and in total
subjugation. As the Bible says: 'better you had not been born....'. These guys had
reality including human affairs figured out 2000+ years ago!
--
http://NewsGuy.com/overview.htm 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
William P. Baird
actually did the water rising scenario[1] with maps and topo data.
Woo!
I picked California cuz, well, that's where Iam at and at least from
the Waters Are Acomin scenario, NM has little to fear. Ever. Well,
at least in the probable human species 'life time'. There's just not
enough water in the world.
On the map that I selected I put the water level at 9 m because that's
the number I hear the climatologists throw around a lot here. More and
more data is being added all the time to the map, so if your part of
the
world isn't there, then check back a few days later. I grumbled about
Ukraine and it appeared a few days later.
Some quick observations:
Places to say bye-bye to: Louisiana (au revoir!), Bangladesh (ouch),
big chunks of coastal China, The Mekong Delta in Vietnam, The
Netherlands[2], Boston, and, of course, good chunks of Florida.
Places where life gets interesting: DC, England, Crimea[3], Northern
Italy, Delware, Maryland, and Northwest Germany.
Places where a lot less than I thought would happen: NYC, Texas,
and Oregon[4].
Pliocene earth looks...interesting for us. The question is the TL for
it. It looks like most of the climatologists are arguing over that
one.
On the one hand (erm, group), they're saying 30 years. On the other,
they're saying 100 years.
We'll see.
Will
1.
http://flood.firetree.net/?ll=35.53222622770337,-116.69677734375&z=11&m=9
2. I am sure the Dutch will attempt to out dike it though.
3. it becomes an island!
4. Talk about almost getting off scott free...
James Nicoll
William P. Baird <anzh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Well, the nonsequitor aside, James Nicoll found a person that
>actually did the water rising scenario[1] with maps and topo data.
>Woo!
>
>I picked California cuz, well, that's where Iam at and at least from
>the Waters Are Acomin scenario, NM has little to fear. Ever. Well,
>at least in the probable human species 'life time'. There's just not
>enough water in the world.
"Who could have predicted opening a hyperspacial tube to the seas of
Neptune could ever backfire?"
>On the map that I selected I put the water level at 9 m because that's
>the number I hear the climatologists throw around a lot here. More and
>more data is being added all the time to the map, so if your part of
>the world isn't there, then check back a few days later. I grumbled about
>Ukraine and it appeared a few days later.
>
>Some quick observations:
>
Stockton and Sacramento become ports. There's a bottleneck
at San Pablo Bay, though.
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
James Nicoll
William P. Baird
> "Who could have predicted opening a hyperspacial tube to the seas of
> Neptune could ever backfire?"
*snorks*
Well, Black Mesa had interdimensional travel...;) Or something
depending on your author or game (*cough*Half Life*cough*). The Rio
Grande would get...impressive. lol. Well, the Neptune seas doing a
lake missoula (sp) keep people from crossing the Rio Grande. Sorry
about pretty much all of civilization in NM and El Paso-Juarez. For
large values of civilization. And proud of it.
> Stockton and Sacramento become ports. There's a bottleneck
> at San Pablo Bay, though.
I keep hoping that Sacremento drowns. No such luck. They'd not be
very deep ports at all though: 5m? Gropenfuhrer is talking levies...
*shudders*
Emeryville goes under. We're only 6.7m. My apartment would be gone
at leas tthe lower three levels.
James Nicoll wrote:
> Is Israel one of the places that they haven't got to yet?
Looks like it.
Will
James Nicoll
>
>> "Who could have predicted opening a hyperspacial tube to the seas of
>> Neptune could ever backfire?"
>
>*snorks*
>
>Well, Black Mesa had interdimensional travel...;) Or something
>depending on your author or game (*cough*Half Life*cough*). The Rio
>Grande would get...impressive. lol. Well, the Neptune seas doing a
>lake missoula (sp) keep people from crossing the Rio Grande. Sorry
>about pretty much all of civilization in NM and El Paso-Juarez. For
>large values of civilization. And proud of it.
If it helps, the total mass of Neptune's seas is more than
the total mass of the Earth, so eventually there'd be no place
to run to.
>> Stockton and Sacramento become ports. There's a bottleneck
>> at San Pablo Bay, though.
>
>I keep hoping that Sacremento drowns. No such luck. They'd not be
>very deep ports at all though: 5m? Gropenfuhrer is talking levies...
>*shudders*
>
>Emeryville goes under. We're only 6.7m. My apartment would be gone
>at leas tthe lower three levels.
>
>James Nicoll wrote:
>> Is Israel one of the places that they haven't got to yet?
>
>Looks like it.
>
I'm just guessing here but I would suspect flooding the
Middle East's coasts won't help stability in the region. At least
with places like Florida and the Atlantic Provinces, it's hard
to imagine reaction to the Inundaterati worse than the Okies
got.
BTW, IIRC, France's two islands offshore of Canada are
gone. Luckily, there won't be that many people to relocate.
William P. Baird
> If it helps, the total mass of Neptune's seas is more than
> the total mass of the Earth, so eventually there'd be no place
> to run to.
Ah, the question is if the tunnel had an 'off' switch. If so, then
we're in luck. If not...well, it's not just the hatch chile crop that
got ruined.
> I'm just guessing here but I would suspect flooding the
> Middle East's coasts won't help stability in the region.
Oh, that's putting it mildly. I'm also thinking of what happens
when you have to move the population of Bangladesh. 144
Megapeople is a little nontrivial. Interestingly, Indonesia is a lot
less whacked than I'd have thought. Ditto the Phillipines. The
author noticed my blog posting to it. He's also adding Africa.
That's gonna be interesting.
> At least
> with places like Florida and the Atlantic Provinces, it's hard
> to imagine reaction to the Inundaterati worse than the Okies
> got.
BTW, looking at these maps has convinced me even further that
Global Warming is a Canuckistani conspiracy. Look at how little
impact there is on Quebec and Ontario. Vancouver gets a little
thumped though.
> BTW, IIRC, France's two islands offshore of Canada are
> gone. Luckily, there won't be that many people to relocate.
Can't wait for SoAm..Brazil ought to be...interesting.
James Nicoll
>Global Warming is a Canuckistani conspiracy. Look at how little
>impact there is on Quebec and Ontario. Vancouver gets a little
>thumped though.
>
I wasn't that surprised. How foresightful of us to put 60%
of the population between Montreal and Windsor...
Tim McDaniel
"Become"?
<http://www.portofstockton.com/>
<http://www.portofsacramento.com/>
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
William P. Baird
> Is Israel one of the places that they haven't got to yet?
He's done the Africa and the Middle East.
I just did a quick look as I am going out the door. Egypt in the
Nile delta and the Iran-Iraq border region get swamped. The Marsh
Arab homeland goes away it looks like. Africa looks kinda
uninteresting otherwise. That's...interesting in and of itself.
Will
Vladamir Vorchiav
"William P. Baird" wrote:
Well, the nonsequitor aside, James Nicoll found a person that
actually did the water rising scenario[1] with maps and topo data.
Woo!I picked California cuz, well, that's where Iam at and at least from
the Waters Are Acomin scenario, NM has little to fear. Ever. Well,
at least in the probable human species 'life time'. There's just not
enough water in the world.On the map that I selected I put the water level at 9 m because that's
the number I hear the climatologists throw around a lot here. More andmore data is being added all the time to the map, so if your part of
the
world isn't there, then check back a few days later. I grumbled about
Ukraine and it appeared a few days later.Some quick observations:
Places to say bye-bye to: Louisiana (au revoir!), Bangladesh (ouch),
big chunks of coastal China, The Mekong Delta in Vietnam, The
Netherlands[2], Boston, and, of course, good chunks of Florida.
all the low areas. CA north misses due to the higher elevations.
Places where life gets interesting: DC, England, Crimea[3], Northern
Italy, Delware, Maryland, and Northwest Germany.
midwest - rexamine you rmap. Mississ widens, inland flooding, inland sea...
Places where a lot less than I thought would happen: NYC, Texas,
and Oregon[4].
Oregon not as mentioned before. NY all easterb seaboard affected but most
pronounced further south (lower elevation) you go. Texas will be affected.
Pliocene earth looks...interesting for us. The question is the TL for
it. It looks like most of the climatologists are arguing over that
one.
On the one hand (erm, group), they're saying 30 years. On the other,
they're saying 100 years.
it all depends on the melt rate which is not linear but exponential. We
already see an absolute difference in climate change (as far back at 1900).
Warmer Humbolt current off So America. Tundra melt across who northern
arctic. Antartic has been
least affected so far because of the vast land mass but pronounced
glacier melt and
speed of movement are documented. Definate changes will be noticed
by 2030's.
What can be done at this date - nothing in my opinion short of a massive
reduction
in human population/production with five-ten years.
We will see because we will (and are) living it right now.
Good luck.
William P. Baird
Vladamir Vorchiav wrote:
> all the low areas. CA north misses due to the higher elevations.
Yep.
> midwest - rexamine you rmap. Mississ widens, inland flooding, inland sea...
It's not /my/ map, first off. lol.
Secondly, I am sure that the Ole Miss wides to some extent, but I don't
see an
inland sea. You have to get up around the 35m level to get a very
large sea
in the American South. That may be coming, but not probably in the
next
century unless there's a crazy run away effect.
> Oregon not as mentioned before. NY all easterb seaboard affected but most
> pronounced further south (lower elevation) you go. Texas will be affected.
Texas is less effected than I would have thought.
> Definate changes will be noticed by 2030's.
I bet the changes are noticed in a decade, personally...
> What can be done at this date - nothing in my opinion short of a massive
> reduction
> in human population/production with five-ten years.
Even stopping cold turkey isn't enough. You are going to have to
sequester carbon in some way, shape or form. There are discussions
to that end already as to how.
> We will see because we will (and are) living it right now.
Da.
> Good luck.
Well, no building on land less than 35 m as far as I am concerned...;)
Will