The all-purpose heavy duty Climate Chaos thread (sprinkled with hope).

brianlux

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well it's something.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67548961?at_campaign_type=owned&at_medium=emails&at_objective=awareness&at_ptr_type=email&at_ptr_name=salesforce&at_campaign=newsbriefing&at_email_send_date=20231128&at_send_id=4010747&at_link_title=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67548961&at_bbc_team=crm

I would rate this as a tiny step forward.  The article mentioned "so-called sustainable aviation fuels" which I think sounds a bit like an oxymoron.  I would be more optimistic about this if it part of the push were to reduce air travel in general, and even more hopeful if railroad travel was being more encouraged.  Railroads are the most energy efficient of all forms of none ambulatory travel.

And I'm sorry, I don't mean to be a dour downing here.  Little steps forward are better than nothing. 

I fully agree. Like I said, it's something, lol. But steps like this are very very important in the long run. It starts here and down the road it results in a completely clean fuel or something, who knows. Air travel isn't going anywhere of course. I agree about the train travel though. It really sucks that America made itself a car country instead of a train country after WWII.

Yes times a hundred! 

I was very happy back in September that the Biden administration- and BIG kudos to Pete Buttigieg- stepped up to fund railroad improvements.

https://apnews.com/article/biden-rail-safety-infrastructure-buttigieg-9a7ff416e41d531dfb996d332a1ba146

Halifax2TheMax

If you ever want to really know what is going on and what is happening? Watch what and how our military prioritizes.

$1 billion for climate resilience funding at the Defense Department. 

Sorry for not quoting but don’t, whatever you do, waste your time.

brianlux

Halifax2TheMax said:

If you ever want to really know what is going on and what is happening? Watch what and how our military prioritizes.

$1 billion for climate resilience funding at the Defense Department. 

Sorry for not quoting but don’t, whatever you do, waste your time.

A link would help, lol.

My understanding is  that the purpose for climate resilience funding is to support measures in protecting lands and waters critical for adapting to climate change.  How that ties in with defense, I don't know. 
We've obviously reached a point of no return for climate change.  It's happening, and it's going to get worse.  More and more, the efforts being made are focused on adapting.  That's great, I suppose, but I think what's more important is to take measures to limit how badly our impact is in increasing climate change. In other words, slow it down. The only way I could never see those actions being a waste of time would be if one's perspective is the notion that the sooner climate change gets worse, the sooner humans will be wiped out, the sooner the planet  can get busy reestablishing it's balances as nature strongly tends to do.  I suppose that is a valid argument.
But humans are going to go away anyway.  I'm not cynical enough to desire that to happen sooner than later.  At least I don't feel that way all the time- maybe 49% of the times, and I don't like feeling that cynical. 

Halifax2TheMax

End of times. Trying to appeal to the MAGA crowd?

Climate change is altering Earth’s rotation enough to mess with our clocks

Climate change is messing with time itself.

The melting of polar ice due to global warming is affecting Earth’s rotation and could have an impact on precision timekeeping, according to a paper published Wednesday in the journal Nature.

The planet is not about to jerk to a halt, nor speed up so rapidly that everyone gets flung into space. But timekeeping is an exact science in a highly technological society, which is why global authorities more than half a century ago felt compelled by the slight changes in Earth’s rotation to invent the concept of the “leap second.”

Climate change is now making these calculations even more complicated: In just a few years it may be necessary to insert a “negative leap second” into the calendar to get the planet’s rotation in sync with Coordinated Universal Time.

“Global warming is managing to actually measurably affect the rotation of the entire Earth,” said study author Duncan Agnew, a geophysicist at the University of California at San Diego. “Things are happening that have not happened before.”

The core problem in timekeeping

Timekeeping has traditionally had an astronomical basis. Earth is a type of a clock. In simpler times, the planet would spin one full revolution on its axis, and everyone would call it a day.

Technologists, however, demand excruciating levels of exactitude. Atomic clocks and not sundials now tell us what time it is. In atomic time, a second is defined as 9,192,631,770 oscillations of a Cesium atom. The goal of the people who want to get things exactly right is to make sure that atomic time is perfectly in sync with astronomical time.

For example, GPS satellites need to know exactly where Earth is beneath them — and precisely what time it is — to accurately get you from your house to the nearest Arby’s.

But Earth doesn’t spin at a perfectly constant speed. Our planet is in a complicated gravitational dance with the moon, the sun, the oceanic tides, Earth’s own atmosphere and the motion of the planet’s solid inner core.

Unhelpfully, Earth’s core is unavailable for close scrutiny and “is a bit of a black box,” as Agnew noted. Geophysicists can infer some details about the planet’s interior by drilling into select areas of the sea floor. And as The Post reported last year, scientists have discerned changes in Earth’s rotation that appear to match 70-year oscillations in the rotation of the core.

But when scientists try to describe what Earth is doing at any given moment, they have to factor in a lot of slop and wobble.

The planet’s fluctuating spin rate is carefully tracked by the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (formerly the only slightly less bombastically named International Earth Rotation Service). In the early 1970s, Earth was clearly slowing down in its rotation, and a gap was forming between atomic time and astronomical time. Thus was born the “leap second” to adjust for the fact that the “day” was getting a bit longer.

Twenty-seven leap seconds have been added to Universal Coordinated Time since 1972. The addition of a leap second happens at the last tick of the clock on the night of Dec. 31.

Making the leap

But hold on: Earth is not slowing down anymore. It’s actually been speeding up a bit. In fact, there hasn’t been a leap second added since the end of 2016.

Here is where the casual reader’s head might start spinning. The melting of the ice caps in Antarctica and Greenland shifts mass — meltwater — toward the equator. That process increases the equatorial bulge of the planet. Meanwhile, at the poles, the land that had been pressed down by ice rises, and Earth becomes more spherical.

These two changes in the planet’s shape have opposite effects on Earth’s rotation, according to Judah Levine, a physicist at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colo.

The new paper by Agnew contends that, although the core is causing the planet to spin faster, the planetary shape changes caused by a warming climate are slowing that process. Absent this effect, Agnew wrote, the overall acceleration of the planet’s rotation might require timekeepers to insert a “negative leap second” at the end of 2026. Because of climate change, that might not be necessary until 2029, he found.

Levine, who is not part of this new study, said the science is credible, but he was not prepared to sign off on the conclusion because it is inherently tricky to predict what Earth is going to do.

“There’s a very great uncertainty about this,” Levine said. “A few years ago, there were predictions in the other direction.”

Nick Stamatakos, head of the U.S. Naval Observatory’s Earth Orientation Department, said in an email that, although it’s more likely a negative leap second will need to be adopted, there’s no way to know for sure what the planet will do.

“It is like a weather prediction of a big storm or hurricane. We can’t say for certain what will happen and when. However, we can say there is a higher percentage chance of a negative leap second than say 25 years ago,” Stamatakos wrote.

He noted that his brother-in-law teases him every time a leap second gets added, declaring, “Wow that was a long year — an entire extra second!” Stamatakos’s response: “Well, in that one second, the Earth rotated about four football fields.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2024/03/27/leap-second-melting-poles-climate-time/

Spunkie

hedonist said:

And then come the wildfires...

It's pretty Grim that my city has got a new portal to sign up evacuees more efficiently for next time!

mickeyrat

Spunkie said:

hedonist said:

And then come the wildfires...

It's pretty Grim that my city has got a new portal to sign up evacuees more efficiently for next time!

hmm. better prepared and not need than need and not have.  just a thought.

Spunkie

Yes, M, you're right 

mickeyrat

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/battelle-researchers-unveil-new-machine-to-remove-forever-chemicals-from-water/530-d605e0a0-ae42-4d1a-8492-c2daff6ffafc?fbclid=IwY2xjawDFiABleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcBR-Az71Kfu4YhQApAzGuc5ltl2R1J3KGbMGRUFSenDf9DjWbyojC75Fw_aem_ASXF67hylCf0iNA-EVfOylKiSHzswRFPISSgFGiv5y_Iu9P7DozHgIVayUeIH7est8885wV4F7IACpbHGN215fA5

brianlux

mickeyrat said:

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/battelle-researchers-unveil-new-machine-to-remove-forever-chemicals-from-water/530-d605e0a0-ae42-4d1a-8492-c2daff6ffafc?fbclid=IwY2xjawDFiABleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcBR-Az71Kfu4YhQApAzGuc5ltl2R1J3KGbMGRUFSenDf9DjWbyojC75Fw_aem_ASXF67hylCf0iNA-EVfOylKiSHzswRFPISSgFGiv5y_Iu9P7DozHgIVayUeIH7est8885wV4F7IACpbHGN215fA5

Good news!  Removing PFAS chemicals, yay!

Halifax2TheMax

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

brianlux

Halifax2TheMax said:

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

And don't forget bitcoin "mining". 

"Worldwide bitcoin miming used 121.12 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023.  The entire country of Netherlands, with more than 17 million people, consumed 121.6 terawatt-hours in 2022, according to the international Energy Agency."

https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/how-much-power-does-crypto-use-the-government-wants-to-know/

All this lead to several questions in my mind including (and this is not meant to be anti-eclectic cars), where is the energy going to come from to run these cars when places like California ban internal combustion engines?  Not that this ban in-of-itself is a bad idea, but I have to wonder if the conversion to electric cars will even be feasible?  Is anyone asking this questions, or are we just speeding headlong as fast as possible into the proverbial brick wall? 

Honestly, I think a slow grinding of things to a near halt would be a lot better than slamming into chaos.  If we go the latter route, we're in for a damn rough ride.

mickeyrat

https://youtu.be/qW7CGTK-1vA?si=4Vf-rAYUV2HUo-3x

tempo_n_groove

Halifax2TheMax said:

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

yet they are force feeding AI down our throats.

I have yet to use any AI(to my knowledge) programs and would hope not to.

Halifax2TheMax

How’s Houston doing? Houston, we have a problem.

Lerxst1992

brianlux said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

And don't forget bitcoin "mining". 

"Worldwide bitcoin miming used 121.12 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023.  The entire country of Netherlands, with more than 17 million people, consumed 121.6 terawatt-hours in 2022, according to the international Energy Agency."

https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/how-much-power-does-crypto-use-the-government-wants-to-know/

All this lead to several questions in my mind including (and this is not meant to be anti-eclectic cars), where is the energy going to come from to run these cars when places like California ban internal combustion engines?  Not that this ban in-of-itself is a bad idea, but I have to wonder if the conversion to electric cars will even be feasible?  Is anyone asking this questions, or are we just speeding headlong as fast as possible into the proverbial brick wall? 

Honestly, I think a slow grinding of things to a near halt would be a lot better than slamming into chaos.  If we go the latter route, we're in for a damn rough ride.

It seems ICE will be around for a while and EVs will take longer than predicted a few years ago. At least three things must happen before EVs have a chance- 1. Cost to ICE cars must be comparable. 2. Recharging battery must be easy to find and quick. 3. Need to be able to get the EV repaired anywhere. We are very far from achieving these milestones.

Regarding all of the electricity generated for bitcoins, saw an interesting video about how Paris is using something similar, the energy used from data/server farms for internet usage to generate heat :

https://youtu.be/2gWudPtN6z4?si=4e1BxQKXm6uU4z9n

About climate change in general, this can’t be said enough.the politics are slippery. Republicans argue if you hop on a plane often, you are really not THAT concerned about the climate. Looking at “liberal” bands like U2 and d and c, drawing hundreds of thousands of fans cross country into a Vegas desert, instead of a small crew traveling with a band, this needlessly burns more carbon than a small city, a complete waste, yet the liberals seem to not care.

brianlux

Lerxst1992 said:

brianlux said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

And don't forget bitcoin "mining". 

"Worldwide bitcoin miming used 121.12 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023.  The entire country of Netherlands, with more than 17 million people, consumed 121.6 terawatt-hours in 2022, according to the international Energy Agency."

https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/how-much-power-does-crypto-use-the-government-wants-to-know/

All this lead to several questions in my mind including (and this is not meant to be anti-eclectic cars), where is the energy going to come from to run these cars when places like California ban internal combustion engines?  Not that this ban in-of-itself is a bad idea, but I have to wonder if the conversion to electric cars will even be feasible?  Is anyone asking this questions, or are we just speeding headlong as fast as possible into the proverbial brick wall? 

Honestly, I think a slow grinding of things to a near halt would be a lot better than slamming into chaos.  If we go the latter route, we're in for a damn rough ride.

It seems ICE will be around for a while and EVs will take longer than predicted a few years ago. At least three things must happen before EVs have a chance- 1. Cost to ICE cars must be comparable. 2. Recharging battery must be easy to find and quick. 3. Need to be able to get the EV repaired anywhere. We are very far from achieving these milestones.

Regarding all of the electricity generated for bitcoins, saw an interesting video about how Paris is using something similar, the energy used from data/server farms for internet usage to generate heat :

https://youtu.be/2gWudPtN6z4?si=4e1BxQKXm6uU4z9n

About climate change in general, this can’t be said enough.the politics are slippery. Republicans argue if you hop on a plane often, you are really not THAT concerned about the climate. Looking at “liberal” bands like U2 and d and c, drawing hundreds of thousands of fans cross country into a Vegas desert, instead of a small crew traveling with a band, this needlessly burns more carbon than a small city, a complete waste, yet the liberals seem to not care.

I don't like to admit this, but I don't believe politics or rock bands are going to do much to lessen the impact of global warming.  Democrats are more likely to pass environmentally friendly legislation and I don't think that can be argued, but it's not going to be enough.  we've already seen that.  We've known about global warming for decades (some of us started talking about to 40 or more years ago).  Republicans care even less about environment.  

And rock bands like Pearl Jam and Neil Young either need to get real about global warming or stop talking about it.  When it comes to their music, I love them both for the rich trove of great music they have added to our  lives.  But the big shows with semi trailers hauling tons of shit around the planet, the over-blown excessive packaging of single albums in gatefold covers with all the other ephemera that gets stuffed in them...  Give me a break, guys.

mickeyrat

Lerxst1992 said:

brianlux said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

We’re so doomed when the next party in power professes that wind farms give you cancer and solar power is unreliable and useless. And because you know socials.

As the tech giants compete in a global AI arms race, a frenzy of data center construction is sweeping the country. Some computing campuses require as much energy as a modest-sized city, turning tech firms that promised to lead the wayinto a clean energy future into some of the world’s most insatiable guzzlers of power. Their projected energy needs are so huge, some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet them from any source.

Data centers, the nondescript warehouses packed with racks of servers that power the modern internet, have been around for decades. But the amount of electricity they need now is soaring because of AI. Training artificial intelligence models and using AI to execute even simple tasks involves ever more complicated, faster and voluminous computations that are straining the electricity system.

A ChatGPT-powered search on Google, according to the International Energy Agency, consumes almost 10 times the amount of electricity as a traditional search. One large data center complex in Iowa owned by Meta burns the annual equivalent amount of power as 7 million laptops running eight hours every day, based on data shared publiclyby the company.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/21/artificial-intelligence-nuclear-fusion-climate/

And don't forget bitcoin "mining". 

"Worldwide bitcoin miming used 121.12 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023.  The entire country of Netherlands, with more than 17 million people, consumed 121.6 terawatt-hours in 2022, according to the international Energy Agency."

https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/how-much-power-does-crypto-use-the-government-wants-to-know/

All this lead to several questions in my mind including (and this is not meant to be anti-eclectic cars), where is the energy going to come from to run these cars when places like California ban internal combustion engines?  Not that this ban in-of-itself is a bad idea, but I have to wonder if the conversion to electric cars will even be feasible?  Is anyone asking this questions, or are we just speeding headlong as fast as possible into the proverbial brick wall? 

Honestly, I think a slow grinding of things to a near halt would be a lot better than slamming into chaos.  If we go the latter route, we're in for a damn rough ride.

It seems ICE will be around for a while and EVs will take longer than predicted a few years ago. At least three things must happen before EVs have a chance- 1. Cost to ICE cars must be comparable. 2. Recharging battery must be easy to find and quick. 3. Need to be able to get the EV repaired anywhere. We are very far from achieving these milestones.

Regarding all of the electricity generated for bitcoins, saw an interesting video about how Paris is using something similar, the energy used from data/server farms for internet usage to generate heat :

https://youtu.be/2gWudPtN6z4?si=4e1BxQKXm6uU4z9n

About climate change in general, this can’t be said enough.the politics are slippery. Republicans argue if you hop on a plane often, you are really not THAT concerned about the climate. Looking at “liberal” bands like U2 and d and c, drawing hundreds of thousands of fans cross country into a Vegas desert, instead of a small crew traveling with a band, this needlessly burns more carbon than a small city, a complete waste, yet the liberals seem to not care.

were flights added to accommodate the fans traveling to those shows in vegas or elsewhere?

 you know, adding more pollution to the earth than is generated daily from the airline industry before or after that venue was built?

Halifax2TheMax

Global warming, ppppfffffffffftttttttttttt!

https://www.accuweather.com/en/severe-weather/heres-why-snow-was-reported-amid-90-degree-temperatures-at-philadelphia-airport/1669810

Halifax2TheMax

November may not matter and 2025 certainly won’t if it’s drill baby drill time.

Sunday was the hottest day ever recorded on Earth, scientists say

The historic day comes on the heels of 13 straight months of unprecedented temperatures and the hottest year scientists have ever seen.

Global temperatures hit the highest levels in recorded history on Sunday, according to preliminary data from Europe’s top climate monitor — another worrying sign of how human-caused climate changeis pushing the planet into dangerous new territory.

The results from the Copernicus Climate Change Service show the planet’s average temperature on July 21 was 17.09 degrees Celsius (62.76 degrees Fahrenheit) — breaking a record set only last year. The historic day comes on the heels of 13 straight months of unprecedented temperatures and the hottest year scientists have ever seen.

“We are in truly uncharted territory,” Copernicus director Carlo Buontempo said in a statement. “And as the climate keeps warming, we are bound to see records being broken in future months and years.”

Though Sunday was only slightly warmer than the world’s previous hottest day, Copernicus researchers noted, it was extraordinarily hotter than anything that came before. Before July 2023, Earth’s daily average temperature record — set in August 2016 — was 16.8 degrees Celsius (62.24 degrees Fahrenheit). But in the past year, the global has exceeded that old record on 57 days.

“What is truly staggering is how large the difference is between the temperature of the last 13 months and the previous temperature records,” Buontempo said.

Scientists have been tracking global temperatures only for the past few centuries. Yet there is good reason to believe that Sunday was the hottest day on Earth since the start of the last Ice Age more than 100,000 years ago. Research from paleoclimate scientists — who use tree rings, ice cores, lake sediments and other ancient material to understand past environments — suggests that recent heat would have been all but impossible over the last stretch of geologic time.

Sunday’s record-setting heat was felt on nearly every continent. Huge swaths of Asia sweltered amid scorching days and dangerously hot nights. Triple-digit temperatures in the western United States fueled out-of-control wildfires. Around much of Antarctica, Copernicus data show, temperatures were as much as 12 degrees Celsius (22 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal.

According to the National Centers for Environmental Information, 550 places around the planet saw record high daily temperatures in the last 7 days alone.

The unrelenting heat has scientists increasingly convinced that this year could prove even hotter than last. In an analysis published last week, researchers at the climate science nonprofit Berkeley Earth estimated that 2024 has a 92 percent chance of setting a new annual heat record. The average temperature for the year is almost certain to exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — surpassing what scientists say is the threshold for tolerable warming.

“It is troubling but not surprising that we are hitting record temperatures this year,” Andrew Pershing, vice president for science at the nonprofit Climate Central, wrote in an email. “We continue to add carbon pollution to the atmosphere, so global temperatures will continue to go up.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/07/23/hottest-day-ever-recorded-climate-change/

brianlux

Halifax2TheMax said:

November may not matter and 2025 certainly won’t if it’s drill baby drill time.

Sunday was the hottest day ever recorded on Earth, scientists say

The historic day comes on the heels of 13 straight months of unprecedented temperatures and the hottest year scientists have ever seen.

Global temperatures hit the highest levels in recorded history on Sunday, according to preliminary data from Europe’s top climate monitor — another worrying sign of how human-caused climate changeis pushing the planet into dangerous new territory.

The results from the Copernicus Climate Change Service show the planet’s average temperature on July 21 was 17.09 degrees Celsius (62.76 degrees Fahrenheit) — breaking a record set only last year. The historic day comes on the heels of 13 straight months of unprecedented temperatures and the hottest year scientists have ever seen.

“We are in truly uncharted territory,” Copernicus director Carlo Buontempo said in a statement. “And as the climate keeps warming, we are bound to see records being broken in future months and years.”

Though Sunday was only slightly warmer than the world’s previous hottest day, Copernicus researchers noted, it was extraordinarily hotter than anything that came before. Before July 2023, Earth’s daily average temperature record — set in August 2016 — was 16.8 degrees Celsius (62.24 degrees Fahrenheit). But in the past year, the global has exceeded that old record on 57 days.

“What is truly staggering is how large the difference is between the temperature of the last 13 months and the previous temperature records,” Buontempo said.

Scientists have been tracking global temperatures only for the past few centuries. Yet there is good reason to believe that Sunday was the hottest day on Earth since the start of the last Ice Age more than 100,000 years ago. Research from paleoclimate scientists — who use tree rings, ice cores, lake sediments and other ancient material to understand past environments — suggests that recent heat would have been all but impossible over the last stretch of geologic time.

Sunday’s record-setting heat was felt on nearly every continent. Huge swaths of Asia sweltered amid scorching days and dangerously hot nights. Triple-digit temperatures in the western United States fueled out-of-control wildfires. Around much of Antarctica, Copernicus data show, temperatures were as much as 12 degrees Celsius (22 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal.

According to the National Centers for Environmental Information, 550 places around the planet saw record high daily temperatures in the last 7 days alone.

The unrelenting heat has scientists increasingly convinced that this year could prove even hotter than last. In an analysis published last week, researchers at the climate science nonprofit Berkeley Earth estimated that 2024 has a 92 percent chance of setting a new annual heat record. The average temperature for the year is almost certain to exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — surpassing what scientists say is the threshold for tolerable warming.

“It is troubling but not surprising that we are hitting record temperatures this year,” Andrew Pershing, vice president for science at the nonprofit Climate Central, wrote in an email. “We continue to add carbon pollution to the atmosphere, so global temperatures will continue to go up.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/07/23/hottest-day-ever-recorded-climate-change/

As well all know, local weather is not the same as global climate.  But that said, we sure have had our fill of global warming this summer.  Another 104 in the shade today.   It's been an unrelentingly hot summer already.   Sounds like we're not along.

And yet people keep flying.  Jet boats keep muddying the waters and polluting the air.  Massive cruise ship, the same time a million.  Bands keep touring with semi trailers full of gear and props.  Factories keep producing made-to-fail planned obsolescent products we want but don't need.  And all the while, the planet burns.

But nature bats last.