Humans exhale CO2 but this does not contribute to global warming because that exhaled carbon was recently obtained from the atmosphere via plant photosynthesis and thus exhaling CO2 is just cycling carbon back to where it was recently extracted. #SJSU#METR12#Globalwarming
Over the long term (millions of years) silicate-to-carbonate conversion draws CO2 out of the atmosphere and sequesters the carbon in the seafloor. This process is too slow to have any appreciable effect on the CO2 produced from fossil fuel burning. #SJSU#METR12#Globalwarming
The carbon sequestered on the seafloor makes it back to the atmosphere via subduction of the oceanic crust and volcanic eruptions that release CO2. #SJSU#METR12#Globalwarming
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In a 2nd Trump presidency, rather than doubling down on the misguided notion that science is an authority that can fully dictate policy, scientists should strive to delineate between strict scientific facts and their political preferences. 🧵
Much like the Democratic party as a whole, scientists and their institutions (universities, research labs, professional societies, journals) are reflecting on the election results, especially what they signal in terms of public trust in science and expertise.
2023 set a record for global temperature in the instrumental era, breaching the 1.5°C 'limit' for the first time.
But global temperature itself is not very relevant to impacts. So where did 2023 come in, in terms of those more impact-relevant climate changes? 🧵
The Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society released its annual "State of the Climate" report last month. Below, I highlight some of their cataloged trends, ranking them roughly from intuitive to more surprising.
First, sea level continues to ⬆️ due to land ice melting and the thermal expansion of the ocean. A sea level rise of 110 mm from 1993 to 2023 corresponds to approximately 1.4 inches per decade or 1.20 feet per century, though this rate is expected to accelerate.
California’s Massive Park Fire Would be Less Severe if We Proactively Reduced Fuels.🧵
The Park Fire shows that both a lack of active management on US Forest Service land and land management optimized for timber production are far from ideal for wildfire safety.
As of today, August 14th, the Park Fire has burned nearly 430,000 acres (672 square miles), or about 65% of the size of the state of Rhode Island. It is officially still only 40% contained and has destroyed over 600 structures.
The Park Fire currently stands as California’s fourth-largest fire since meticulous record-keeping began in the 1980s, and by itself, it has burned more area than that from all California fires in the calendar years of either 2022 or 2023.
Is climate change driving massive increases in severe thunderstorm costs and causing “The Possible Collapse of the U.S. Home Insurance System” as @nytimes reports?
There is a large and growing gap between climate science and the reporting coming from 'climate desks'…🧵
It is true that both US billion-dollar disasters and global insured disaster losses are increasing, and a large fraction of the overall increase seems to be driven by increases in losses from severe thunderstorms.
But what, specifically, does climate science say about historical and expected changes in severe thunderstorms and their associated hazards of tornadoes and hail?
When considering the risk of natural disasters like floods, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has adopted a useful framework for breaking down the risk of impacts.
This is useful for considering the underlying causes of any changes in flood disasters because, on the many-decade timescales that climate change progresses, there will not only be changes in the hazard but also changes in exposure and vulnerability.
I have a piece out today in The Chronicle of Higher Education on how social and career incentives surrounding researchers cause a good portion of the full story on the climate problem to be left out of the high-impact literature. 🧵 chronicle.com/article/does-c…
I also recently gave a seminar for the Energy Policy and Climate Program at Johns Hopkins University (where I am a lecturer) that covers the same topic:
This piece stems from a frustration I feel about not being able to take the high-impact climate science literature at face value.