This is an interesting new paper
For heat outcomes, finds vulnerability reduction can be much more important than climate risk increase
Landreau et al 2021. Combining socio-economic & climate projections to assess heat risk. Climatic Change, 167(1), 1-20. link.springer.com/article/10.100…
"The assessments of future climate risks are common; however, usually, they focus on climate projections without considering social changes"
True!
If you see a study with "no adaptation" used as a projection of the future, run away, fast!
This paper considers adaptation
How society develops will say more about how future heat risk evolves than will changing climate risk alone
The choices we make ... both emissions and societal will determine our collective future
And similarly
Rohat et al 2019. Characterizing the role of socioeconomic pathways in shaping future urban heat-related challenges. Science of the total environment, 695, 133941. doi.org/10.1016/j.scit…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, recognizing that there are regional differences, more locations saw decreasing trends than increasing trends
Overall, that means less flooding
Second - and this is really important - evidence of decreasing floods are contrary to evidence of increasing precipitation, and specifically maximum precipitation intensities
So YES extreme precip is going up (due to CC), but that does not mean that floods are also!
There is no doubt that attribution claims have run far out ahead of detection of trends
"Since 1951, the number of heavy rainfall days per year for the whole of Germany has hardly changed, almost independently of their definition" mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/7…
I'm not sure how the current strong attribution claims (it's obvious, right?) can be reconciled with the observational data, but I'm sure there is an explanation
If certain extreme events have become much more likely, then evidence should show them being more likely? Or not?
My piece in the WSJ today on the importance of climate adaptation
My discussion of Mike Hulme’s “climate reductionism” didn’t survive the edit, but it is a really important piece for understanding the incredible flattening of knowledge on climate
“In this new mood of climate-driven destiny the human hand, as the cause of climate change, has replaced the divine hand of God as being responsible for the collapse of civilizations, for visitations of extreme weather & for determining the new 21st-century wealth of nations”