Rising Temps Forecast Changes

By H. Josef Hebert Associated Press Writer Friday, June 9, 2000; 1:56 a.m. EDT

WASHINGTON  It's a grim forecast: Salmon quit running the Columbia River as the cold water fish move farther north; sugar maples in New England disappear; the barrier islands off the Carolinas are swept away by higher seas.

These changes in landscape and ecosystem are but a few of the projections outlined in the first-ever detailed "national assessment" of what could be expected to occur in the United States  region by region  if the nation's climate becomes 5 degrees to 10 degrees warmer over the next 100 years.

The assessment, likely to be made public next week, is the product of four years of study, numerous workshops and reviews by hundreds of scientists both in and out of government who examined global warming's likely regional impacts as well as its effect on human health, agriculture, forests and coastal areas across the country.

Unlike other studies that have examined general global impacts, this assessment was directed by Congress to focus on the United States specifically.

Critics argue the analysis is little more than guess work and that computer climate models, heavily relied upon in the assessment, cannot predict impacts on a regional basis.

"This document is an evangelistic statement about a coming apocalypse, not a scientific statement about the evolution of a complicated system with significant uncertainties," John Christy, a climatologist at the University of Alabama-Huntsville, wrote during a review of an early draft of the 128-page overview.

Christy, who is among a group of scientists skeptical about the likelihood of significant global warming, did not return telephone calls seeking to know whether his views have changed about later drafts.

The overview report, a recent draft copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, acknowledges "significant uncertainties in the science underlying climate-change impacts" particularly related to human health. Still, it concludes "based on the best available information, most Americans will experience significant impacts" from the Earth's warming.

The forecast predicts "a complex mix of positive and negative impacts" and concludes there may be surprises. "It is very likely that some aspects and impacts of climate change will be totally unanticipated," the report says.

But the assessment predicts entire ecosystems likely will shift northward as temperatures increase, and coastal areas will have to cope with higher sea levels and the prospects of more frequent storms. Cities will swelter in more frequent heat waves, and droughts will become more likely in parts of the Midwest.

At the same time, the warmer, wetter climate will cause larger crop yields for many farmers and cause tree growth to flourish in the Northwest, although forests in the Southeast likely will break into "a mosaic of forests, savannas and grasslands" and sugar maples could disappear from the Northeast.

The warming will cause ocean levels to rise, causing barrier islands to disappear and  when the geography allows  force wetlands and marshes inland. But the Great Lakes are predicted to decline because of increased evaporation, causing yet different problems.

Tree, fish and animal species will migrate northward everywhere.

In the Pacific Northwest, the salmon may shift farther north because of the warmer streams and offshore waters and be replaced by warmer-water species. And in Alaska the rising temperature is expected to cause further thawing of permafrost, damaging roads and buildings.

Some coastal cities, faced with sea level rise and more frequent storm surges, may have to redesign and adapt water, sewer and transportation systems, the study says. It makes no attempt to estimate the costs of such improvements.

An early draft of the overview summary was attacked in December as having "an extreme, alarmist tone" on predicting impact on human health. It since has been revised with more emphasis on the uncertainties of predicting health impacts.

Nevertheless, the study says higher temperatures and increased rainfall likely will exacerbate air pollution, saddle large cities with more frequent and severe heat waves, and lead to the spread of waterborne or insect-carrying diseases, including malaria in the Southeastern states.

In much of the country, winter will be much milder. The result: fewer opportunities to ski and more time for mountain hiking and other mild-weather recreation. The warmer weather will reduce the mountain snowpack, cutting summer runoff that feeds irrigation across much of the West. More rain in the arid Southwest could bring new vegetation to desert lands, but also more flash floods.

-- Another good reason (not@to.live forever), June 09, 2000

Answers

Another good reason for OTHERS -- MANY OTHERS -- not to live forever.

-- A (A@AisA.com), June 09, 2000.

I guess I better get out my wheat grinder, kerosene lamps and clean my S&W. There may be some looters out there wanting to take advantage of the collapse of infrastructure. What do y'all think? on a scale of 1 to 10 will it be an 8 or a 9? will it lead to the collapse of the U.S. Government? Will it cause a major recession or a 10 year deppresion? (I have already been in a 6 month personal deppression -- just kidding). Do you think the IRS will continue to function after the Aural disturbance hits tomorrow? Where is Paula Gordan when we really need her? Flint, please assure me that it will only be a 2 or 3 on the scale. Will the power grid completely collapse tomorrow or will we just experience dirty power and rolling brown-outs for awhile? Does anyone know how to get in touch with Cori Hamaski? sorry folks, I just had to get that off my chest. I feel better now!

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), June 09, 2000.

JUNK-SCIENCE !!!

-- Justin Me (justme@not.not), June 09, 2000.

WHERE THERE,S SMOKE----FIRE COMING,for the few BELIEVER,S THAT PASS THIS WAY---LOOK UP YOUR REDEMPTION DRAWS NIGH. LIKE A WOMEN IN LABOR--NATURE IS GROANING.

-- al-d. (dogs@zianet.com), June 09, 2000.

Ah, we'll run the air conditioners on peanut oil.

-- Pollyanna Davis (optimist@debunkery.com), June 09, 2000.

Bullshit. There is no "global warming". More fear-mongering tree-huggers trying to get their hands on peoples money...."to save something-or-other (rainforest, coral reef, algae....)"

When are you people going to wise up and quit buying all this earth-worship crap?

-- BS detector (is@screaming.now!), June 09, 2000.

Whine, whine whine. Ya, sure, "Salmon quit running the Columbia River as the cold water fish move farther north; sugar maples in New England disappear; the barrier islands off the Carolinas are swept away by higher seas"

But, have you ever been to a barrier island off the Carolinas? Neither have I. Won't miss'em. Up here in Minnesota, global warming is party time. For us, all the forecasts are good. Climate will be better; argiculture more productive. We'll miss you all down next to the coast, but, hey, life is tough.

Perhaps its not to late to invest in Siberian real estate.

-- E.H. Porter (Just Wondering@About.it), June 10, 2000.

Lol E.H., you are obviously very naive about the way our ecosystem works. Global warming does not simply mean that you are going to have milder winters and warmer summers. It is an indicator that we are about to undergo a period of rapid changes in the major forces of nature, and these changes will very likely occur more quickly than ever before experienced by mankind.

It is about INSTABILITY within the life supporting system of the entire planet, the biosphere.

Sure, you might have a nice warm 85 degree day in Minnesota in the middle of December, but then the next day it might snow 30 feet and you'll be buried alive. Sounds like fun, eh?

You may think you've got it better than someone in Florida, but that is wishful thinking. If the patterns of nature go far enough out of balance to screw up the coastlines, it'll screw things up all the way to the top of the highest mountains as well. You can laugh it off if you like, but there's no way out, we're all just one big happy family on this 3rd rock from the Sun.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), June 10, 2000.