The Camp Fire, Global Warming, and the Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II

“No, no I have a strong opinion. I want a great climate. We’re going to have that, and we are going to have that are very safe because we can’t go through this. Every year we go through this. We’re going to have safe forests and that’s happening as we speak,” -Donald Trump, during a briefing at a command center in Chico, California,l November 17th

"Climate change is spawning more extreme weather, causing irreparable harm to communities, costing billions of dollars a year, and leading to countless deaths. We can stop climate destruction, but only if we act quickly to end the use of fossil fuels ...The decision to release this damning report when families are beginning to celebrate the holidays and newsrooms are short-staffed is a brazen attempt to bury the truth from the public that we must act now to move off fossil fuels and stabilize the climate," Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch

“Unbelievably deadly and tragic wildfires rage in the west, hurricanes batter our coasts — and the Trump administration chooses the Friday after Thanksgiving to try and bury this critical U.S. assessment of the climate crisis. The President may try to hide the truth, but his own scientists and experts have made it as stark and clear as possible.” -Al Gore

In fact, the thickness of the Earth's atmosphere, compared with the size of the Earth, is in about the same ratio as the thickness of a coat of shellac on a schoolroom globe is to the diameter of the globe. That's the air that nurtures us and almost all other life on Earth, that protects us from deadly ultraviolet light from the sun, that through the greenhouse effect brings the surface temperature above the freezing point. (Without the greenhouse effect, the entire Earth would plunge below the freezing point of water and we'd all be dead.) Now that atmosphere, so thin and fragile, is under assault by our technology. We are pumping all kinds of stuff into it. You know about the concern that chlorofluorocarbons are depleting the ozone layer; and that carbon dioxide and methane and other greenhouse gases are producing global warming, a steady trend amidst fluctuations produced by volcanic eruptions and other sources. Who knows what other challenges we are posing to this vulnerable layer of air that we haven't been wise enough to foresee? -Carl Sagan
In Wonder and Skepticism, Skeptical Enquirer (Jan-Feb 1995), 19, No. 1.

The Newsroom Interview

White House dismisses ominous climate change report

Colbert



Picture Legend:

1. Holy Fire
2. Carla Gugino
3. Richard Campbell
4. Paradise
5. Map
6. Another map, Butte County
7. The scenery in Paradise
8. The top of Old Town Plaza on Clark Road in Paradise
9. The Little Grand Canyon
10. Homes
11. Pluga welcomes you
12. More Pluga
13. The Camp Fire begins November 8th
14. The total area of the Camp Fire superimposed over the city of New Orleans
15. Blaze
16. After the fire in Paradise
17.                ^
18.                ^
19.                ^
20.                ^
21. Camp fire as seen from Chico, CA
22. Paget Brewster & Jim Rash, "Community, "Advanced Safety Features"
23. Northern California fires
24. Fires north of Bundaberg in northeastern Australia
25. Drought
26. Dustbowl
27. Heat Wave
28. Hurricanes everywhere, Jose at the top near the Eastern U.S. and Maria at the bottom, heading toward Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic
29. Florence getting ready to park on the Carolinas and dump its rain
30. Rising sea levels
31. Ocean acidification
32. Example of coral bleaching
33. Deforestation
34. Earthquakes
35. The Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II
36. It's cold!
37. Colbert
38. Faith
39. Naomi Klein



   One of my very favorite actresses and persons in general is the lovely Carla Gugino. All of us here at Joyce’s Take like her so much that we gave her a happy birthday shout out relatively soon after this site was launched back in February of 2009, and that can be seen here.
   Carla of course was born in Sarasota, Florida, but after her dad, Carl, and some unknown woman who is her mother (no one knows her name, and Carla states “I'm fiercely protective of my privacy,” so it doesn’t look like we’re going to get any fresh information out of her anytime soon), separated when she was two years old, Carla spent her time between the two households, with her dad and half-brother in Sarasota, and her mom in a little town in Northern California, called Paradise, where her mom moved to when Carla was four or five.
   Carla has been heard speaking of her upbringing, "I lived in a tepee in Northern California and a van in Big Sur. With my dad, I lived in a beautiful house with a swimming pool and a tennis court and went to Europe for the summers. So I feel like I lived two childhoods."
   The famous musician Richard Campbell (AKA DoctorDawg), who was born on the very same day as my sister (December 7th, 1958), also moved to Paradise when he was very young, eight years old to be exact. He more or less stayed there all of the time and graduated from Paradise High School in 1977, before going on to perform with the likes of  Natalie Cole, Three Dog Night, Dave Mason, Edgar Winter and America. 
   Paradise (39° 45′ 35″ N, 121° 37′ 19″ W) was located in Butte County, California, in the Sierra Nevada foothills above the northeastern Sacramento Valley, 10 miles east of Chico and 85 miles north of Sacramento, our states capital. The town was spread out on a wide ridge between deep canyons formed by the west branch of the Feather River to the east and Butte Creek to the west. The Paradise area extended northward to include the unincorporated town of Magalia, as well as Stirling City, eleven miles to the north. Elevation of the area where the town was located is 1,778 feet.
   According to the United States Census Bureau, the town had a total area of 18.3 square miles,  over 99% of it land. As of the census of 2000, there were 26,408 people, 11,591 households, and 7,244 families residing in Paradise. The population density was 1,447.1 people per square mile. There were 12,374 housing units at an average density of 678.1 per square mile. The racial makeup of the town was 93.73% White, 0.19% Black or African American, 1.07% Native American, 1.04% Asian, 0.12% Pacific Islander, 1.21% from other races, and 2.64% from two or more races. 4.27% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race.
   The girl to guy ratio gave the advantage to the guys. For every 100 females aged 18 and over, there were 83.5 males.
   The median income for a household in Paradise was $31,863, and the median income for a family was $41,228 (I can find no information on what it was that the residents of Paradise did to make money, probably babysitting, odd jobs, roof repair, stuff like that) Males had a median income of $35,419 versus $25,231 for females, another glaring example of income inequality.
    I’ve used the past tense in describing Paradise for the simple reason that it no longer exists.
   At approximately 6:19am PST on November 8th, of this year, a Thursday morning, fire broke out near Pluga, CA (Pluga is not indicated on maps usually, but is about 10 or 11 miles northeast of Paradise). It was first reported at 6:33am, near Camp Creek Road. Soon after the ignition of what would be called the Camp Fire (named due to its close proximity to Camp Creek Road), initial attack firefighters were dispatched to a report of a brush fire under Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) power lines near Poe Dam on the Feather River.
   Firefighters arrived 10 minutes later, the first units on scene observing rapid fire growth and extreme fire behavior due to the low humidity and high winds in the area. The National Weather Service had issued a red flag warning for most of Northern California's interior, as well as Southern California, through the morning of November 9th.
   PG&E reported that power lines were down (there is some speculation that downed power lines started the fire, although the exact cause is still under investigation).
   Shortly after the fire erupted, the Butte County Sheriff's Office ordered the evacuation of Paradise. Other locations were also issued evacuation orders, while others were issued evacuation warnings, and emergency shelters were established.
   The fire spread very quickly and prevented most residents of the town Concow and many residents of Paradise from evacuating before the fire arrived. The fire spread so rapidly that firefighters stopped attempting to control the flames, and instead sought to help people get out alive.
   By 8:00pm of November 9th, the fire had burned 20,000 acres and threatened about 15,000 structures, with wind speeds approaching 50 miles per hour, feeding oxygen to the vastly expanding flames.
   According to Captain Scott McLean of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, "Pretty much the community of Paradise is destroyed, it's that kind of devastation. The wind that was predicted came and just wiped it out."
   By the next morning the fire had grown to 100,000 acres and was only 20% contained. By then, an estimated 6,713 structures had been destroyed, surpassing the Tubbs Fire, the previous year,  as the most destructive wildfire in California history.
   Nine fatalities had been reported until they found 14 more on November 10th, and 6 more the next day, making the total 29.  
   By the morning of the 13th the fire had expanded to 125,000 acres with 30% containment. It  had destroyed over 8,700 residences in addition to commercial buildings and other structures, with most of the damage occurring within the first two days. The death toll increased to 42, making it the single-deadliest wildfire in California history, surpassing the 1933 Griffith Park Fire, which had killed 29 people. By that evening the death toll had risen to 48.
   By November 15th the numbers of firefighters and equipment employed in fighting the fire included 5,596 firefighters, 622 engines, 75 water tenders, 101 fire crews, 103 bulldozers, and 24 helicopters from all over the state and the the rest of the country. Then as of 7:00am, the fire was 40% contained with 140,000 acres burned and still threatening 15,500 structures. Death toll 63.
   The next day 146,000 acres had been burned with 50% containment, 71 dead.
   By the time our fearless leader, Donald Trump got there, escorted by outgoing Governor Jerry Brown, Governor-elect Gavin Newsom, and FEMA director Brock Long (Brock Long? Good porn name). Trump explained how all of this death and carnage could have been avoided if California Interior Officials had simply had the foresight to rake 330,000 acres of forest floor... like they do in Finland, whose President told him that’s what they did in his country (about a third of Finland’s territory lies inside the Arctic Circle, and overall it is a cold, wet and dark place. Finland’s landscape is dotted with lakes and swamps, which act as natural barriers to fire. The rain and wind conditions are also completely different from those in California. Oh yes, Finland’s President Sauli Niinistö, says he never discussed raking with Donald).
   Just before making the rake prognosis Donald got the name of the remains of the town he had  visited just ten minutes earlier wrong, calling it Pleasure, rather than its true name, Paradise, thus at least giving Paradise national prominence for a brief period of time.
   Our President is an moron. I’m sorry, that statement does a disservice to morons everywhere. Let’s just say Donald is... mentally confused, sometimes.
   He quite often reminds of a scene from the television show, “Community,” season 6, episode 7, written by ex-editor-in-chief of The Onion, Carol Kolb, in which the lovely and talented Paget Brewster as Francesca "Frankie" Dart,  a consultant hired to help improve the Greendale Community College, and Jim Rash as the school’s Dean have a conversation in the Dean’s office. Frankie walks in on the Dean, who is engulfed in packages and parcels that he has been duped into buying using school funds because he is highly susceptible to a guerrilla marketing campaign carried out by Britta's ex-boyfriend, Rick.
   Frankie confronts the Dean and makes the following observation:
   Frankie: Are you... I don’t know how to... I have a rule about being constructive so I can’t ask any questions right now because all of them I have are rhetorical and end with the word idiot. Do you know what a rhetorical... of course you know what it is, you’re an idiot. (aghast) Oh, I am so sorry. I am so sorry, but you’re so stupid, you have no idea, and you’re the only one who has no idea because, guess why. Don’t answer that, you’ll get it wrong. Oh, so dumb. You’re just a dumb little man who tries to destroy the school every minute. I am so sorry (at this point the Dean breaks down realizing the enormity of his stupidness and seeks a comforting hug from Frankie) Oh, it’s okay... I mean it’s not okay (holding him and patting his bald, sobbing head, providing the comfort he needs). Shuusss, Shuusss, oh so stupid... such a dummy.
   I don’t know why that reminds me of President Trump but it does.
   On November 19th, the death toll was raised to 79. 83 by the 21st. The official total would become 88 civilian fatalities, 12 civilians and 5 firefighters experienced non-fatal injuries, 18,421 buildings were burned, 153,336 acres. And here is the statistic that is most shocking to me, 196 people remain missing.
   These numbers keep changing, sometimes in a good way. The number of missing people was once in the six hundreds.
   As of November 21st at 7am, the fire was 80% contained. Fire crews pulled back and let  rain do the work of putting out fires while teams searched for victims. By 7 pm, the fire was described as 85% contained. As of November 22nd at 7am,  the fire was 90% contained.
   On the morning of November 25th rain helped extinguish the last of the Camp Fire.
   This fire was the deadliest in California’s history, but just one of 7,579 fires burning an area of 1,667,855 acres during this year’s wildfire season (The Santa Ana Season, October through April, and the Summer Season which tends to burn between June and September. This means that the only month of the year that is not in a wildfire season is May. Wildfires don’t care about seasons anymore though, as there were two that began in May this year, The Nees fire in Merced, and the Patterson fire in Riverside). 
   As of November 11th, the wildfires in 2018 recorded the largest amount of burned acreage in a fire season, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) and the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC).       
   The fires have caused more than $2.975 billion American dollars in damages, including $1.366 billion in fire suppression costs. Through the end of August, Cal Fire alone spent $432 million on operations.
   The Mendocino Complex Fire alone burned more than 459,000 acres, becoming the largest complex (consisting of two or more different fires) fire in the state's history, with the complex's Ranch Fire surpassing last December’s Thomas Fire and the Santiago Canyon Fire of 1889 to become California's single-largest recorded wildfire.
   Ryan Zinke, the interior secretary, said that he hoped new legislation would allow for the “thinning” of forests to help prevent wildfires. He said he was confident Congress would soon pass a new farm bill that would remove environmental reviews for the removal of trees and brush, as well as the building of roads through federal forests.
   In other words Zinke is using the fires to boost the logging industry. This is a glaring example of what Naomi Klein would dub “Disaster Capitalism,” using a disaster, or shock (“The Shock Doctrine”) to push through a certain agenda.
   Look forward to to this type of maneuver becoming more prevalent as the deleterious effects of climate change make themselves more apparent.
   Number 1, those who are climate deniers, who are actively participating in ignoring or hindering efforts to curb global warming will never take responsibility for their actions, so they’ll blame everything on Obama, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore. Number 2, they’ll try to figure out a way to make money off of rising sea levels, spreading diseases, and heat waves (a surge in the sale of air conditioners?).  
   On August 4th, a national disaster was declared in Northern California, due to massive wildfires burning there.
   Of course the United States is not the only country susceptible to wildfires. Currently Queensland in eastern Australia is in flames.
   Why?
   Why so much fire? Why are there so many? Why are they so large and destructive?
   Well, there was a lot of fuel out there to burn. There was a record 129 million dead trees in California at the beginning of the year. That’s a lot of wood available for combustion.
   Climate change is certainly a factor. Stanford Earth System Science Professor Noah Diffenbaugh stated that atmospheric conditions for California wildfires are expected to worsen in the future because of the effects of climate change in California and that "what we're seeing over the last few years in terms of the wildfire season in California is very consistent with the historical trends in terms of increasing temperatures, increasing dryness, and increasing wildfire risk." Other experts agreed, saying that global warming is to blame for these extreme weather conditions. Global warming led to higher temperatures and less rain, creating a drier landscape that gave fires more fuel to burn longer and stronger.
   Climate Change. That not only affects wildfires here in California, but a host of other things as well.
   Droughts will continue and intensify as the ambient temperature increases, or even stays the same. Currently 93.91 of California is in a severe drought or worse. 86.99% of Nevada, 68.48% of Oregon, 34.38 % of Utah, 29.26% Arizona, 26.19 Idaho, 23.76% Washington State, 11.95% New Mexico (according to the good folks at The Weather Channel).
   So what, you may declare. Well, what’s the definition of drought? Wikipedia tells us: “A drought is a natural disaster of below-average precipitation in a given region, resulting in prolonged shortages in the water supply, whether atmospheric, surface water or ground water. A drought can last for months or years, or may be declared after as few as 15 days. It can have a substantial impact on the ecosystem and agriculture of the affected region and harm to the local economy. Annual dry seasons in the tropics significantly increase the chances of a drought developing and subsequent bush fires. Periods of heat can significantly worsen drought conditions by hastening evaporation of water vapour... Prolonged droughts have caused mass migrations and humanitarian crisis’. Most arid ecosystems have inherently low productivity.”
   Bernie Sanders quite rightly considers drought and drought conditions to be a major, maybe the major cause for all the strife in the Middle East we’re currently seeing, and have seen in the past.
   We’ve discussed drought at length before here and here. We've discussed the Dustbowl as well, which stands as the greatest period of drought in the United States.
   Longer and hotter heat waves (periods of abnormally hot weather lasting days to weeks) everywhere are projected to become more intense, and cold waves less intense everywhere. Summer temperatures are projected to continue rising, and a reduction of soil moisture, which exacerbates heat waves, is projected for much of the western and central U.S. in summer. By the end of this century, what have been once-in-20-year extreme heat days (one-day events) are projected to occur every two or three years over most of the nation.
   The proportion of Earth's population that's vulnerable to heat-related death and disease continues to grow both in the United States and around the world because of human-caused climate change, according to a report released this week.
   "Climate change is a medical emergency," said report co-author Renee Salas, a doctor of emergency medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. She said, "It is truly harming the health of Americans, and especially the most vulnerable ... Children, the elderly, minorities, and the poor."
    Just last year, approximately 157 million vulnerable people were exposed to heat waves globally. That's 18 million more than in 2016.
   Heat waves are also a precursor to wildfires.
   We’ve had some pretty strong hurricanes lately. Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico in September of 2017. Officials there now say 2,975 people died following its passing. 2,975 American citizens. 
   Total damage done by Maria is said to have cost between $45 to $95 billion, making it the third-costliest tropical cyclone on record, and certainly the costliest in Puerto Rican history.
   Hurricane Florence was a powerful and long-lived Cape Verde hurricane that caused severe damage in the Carolinas last September, primarily as a result of freshwater flooding. Florence dropped a maximum total of 35.93 inches of rain in Elizabethtown, North Carolina, becoming the wettest tropical cyclone recorded in the Carolinas, and also the eighth-wettest overall in the contiguous United States. 55 people died either directly or indirectly due to Florence.  3.4 million chickens and turkeys and 5,500 hogs died in flooded farms. Dozens of farms remained isolated with animals unable to be fed. Piles of manure stored at these farms were swept into overflowing  rivers, about a dozen pits holding animal waste were damaged by the flooding and debris and guess where that waste went. Property damage and economic losses in North and South Carolina reached at least $17.9 billion American dollars, with estimated insured losses ranging between $4.8–5 billion. One estimate for North Carolina is nearly $17 billion, more than the damage from Hurricane Matthew and Hurricane Floyd in that state combined.
   The intensity, frequency and duration of North Atlantic hurricanes, as well as the frequency of the strongest (Category 4 and 5) hurricanes, have all increased since the early 1980s.
   Unchecked global warming will insure hurricanes will become stronger and more intense, and possibly more frequent.
   Despite North Carolina passing a law making it illegal to make policies based on forecasts of rising sea levels in 2012, climate change and global warming will insure that water that is locked up in various forms of ice (Artic Ocean, Antarctica, Greenland, etc. The Arctic Ocean is expected to become essentially ice free in summer before mid-century) will melt into the the world’s oceans and sea levels will rise because of it. 
   At least since 1880, the average global sea level has been rising with about a 7.1 inch rise from 1897 to 1997. More precise satellite based data show about a 3.0 inch accelerating rise in sea level from 1993 to 2017. This is due mostly to global warming originating from human activity, and which is driving the thermal expansion of seawater while melting land-based ice sheets and glaciers.
   In the next several decades, storm surges and high tides could combine with sea level rise and land subsidence to further increase flooding in many regions. Sea level rise will continue past 2100 because the oceans take a very long time to respond to warmer conditions at the Earth’s surface. Ocean waters will therefore continue to warm and sea level will continue to rise for many centuries at rates equal to or higher than those of the current century.   
      Globally tens of millions of people will be displaced in the last half of the century if greenhouse gases are not reduced drastically. Many coastal areas have large populations, which will result in more people at risk from sea level rise. The rising seas pose both a direct risk: unprotected homes can be flooded, and indirect threats of higher storm surges, tsunamis and king tides. Asia has the largest population at risk from rising sea levels with countries like Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam having very densely populated coastal areas.
   Ten per cent of the world's population live in coastal areas that are less than 33 feet above sea level. Two thirds of the world's cities with over five million people are located in these low-lying coastal areas. Future sea level rise could lead to potentially catastrophic difficulties for shore-based communities in the next centuries, including North Carolina.
   For example, many major cities such as Venice, London, New Orleans, and New York City already need storm-surge defenses, and will need more if the sea level rises; they also face issues such as subsidence, which is just vertically sinking ground.
   Scientists predict that as sea levels rise, thousands of islands will be afflicted by frequent flooding, lack of freshwater and damage to infrastructure. The research, published in the journal Science Advances, looked specifically at a case study from the Marshall Islands – a country already feeling the harmful effects of climate change. However, the authors warned that their findings also apply to islands all over the world including the Maldives, Seychelles and parts of Hawaii – meaning hundreds of thousands of people could be driven from their homes.
   Another study found that at least eight islands in the Pacific Ocean have already disappeared due to rising sea levels.
   Miami has been listed as "the number-one most vulnerable city worldwide" in terms of potential damage to property from storm-related flooding and sea-level rise.
   Another dire aspect of global warming is the acidification of the planet’s oceans, which is an  ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth's oceans, caused by the uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. An estimated 30–40% of the carbon dioxide from human activity released into the atmosphere dissolves into the planet’s oceans, rivers and lakes. Normally seawater is slightly basic (meaning pH > 7), and ocean acidification involves a shift towards pH-neutral conditions rather than a transition to acidic conditions (pH < 7).
   Some of this CO2 reacts with the water to form carbonic acid. Some of the carbonic acid dissociates into a bicarbonate ion and a hydrogen ion (an ion is an atom or molecule with a net electric charge due to the loss or gain of one or more electrons), thus increasing ocean acidity. Between 1751 and 1996, surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.25 to 8.14, indicating an increase of almost 30% in H+ ion concentration in the world's oceans.
    So what, you say again. What has this got to do with me?
   Good question. Let’s see. Ongoing acidification of the oceans may threaten future food chains linked with the oceans. Acidification and the general warming of ocean water causes coral bleaching. With more carbonate ions bonding with hydrogen ions, less carbonate ions are available for coral reefs (Corals are marine invertebrates within the class Anthozoa of the phylum Cnidaria. They typically live in compact colonies of many identical individual polyps. Corals species include the important reef builders that inhabit tropical oceans and secrete calcium carbonate to form a hard skeleton). When water is too warm, corals will expel the algae living in their tissues causing the coral to turn completely white. This is called coral bleaching. When a coral bleaches, it is not dead. Corals can survive a bleaching event, but they are under more stress and are subject to mortality.
   So what, you say! I don’t need no stinking coral reefs!
   Beyond a certain apathetic and callous attitude apparent in the question itself, you may indeed need coral and the reefs they make.
   Coral reefs are important for many different reasons aside from containing some of the most diverse ecosystems on the planet. They protect coastlines from the damaging effects of wave action and tropical storms and provide habitats and shelter for many marine organisms. An estimated one billion people have some dependence on coral reefs for food and income from fishing. If properly managed, reefs can yield around 15 tons of fish and other seafood per square kilometer each year.
   Also the impacts of acidification will extend up the food chain to affect economic activities such as fisheries, aquaculture and tourism. This of course will and does affect the economy, which in turn may affect you, you heartless bastard.
   Deforestation, the removal of a forest or stands of trees where the land is thereafter converted to a non-forest use (examples of deforestation include conversion of forestland to farms, ranches, or urban use), is occurring at breakneck speeds.
   I don’t need no stinking forests!
   Now wait a second. We do need forests.
    About 31 percent of Earth's land surface is covered by forests. Deforestation itself contributes to global warming, and is often cited as one of the major causes of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Tropical deforestation is responsible for approximately 20% of world greenhouse gas emissions.  Why?  Deforestation causes carbon dioxide to linger in the atmosphere. As carbon dioxide accrues, it produces a layer in the atmosphere that traps radiation from the sun. The radiation converts to heat which causes global warming, which is better known as the greenhouse effect. Plants remove carbon in the form of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during the process of photosynthesis, but release some carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere during normal respiration. Only when actively growing can a tree or forest remove carbon, by storing it in plant tissues. Both the decay and burning of wood (which occurs during deforestation) releases much of this stored carbon right back into the atmosphere.
   So here’s another example of humanity screwing itself for short-term economic gain.
   In Brazil, where 60% of the Amazon rainforest lives, between August of 2017 and July of 2018, 7,900sq kms (3,050 sq miles) were deforested, according to preliminary figures from the environment ministry based on satellite monitoring – a 13.7% rise from the previous year and the biggest area of forest cleared since 2008. The area is equivalent to 987,000 football fields. 
   Climate change itself can result in deforestation. One computer model of future climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions shows that the Amazon rainforest could become unsustainable under conditions of severely reduced rainfall and increased temperatures, leading to an almost complete loss of rainforest cover in the basin by 2100.
   The situation in Brazil looks like it will only get worse with the election of right-wing madman, Jair Bolsonaro, who will become President on the first of January, 2019.
   "Bolsonaro is a powerful supporter of agribusiness...and is likely to favor profits over preservation. ... Bolsonaro has chafed at foreign pressure to safeguard [the Amazon rainforest], and he served notice to international nonprofit groups such as the World Wildlife Fund that he will not tolerate their agendas in Brazil. He has also come out strongly against lands reserved for indigenous tribes. Bolsonaro advisers additionally say that he plans to expand nuclear and hydroelectric power into the Amazon."   
   If there were ever a good reason for the United States to invade another country, Brazil would be it, to save the rainforest for the sake of humanity.
   If all that wasn’t enough changes in temperatures, rainfall, and humidity levels allow vectors like mosquitoes, ticks, rodents, and bats to multiply or migrate to new areas to survive, bringing infectious diseases along with them. Climate change isn’t the only villain associated with changing disease vectors. They are also being displaced as a result of deforestation, urbanization, and the demands of economic development. It is believed that deforestation in Guinea is partly responsible for the Ebola outbreak, forcing the most likely vector of the disease – fruit bats – to come into closer contact with us humans. As floods and more frequent rainfall are on the rise, diarrheal diseases and Leptospirosis are a serious threat, especially in areas with poor sanitation.
   We’re already seeing the Appearance of Chikungunya in the Caribbean, locally acquired Dengue in southern Florida, southern France, Italy, Portugal, and Japan, West Nile Virus spreading across North America and Europe, Malaria being transmitted at higher altitudes, Lyme Disease spreading further north into Canada, Japanese Encephalitis outbreaks intensifying in northern India (all of these diseases are viral and spread by mosquitos except Malaria which is caused by parasites, and Lyme Disease which is carried by ticks).
   Earthquakes. Earthquakes are not affected by global warming or climate change whatsoever. The ubiquitous rumors that a warmer climate cause tectonic plates to become more slippery are completely false and without merit.
   Earthquakes aside, climate change is a big and serious deal. Like an oncoming train ignoring it won’t make it go away and the longer you wait to do something about it the problem gets decidedly worse.
   What’s the Trump Administration going to do about climate change?
   Not a fucking thing.
   As a matter of fact they’re doing pretty much everything they can to exacerbate the problem. Trump pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement, and then claimed that it wouldn’t do any good to limit CO2 emissions if the rest of the world didn’t follow suit, a problem the Paris Agreement was specifically designed to mitigate!
   The Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4) 2017/2018 is a 1,656 page two-part congressionally mandated report by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) —the first of its kind by the Trump administration, who unsuccessfully tried to bury it by releasing it on  November 23rd, the day after the Thanksgiving holiday when most Americans were fat, bloated, and lethargic from eating too much turkey and yams. What those who released it didn’t realize was that there wasn’t any other news being made that day, the conclusions the report made were serious and dire, and a lot of people were really interested in its findings, like national news organizations, which made a very big deal about reporting it.
   The report as stated is mandated by the federal government, the very same federal government that Trump is nominally the head of. It is to be submitted to Congress every four years, is mandated by law through the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The report, which took two years to complete, is the fourth in a series of National Climate Assessments (NCA) which included NCA1 (2000), NCA2 (2009), and NCA3 (2014), way before Trump became President (and considered about as seriously as Trump is considering this one). 
     Volume 1 of this report was released in October of last year and titled "Climate Science Special Report" (CSSR). In the CSSR, researchers reported that "it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence."
   There you go! Human caused. Anthropogenic. It’s our fault. We’ve been dumping greenhouse gases and pollutants into our atmosphere at an alarming rate since the beginning of the industrial revolution (a technical advance that began in Britain in the 18th century and from there spread to other parts of the world. Although used earlier by French writers, the term Industrial Revolution was first popularized by the English economic historian Arnold Toynbee (1852–83) to describe Britain's economic development from 1760 to 1840).
   A lot of people make the argument that if global warming and climate change are not caused by humans, that its a natural process, then we don’t need to do anything about it, that it will self-correct somehow, and that’s just the way it is. I say bullshit! And I say that proudly. Even if global warming were not anthropogenic we would still be dealing with a warming planet and all that ensues. We’d have to deal with deforestation, drought, ocean acidification, rising sea levels anyway.
   In other words it doesn’t matter what causes global warming. It’s a problem that needs to be addressed.
   A little history. President George H.W. Bush (the relatively good Bush, who passed away today at the age of 94) signed the Global Change Research Act of 1990 104 Stat. 3096 into law on November 16th, 1990, which established the United States Global Change Research Program with a mandate to understand and respond to global change, including the cumulative effects of human activities and natural processes on the environment, to promote discussions toward international protocols in global change research, and for other purposes.
   Although the National Climate Assessment was mandated to release a report every four years, there have only been four reports since the 1990 Act was enacted, so we’re missing three. I don’t know why (the Trump administration  disbanded a 15-member Advisory Committee for the Sustained National Climate Assessment last year. The advisory panel, made of up of academics and local officials, is supposed to help translate the analysis provided by the assessment into concrete proposals and guidance for local authorities, and you know, who needs that).
   In the preparation of the NCA4, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), one of thirteen federal agencies comprising the USGCRP team, was the "administrative lead agency," responsible for the report.
   The other agencies include the Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services,  Department of the Interior, Department of State, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, the Smithsonian Institution, and the United States Agency for International Development. The  report was produced with the assistance of 1,000 people, including 300 leading scientists, roughly half from outside the government.
   The media is making a big deal out of this report, but it merely "warns, repeatedly and directly, that climate change could soon imperil the American way of life, transforming every region of the country, imposing frustrating costs on the economy, and harming the health of virtually every citizen." -Robinson Meyer of The Atlantic.
   The report goes on to say that without more significant mitigation efforts, there will be substantial damages on the U.S. economy, human health, and the environment. Under scenarios with high emissions and limited or no adaptation, annual losses in some sectors are estimated to grow to hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century.
   The report cited a 2017 study, published in the journal Science, that estimated the economic damage to the U.S. economy in relation to increases in the global mean surface temperature.
   The report said that across the United States damages are "intensifying". It analyzed the "effects of climate change by U.S. region," emphasized that "poor and marginalized communities" will be the most negatively "impacted by the intensifying storms and weather patterns caused by global warming."
   "While Americans are responding in ways that can bolster resilience and improve livelihoods, neither global efforts to mitigate the causes of climate change nor regional efforts to adapt to the impacts currently approach the scales needed to avoid substantial damages to the U.S. economy, environment, and human health and well-being over the coming decades."  
   The report indicates that the global climate will continue to change rapidly compared to the pace of the natural variations in climate that have occurred throughout Earth’s history. Trends in globally averaged temperature, sea level rise, upper-ocean heat content, land-based ice melt, arctic sea ice, depth of seasonal permafrost thaw, and other climate variables provide consistent evidence of a warming planet. These observed trends are robust and have been confirmed by multiple independent research groups around the world.
   The frequency and intensity of extreme heat and heavy precipitation events are increasing in most continental regions of the world. These trends are consistent with expected physical responses to a warming climate. Climate model studies are also consistent with these trends, although models tend to underestimate the observed trends, especially for the increase in extreme precipitation events. The frequency and intensity of extreme high temperature events are virtually certain to increase in the future as global temperature increases. Extreme precipitation events, like hurricanes, will very likely continue to increase in frequency and intensity throughout most of the world. Observed and projected trends for some other types of extreme events, such as floods, droughts, and severe storms, have more variable regional characteristics.  
    Annual average temperature over the contiguous United States has increased by 1.2°F (0.7°C) for the period 1986–2016 relative to 1901–1960 and by 1.8°F (1.0°C) based on a linear regression for the period 1895–2016. Surface and satellite data are consistent in their depiction of rapid warming since 1979. Paleo-temperature evidence (older or ancient, especially relating to the geological past) shows that recent decades are the warmest of the past 1,500 years.
   There have been marked changes in temperature extremes across the contiguous United States. The frequency of cold waves has decreased since the early 1900s, and the frequency of heat waves has increased since the mid-1960s. The Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the peak period for extreme heat. The number of high temperature records set in the past two decades far exceeds the number of low temperature records.
   Annual average temperature over the contiguous United States is projected to rise. Increases of about 2.5°F (1.4°C) are projected for the period 2021–2050 relative to 1976–2005 in all RCP scenarios, implying recent record-setting years may be “common” in the next few decades. Much larger rises are projected by late century (2071–2100): 2.8°–7.3°F (1.6°–4.1°C) in a lower scenario (RCP4.5) and 5.8°–11.9°F (3.2°–6.6°C) in the higher scenario (RCP8.5).
   Annual precipitation has decreased in much of the West, Southwest, and Southeast and increased in most of the Northern and Southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast. A national average increase of 4% in annual precipitation since 1901 mostly a result of large increases in the fall season.
   Heavy precipitation events in most parts of the United States have increased in both intensity and frequency since 1901. There are important regional differences in trends, with the largest increases occurring in the northeastern United States. In particular, organized clusters of thunderstorms, the main mechanism for warm season precipitation in the central part of the United States, have increased in occurrence and precipitation amounts since 1979.
   The frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation events are projected to continue to increase over the 21st century. Thunderstorms in the central United States are expected to continue to increase in number and intensity in the future. There are, however, important regional and seasonal differences in projected changes in total precipitation: the northern United States, including Alaska, is projected to receive more precipitation in the winter and spring, and parts of the southwestern United States are projected to receive less precipitation in the winter and spring.
   Recent droughts and associated heat waves have reached record intensity in some regions of the United States; however, by geographical scale and duration, the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the benchmark drought and extreme heat event in the historical record. While by some measures drought has decreased over much of the continental United States in association with long-term increases in precipitation, neither the precipitation increases nor inferred drought decreases have been confidently attributed to anthropogenic forcing.
   Substantial reductions in western U.S. winter and spring snowpack are projected as the climate warms. Earlier spring melt and reduced snow water equivalents have been formally attributed to human-induced warming and will very likely be exacerbated as the climate continues to warm. Under higher scenarios, and assuming no change to current water resources management, chronic, long-duration hydrological drought is increasingly possible by the end of this century.
   Human activities have contributed substantially to observed ocean–atmosphere variability in the Atlantic Ocean, and these changes have contributed to the observed upward trend in North Atlantic hurricane activity since the 1970s.
   Both theory and numerical modeling simulations generally indicate an increase in tropical cyclone (TC) intensity in a warmer world, and the models generally show an increase in the number of very intense TCs. For Atlantic and eastern North Pacific hurricanes and western North Pacific typhoons, increases are projected in precipitation rates and intensity. The frequency of the most intense of these storms is projected to increase in the Atlantic and western North Pacific  and in the eastern North Pacific.
  Tornado activity in the United States has become more variable, particularly over the 2000s, with a decrease in the number of days per year with tornadoes and an increase in the number of tornadoes on these days. Climate models consistently project environmental changes that would putatively support an increase in the frequency and intensity of severe thunderstorms (a category that combines tornadoes, hail, and winds), especially over regions that are currently prone to these hazards.
   Global mean sea level (GMSL) has risen by about 7–8 inches (about 16–21 cm) since 1900, with about 3 of those inches (about 7 cm) occurring since 1993. Human-caused climate change has made a substantial contribution to GMSL rise since 1900, contributing to a rate of rise that is greater than during any preceding century in at least 2,800 years.
   Relative to the year 2000, GMSL is very likely to rise by 0.3–0.6 feet (9–18 cm) by 2030, 0.5–1.2 feet (15–38 cm) by 2050, and 1.0–4.3 feet (30–130 cm) by 2100. Emerging science regarding Antarctic ice sheet stability suggests that, for high emission scenarios, a GMSL rise exceeding 8 feet (2.4 m) by 2100 is physically possible, although the probability of such an extreme outcome cannot currently be assessed. It is extremely likely that GMSL rise will continue beyond 2100.
   The world’s oceans have absorbed about 93% of the excess heat caused by greenhouse gas warming since the mid-20th century, making them warmer and altering global and regional climate feedbacks. Ocean heat content has increased at all depths since the 1960s and surface waters have warmed by about 1.3° ± 0.1°F (0.7° ± 0.08°C) per century globally since 1900 to 2016. Under a higher scenario, a global increase in average sea surface temperature of 4.9° ± 1.3°F (2.7° ± 0.7°C) by 2100 is projected, with even higher changes in some U.S. coastal regions.
   Reducing net emissions of CO2 is necessary to limit near-term climate change and long-term warming. Other greenhouse gases (for example, methane) and black carbon aerosols exert stronger warming effects than CO2 on a per ton basis, but they do not persist as long in the atmosphere; therefore, mitigation of non-CO2 species contributes substantially to near-term cooling benefits but cannot be relied upon for ultimate stabilization goals.
   Stabilizing global mean temperature to less than 3.6°F (2°C) above preindustrial levels requires substantial reductions in net global CO2 emissions prior to 2040 relative to present-day values and likely requires net emissions to become zero or possibly negative later in the century. After accounting for the temperature effects of non-CO2 species, cumulative global CO2 emissions must stay below about 800 GtC (Gt = gigatonne = 10^9 metric tonnes, which is the mass of one cubic kilometer of water. Instead of Gt, some authors use Pg = petagram = 10^15 grams 1 GtC corresponds to ~3.67 Gt CO2) in order to provide a two-thirds likelihood of preventing 3.6°F (2°C) of warming. Given estimated cumulative emissions since 1870, no more than approximately 230 GtC may be emitted in the future to remain under this temperature threshold. Assuming global emissions are equal to or greater than those consistent with the RCP4.5 scenario, this cumulative carbon threshold would be exceeded in approximately two decades.
   Achieving global greenhouse gas emissions reductions before 2030 consistent with targets and actions announced by governments in the lead up to the 2015 Paris Climate Conference would hold open the possibility of meeting the long-term temperature goal of limiting global warming to 3.6°F (2°C) above preindustrial levels, whereas there would be virtually no chance if net global emissions followed a pathway well above those implied by country announcements. Actions in the announcements are, by themselves, insufficient to meet a 3.6°F (2°C) goal; the likelihood of achieving that goal depends strongly on the magnitude of global emissions reductions after 2030.
   Detailed economic research has estimated that climate change could cause hundreds of billions of dollars in annual damage, as deadly heat waves, coastal flooding, and an increase in extreme weather take their toll, and knock as much as 10 percent off the size of the American economy by the century’s end, more than double the losses of the Great Recession of a decade ago.
   Extreme weather events driven by global warming are “virtually certain to increasingly affect U.S. trade and economy, including import and export prices and businesses with overseas operations and supply chains,” the report concludes.
   Such disasters will temporarily shutter factories both in the United States and abroad, causing price spikes for products from apples to automotive parts, the scientists predicted. So much of the supply chain for American companies is overseas that almost no industry will be immune from the effects of climate change at home or abroad.
   “Rising temperatures, extreme heat, drought, wildfire on rangelands and heavy downpours are expected to increasingly disrupt agricultural productivity in the U.S.,” the report says. “Expect increases in challenges to livestock health, declines in crop yields and quality and changes in extreme events in the United States and abroad.”
   Summery: Climate change, the gradual warming of the planets atmosphere and oceans are causing a lot of bad things for humans right now and will continue to do so, getting worse as the climate and oceans get hotter, unless drastic actions are taken to limit CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions.
   Speaking of our country only for a moment, is there any impetus or drive to drastically limit CO2 emissions within the federal government?
   Some.
   Why only some?
   Probably lobbying and the control the fossil fuel industry has over Congress has a great deal to do with it.
   This has got to change. Furthermore, the fossil fuel industry has to be held responsible for the damage they are causing the planet and the human race (and by extension, the entire animal kingdom). There has to be a stiff penalty, monetarily, since that’s all the industry leaders seem to understand, for dumping these gases into everyone’s atmosphere (and all industrial polluters for that matter). Clean energy technologies need to be fiercely embraced and subsidized if necessary.
   Is there hope?
   Yes, there is! There are members of the Congress who recognize the dangers climate change and global warming pose and are willing to do something about it (unfortunately not our President, who still insists climate change is is some kind of hoax perpetrated by the Chinese (he offers no proof of this of course). Right wing tool, former Senator, Rick Santorum, claims that the 97-98% of scientists who promote climate change is real (the other 2-3% work for the oil industry) are in it for the money (he offers no proof of this of course). What money? From whom? George Soros? Obama? Hillary? Might as well blame it on them as everything else is blamed on them. Trump when asked said the report was “Fine.” Did he believe it? “No.” One has to wonder then why did he request a sea wall in Ireland to protect one of his golf courses from rising ocean  levels? Why I ask you? (his own military, of which he is Commander and Chief, has long taken climate change seriously, both for its potential impacts on troops and infrastructure around the world and for its potential to cause political instability in other countries) Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the official Trump administration’s liar, er... press secretary, has said: “The president is certainly leading on what matters most in this process and that’s on having clean air and clean water,” [tell that to the people of Michigan] Sanders began, before saying that the latest report came to “radical conclusions” that “contradicts long-established trends.” “Regarding climate change, Trump said: “One of the problems that a lot of people like myself, we have very high levels of intelligence but we’re not necessarily such believers.” Putting aside the absurdity of Trump’s boasts about his own intelligence, this claim — like many the president makes — is simply unintelligible. What is he actually saying about climate change? He doesn’t believe it because smart people like him don’t believe it? Climate change denialism is delusional, but at least some of its defenders can string together a coherent argument to defend the view. Trump can’t even manage that.” Washington Post 11-27-18).
   The Canadian sex symbol, activist, and author of “The Shock Doctrine,  the Rise of Disaster Capitalism,”  Naomi Klein, has written “Like so many others, I’ve been energized by the bold moral leadership coming from newly elected members of Congress like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley in the face of the spiraling climate crisis and the outrageous attacks on unarmed migrants at the border. It has me thinking about the crucial difference between leadership that acts and leadership that talks about acting.” (her 4th book, "This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate," discusses the subject of climate change at great length. I highly recommend it... even to small children)
   Even in our current Congress, there are members who seem to be serious about doing something about climate change.
   A bipartisan group of lawmakers are introducing a landmark bill that would charge fossil fuel companies a tax for their carbon dioxide emissions.
    The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, announced by two Republicans and three Democratic members of the House last Tuesday (11-27-18), would charge $15 for each ton of carbon emitted into the air and would increase that fee by $10 every year afterward, in an effort to fight climate change. Other than administrative costs, all of the money would go back to taxpayers.
   Supporters say the bill would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent in 10 years, and 91 percent by 2050. That’s a bigger cut than former President Obama’s Clean Power Plan (which Trump has actively undermined) or the United States’ commitment under the Paris climate agreement (which Trump has rejected).
    Introduced weeks before Congress ends for the year, the legislation is unlikely to get serious House consideration in this session. But with Democrats ready to take control of the House  January 3rd, the bill is poised for potential future consideration and will likely be a major marker of where lawmakers from both parties can agree on tackling climate change.
   That’s welcome good news. Because climate change is not something that might happen in the future. It’s happening now, and we can’t afford to sit back and continue to pay lip service to actually doing something about it. It is said the the old guard democrats that will soon be back in power in the House of Representatives are afraid of the zeal to actually do something to fight global warming which is apparent in their younger and more progressive counterparts who will soon be sharing that power with them. I know a little about how politics work, but democrats like Nancy Pelosi need to take a strong stance, forget political conformity and begin tackling this problem, probably the greatest problem man and womankind has ever faced, not for themselves, not for you or me, but for the future generations whose lives will be affected by the decisions and actions that we take now. For how can we say to them that we knew what the consequences would be if we did nothing about climate change, and continued to do nothing about it because it was politically expedient to do so.
   Let’s not hope but work for the best.

   “The rest of us are listening to the scientists — and to Mother Nature. The impacts of the Climate Crisis are being felt in all regions across our country – extreme weather, heat waves, deeper and longer droughts, crop failures, strengthening wildfires, sea level rise – and they are disproportionately borne by the most vulnerable among us. Mr. President, the majority of Americans are deeply concerned about the climate crisis and demand action. Even as local leaders are responding in the wake of fires and storms, national leaders must summon the will to respond urgently to the dire warnings of this report with bold solutions.” -Al Gore


Addendum: 12-1-18: A Major National Climate Report Came Out. Then the Deniers Got on TV.
Addendum: 12-1-18: Why No US Region is Safe From Climate Change.
Addendum: 12-1-18: Climate Change Response Pits Trump Against US Government
Addendum: 12-1-18: In Mount Everest Region, World's Highest Glaciers Are Vanishing
Addendum: 12-2-18: The EPA's Climate Change Page Is Just Gone Now
Addendum: 12-2-18: Noam Chomsky: The Future of Organized Human Life Is at Risk Thanks to GOP's Climate Change Denial
Addendum: 12-3-18: Global CO2 Rises for the First Time in 4 Years: What’s Going On?
Addendum:12-24-18: Last day in Paradise: The untold story of how a fire swallowed a town
Addendum: 12-31-18: California Attorney General: PG&E Could Face Murder Charges for Role in Deadly Camp Fire
Addendum 1-15-19: California Utility Tied To Devastating Wildfires To File For Bankruptcy
Addendum: 1-29-19: California Wildfires Losses Top $11.4 Billion In Insurance Claims