The ugly truth about Predictions on global warming it’s frightening. Whatever the reason is, mean temperature is rising. Virtually all scientist, believe that humankind is responsible for rising global temperature. It makes a certain amount of sense, we are the only ones making pollution.
The problem is far more serious. While scientists, agree that rising mean temperature is a problem, they have no idea in what way it is a problem.
over the weekend, one of my oldest friends from university visited the farm. He was impressed by the farms, low carbon footprint. It was when I revealed, the carbon footprint had never been the driver, rather efficiency, and the trauma of Covid. Had been the real driver.
my friend and I were having a nice whiskey, actually my favorite, Jamison‘s. An Irish blended whiskey that I’ve loved for almost 30 years. My friend is a data scientist. His job is to look at complex system, and analyze them. And when he says complex system, it means 30 or even 100 variables, in a single system.
The problem we’re predicting the impact in global warming, is that there are millions of variables. Normally that, no one knows the importance of each variable. For example, example, the impact of melting ice caps, is to reduced the salinity of the Arctic ocean. The problem, is that it seems to affect the gulf stream current. However, we don’t know what effect this will have. Of course, the golf stream is the main reason why north in Europe is not under ice and snow, like northern Canada. We can model, the impact of a shift in the currents. But we have no way of knowing how they will change.
That’s the problem. The assumption today, is that the reduced salinity who destruct the current and thereby negatively affect Europe. There is no doubt that the disappearance of this current from northern Europe will impact hundreds of millions. However, the basic issue is that the only way this is true is if we assume that the changes will be negative. And again, it’s an assumption.
his point is valid, the rapid rise in global temperature is a huge problem because of the uncertainty it creates. However, no one knows what the impact will be, because the systems are too complicated. The problem with the pessimistic analysis, is that it’s a bit like crying wolf. At one point, people stop listening.
The tragedy, is that without these doom and gloom scenarios, politicians will do nothing. Since the status quo requires no decision, no action, and no short term political consequences.
As an aside, one of the consequences of Trump‘s trade war, because that’s what it is ! If you have changed, the demand supply equilibrium in the oil sector. The economic, slow down in the US, and in the rest of the world has reduced oil prices, which has reduce the desire of high cost or supply to seek new reserves. The impact, in a short term, is that US drilling has dropped by nearly 30%.
I mentioned this, because it’s a direct example of the complication of understanding the long-term impact in rising global temperatures. To add insult to injury, one or two massive volcanoes, could change the equation in less than a few days. It’s happened in the past, it could happen in the future.
so, scientist have to show doom and gloom outcomes to justify government action in reducing the impact of climate change. So that the politicians, see a real short-term gain, or loss, because of in action. It’s a perverse way of achieving a reasonable goal. However, as my friend said, we have problems analyzing system, with more than 30 variables, earth has millions of variables, and we don’t know what they mean in aggregate.
An interesting conversation.
Comments