Climate Change - Science topic

I would suggest, if possible study crop diversification over time and the growing share of Horticulture.

Can't hurt ;-) So DO!

Actions make thinks happen not great ideas!

Dear Jack,

just to add to the previous answers, there are various approaches for capacity and resilience in the literature, based on engineering, ecological definitions, static or dynamic measures (including functions of the system's performance, adaptive and withstanding capacity, transformability), recovery-related metrics, hazard-based definitions, and also statistical metrics (e.g. the Hashimoto resilience). So, I'd make a review on such approaches and then try to find which one(s) suits best and is more meaningful for the specific problem you are studying.

Hope this helps,

Angelos

Climate Change and it's implications. If not addressed, life on planet earth may just end. Over population on the other hand is a minor issue.

Dear Lucio Muñoz,

I will also answer your question by referring to the economic crisis indirectly caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic in 2020. When the World Health Organization announced the state of a global epidemic at the beginning of March 2020, i.e. of the pandemic, the reaction of the financial markets was too nervous, too deep, too exaggerated. The behavior of stock exchange investors and the speculation of large financial institutions worked. Some governments fearing that there would be a shortage of beds in hospitals for seriously ill people with Covid-19 introduced lockdowns, which caused serious economic problems in many industries and sectors of the economy. In order for these decisions not to cause protests from the public, the government granted non-returnable subsidies to business entities on the basis of printed money in the public finance system cooperating with the central bank. These actions started an increase in inflation in 2021. Now, when we ask whether lockdowns have been applied to selected sectors of the economy in the context of rapidly developed vaccines and the scale of the severely ill with Covid-19 population and deaths from Covid-19 and comorbidities, different answers are coming up. The difference between the so-called the health crisis caused by the pandemic announced by the WHO and the climate crisis is that the pandemic appeared suddenly and was something new, and the climate crisis is being realized as a long-term, multi-year process. An interesting point is that so far WHO has not lifted the pandemic state, despite the fact that in many countries the pandemic has already been replaced with a state of increased virological risk, the anti-pandemic restriction has been lifted, the number of people seriously ill with Covid-19 has significantly decreased and the government has already recognized other problems as more important, which should be solved systematically and with the use of funds from the public finance system of the state. Such problems are currently double-digit and still growing inflation, and raised interest rates. by central banks and the economy entering a recession, energy crisis, food crisis, climate crisis. However, now referring to your question, I state that what you define as dwarf green markets, i.e. incomplete application of sustainability, pro-environmentalism, pro-climate in economic policy, is a kind of prosthesis of actions that should be implemented as part of a full pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the economy and are not realistically implemented. The reason is resistance in the spheres of business and politics, the lobby of large mining, mining and energy companies, as well as refineries operating in the sector or for the benefit of the dirty combustion energy sector. These sectors are key factors in slowing down the green transformation. Therefore, instead of fully carrying out the pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the classic growth, brown, linear surplus economy into a sustainable, green, zero-emission, zero-growth economy and a circular economy, prostheses of these processes are created, i.e. what you refer to as dwarf green markets. Thus, a short-sighted approach still prevails instead of long-term and strategic planning. Ad hoc measures are still being taken instead of introducing profound changes in the area of ​​pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the economy. The problem is still being swept under the rug instead of solving the problem in a multi-faceted manner and reaching the source of the problem. Contrary to the situation from the 1st wave of the pandemic (spring 2020), we know what to do in terms of the pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the economy, but we still do not fully do it, assuming that it will be done somehow. On the other hand, there is little time for a full pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the economy, thanks to which it would be possible to significantly slow down the global warming process, which has been progressing since the first industrial revolution and accelerating in recent years, and to significantly reduce the scale of the potential negative effects of the climate catastrophe, which may already appear in the current XXI century. In this way, instead of carrying out a complete, thorough (with reaching the source of the problem and taking into account a long-term strategy) pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the economy, prostheses of this process are created and dwarf green markets are created as you have described it. For example, companies and enterprises add to their missions and development strategies the issues of achieving the goals of sustainable development, pro-environmental and pro-climate responsibility of business, although they do not really do much in this matter. They present their new green missions in advertising campaigns with their new product and service offers, because they see that the level of pro-environmental awareness of citizens, i.e. their potential customers, is growing. On the other hand, penalties for introducing toxic waste into the natural environment, for CO2 emissions to the atmosphere, for poisoning the natural environment and increasing the incidence of various diseases occurring in humans and animals, etc., are not always allocated to solving these problems, to increasing the scale activities implemented under the environmental and pro-climate policy. Probably many people still do not realize that it is not much time left.

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear friends, some of you may find some good food for thoughts in this article just published. Here sharing it in good faith.

Sustainability thoughts 139: How can the 2012 road to transition from environmental pollution based traditional economies to the environmentally clean economies that the world never built be pointed out?

climate change > rainfall > groundwater recharge > shallow aquifers

We can only do our best. Covid will be gone soon, wars end and we can try hard to reduce climate change :)

Thanks Marcel Severijnen

You are an original thinker and researcher; I have taken your works on sustainability into account. Astronomy replaced astrology, chemistry replaced alchemy; the same process is currently in the making, with respect to social science: what is now understood as economics (mainly a mathematized derivate of private wealth accumulation and subsequent management practices) will be replaced by a more scientific model of human economic action, cleaned up from ideological wishlists. I do regard the profound study of other authors as a precondition of learning, dear Lucio Muñoz Most of my articles and books, i.e. my own work and views, are on my RG account (e.g.

).

This not research, but rather, personal observation, having earned my MS in Ecology in 1978. Climate change was not even a topic, except in a theotetical sense. There was more emphasis on basic science and less on applied, more conservation, less restoration. There was no GIS. Remember, this was before the advent of the personal computer. To construct and test a systems model, you had to write code to punch cards and get in line to use the mainframe. I don't ever remember hearing the terms: landscape ecology, patchiness, fragmentation, human ecology. Here is an exercize for you. Assemble a glossary of commonly used terms in the field of ecology and find when they first appeared in the literature. I think you will find that a large percentage appeared after 1990.

Dariusz Prokopowicz : Firstly, Coral reefs systems consist of both coldwater/deepsea corals, and tropical coral reefs with associated ecosystems of mangroves, seagrass beds, etc. Hence, anthropogenic causes (including IPCC's position that climate change is mainly due to anthropogenic GHGs emissions) of the deteriorating conditions of these coral reefs can differ. For example, deepsea corals which are NOT zooxanthellae-linked located off New Zealand or off the Nordic margin (off Norway) etc are threatened by oil & gas drillings and activities. The tropical coral reefs and associated ecosystems are damaged, inter alia, by coastal areas development (cities, military bases, unsustainable agriculture/aquaculture, tourism, etc, contributing to actual reefs physical destruction and via pollutants such as plastics, chemicals, fertilizers and sediments runoffs changes etc), Oil & Gas activities, Oil spills, submarine cables laying, military activities, pollutions, shipping activities such as garbage/pollutants dumping, ship-groundings; tourists' activities (e.g. inexperienced tourists/snorkelers/divers accidentally breaking the corals, destructive fishing practices such as bottom trawling and fish-bombing, strong waves during hurricanes, and high sea surface temperature (SST) that can lead to bleachings, etc. (Keep in mind the Great Barrier Reef has recently been reported to recover well).

Hence, the ways to address the coral reefs decline are also diverse, and can be very site-specific.

Instruments and systems for marine biodiversity conservation in the face of global warming can be at various levels e.g. legal :

International level: multilateral environmental agreements, IMO Rules and Procedures, etc, soft laws such as Rio Declaration, etc

Regional level: Regional organizations or IO, Regional Fisheries Management Organizations, etc

National and local level: national laws, municipal or local government laws and town planning, etc

The instruments and systems can be vastly improved with, among others:

Honest co-operation using, inter alia, precautionary, fair and equitable principles, common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), with sufficient funding and technical assistance, technology transfer for the poorer tropical countries to conserve marine biodiversity, respecting indigenous peoples and local communities rights (conservation for the people, with the people), and the special situation of Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) and developing countries most impacted by climate-related sealevel rise, and coastal floodings, etc.

There is no fair sense in making the economically-challenged developing countries (sans adequate funding/tech assistance) to carry out the huge obligations as proposed in the CBD draft Global Biodiversity Framework Target 3 etc currently being negotiated, for resolving global problems such as climate change and associated biodiversity loss that IPCC had stated was due to mainly historic anthropogenic GHGs emissions (by developed countries). Lessons learn from the Aichi Targets failures (also SDG failures) due to lack of sufficient funding and tech assistance should not be repeated.

Hence, one of the ways to improve is to ensure at all MEAs negotiations, Developed Countries shall also shoulder the obligations for global biodiversity conservation, showing honest co-operation for fair and equitable outcomes.

Red socialism a la Karl Marx aimed at the end of pure capitalism(profits/growth the problem destroying society), social equality without freedom, Opium here religion.

Green socialism a la Karl Marx aims at the end of dwarf green captalism(profits/growth the problem destroying nature), environmental equality without freedom, Opium here is green marketwashing and dwarf green market development goals and policies

Your comments are inconsistent with your answer YES

Dear Lucio,

Yes, but unfortunately only in theory at the moment. In order for the socio-economic system built on the model of full green, pro-environmental, pro-climate socialism based on a sustainable, green circular economy to be successful in comparison with (as you call it) dwarf green capitalism, it is necessary to significantly increase the pro-environmental awareness of citizens and significantly increase the scale of creation and implementation of new eco-innovations and green technologies on an industrial scale, thanks to which it will be possible to significantly accelerate the efficient implementation of the process of pro-environmental transformation of the classic growth, brown, linear excess economy into a sustainable, green, zero-emission zero-growth economy and a circular economy, and to build a system of economically profitable, pro-environmental and pro-climate economic ventures.

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Felipe, good day.

Since you are interested in the idea, I am sharing here in good faith some thoughts even though this will move attention away from the relevant question at hand.

The following concepts are relevant directly or indirectly to the question at hand: environmentally dirty markets, environmentally clean markets, environmental pollution reduction markets, environmental externality management based markets, green markets, dwarf green markets, and renewable energy technology gap.

This knowledge allows us/me to frame the road to transition from environmentally dirty economies to environmentally clean economies understanding that there is an environmental externality problem separating them, which needs to be fixed.

As you may know in 2012 the world went the way of managing that externality problem instead of fixing, a situation we have today, which has led to extreme dependency on non-renewable in those countries who avoided the green market paradigm shift in 2012, which in turns led to an increase in value and revenue for those owners of non-renewable energy. Had we gone green markets and had we invested heavily and systematically in closing the renewable energy technology gap, then dependency and the value of non-renewable resources would have gone down while making money through pollution reduction planning, a win-win for the economy and the environment….The pain of deep dependency on non-renewable energy because of green market paradigm shift avoidance and transition from dirty to clean economy avoidance becomes clear when there are disruptions on the supply of non-renewable, including wars or trade disputes or natural disasters, which has negative social, economic and environmental impacts.

As those concepts are not yet well-known, I am working on a series of papers to help spread them, one of those papers on the road to transition from dirty to clean economies is almost done, just the reference part is missing. I will share it as soon as it is published.

Have a nice day

Lucio

Over the past decades, a number of sources of globalization have emerged. One of them is technological progress, which has led to a sharp reduction in transport and communication costs, a significant reduction the costs of processing, storing and using information.

The second source of globalization is trade liberalization and other forms of economic liberalization that have curtailed protectionist policies and made world trade freer. As a result there were tariffs have been substantially reduced, and many other barriers to trade in goods and services have been removed. Other liberalization measures have led to an increase in the movement of capital and other factors of production.

The third source of globalization can be considered a significant expansion of the scope of organizations, which became possible both as a result of technological progress and wider horizons of management on basis of new means of communication. Thus, many companies that previously focused only on local markets have expanded their production and marketing capabilities, reaching the national, multinational, international and even global level.

Globalization brings not only benefits, it is fraught with negative consequences or potential problems, which some of its critics see as a great danger.

One of the main problems is related to the question: who benefits from globalization? In fact, most of the benefits are rich countries or individuals. The unfair distribution of the benefits of globalization gives rise to the threat of conflicts at the regional, national and international levels.

The second problem is related to potential regional or global instability due to the interdependence of national economies at the global level. Local economic fluctuations or crises in one country may have regional or even global implications.

The third set of problems posed by globalization is caused by the fear that control over the economies of individual countries may shift from sovereign governments to other hands, including the most powerful states, multinational or global corporations and international organizations.

Because of this, some see globalization as an attempt to undermine national sovereignty. For this reason, globalization can make national leaders feel helpless before its forces, and the electorate - antipathy towards her. Such sentiments can easily turn into extreme nationalism and xenophobia with calls for protectionism, lead to the growth of extremist political movements, which is potentially fraught with serious conflicts.

The problem generated by globalization - the infringement of national sovereignty and the independence of political leaders - can also be largely resolved on the basis of international cooperation, for example, by a clear delineation of the powers of the parties, i.e. national governments and their leaders, on the one hand, and international organizations and multinational or global corporations, on the other. The very involvement of political leaders in building the necessary institutions to deal with these and other globalization-related issues will help them regain the sense that they are in control of their future and in control of their positions in the world.

Globalized world. In the meantime, unfortunately, the world is moving in the opposite direction, along the path of political and military dictate of a strong

weak, that in the context of globalization of all aspects of the life of the world community, it is fraught with a global confrontation.

The current crisis of the Western economy is not a recession because it is not cyclical and is not limited to 12-16 months. What is happening in the US and Europe today is a structural crisis, a process that began in the fourth quarter of 2021 and will continue for at least five years without interruption. However, the West does not understand the causes and essence of the crisis, because they do not have theories describing it. That is why, according to the economist, the American and European authorities are doing stupid things instead of effective measures to resolve problems.

It was impossible to avoid this crisis, because they went too far. They have expanded private consumption so much that they can no longer keep it. You need to name the main number. There is an indicator in the United States that they do not disclose in public discussion: this is the level of price growth for all industrial goods, not only for final goods entering the wholesale trade, but in general for everything, from raw materials to the final product. For the first time, the rise in prices for manufactured goods exceeded the level of the late 1970s. The previous peak was at the end of 1947. There are 23 with something percent.

The entire system of socio-political management in the West, both in the USA and in Europe, is built through representatives of the middle class, qualified consumers. Today this instrument is being destroyed. Instead of the middle class, new poor people appear, who have a middle-class attitude, but they have no money.

The sanctions pressure on Russia has exacerbated the economic problems of the West. European financiers note that EU politicians are afraid to take responsibility for decisions taken under the slogans of transatlantic solidarity and assistance to Ukraine.

In fact, this whole situation with global confrontation and the breakdown of the dollar system is disastrous for the United States not by economic factors, but by intellectual ones. Roughly speaking, Washington will undoubtedly lose to Moscow only because the US does not even have a concept of a plan to solve the colossal economic problems and save the dollar system.

Intellectual life in the US and Russia goes in opposite directions. The US has nothing left for a long time. There, no one can imagine even a weak positive scenario. The complete absence of any thought, not to mention the concept.

In my opinion, the globalization of markets has a large carbon footprint.

Ultimately it will imbalance the health of grassland ecosystem.

Ultimately there will be less production of grasses due to climate change

Hello, Kousha Hoghoughinia

Thank you for your detailed explanation of the fitQmap function.

In this function, how to set the parameter——“wet.day” for different variables? For precipitation data, the parameter should be "wet.day = TRUE". For other variables, is that "wet.day = FALSE"?

Best regards

Dear Geoff, we have gone off the relevant question here, so this will be my last comment to your outside the question comments….

With respect to your previous comments and the current comments….

You original comments and critic of the working of the traditional market and its negative social and environmental consequences are consistent with my point of view because that means that we have been trying to use a distorted market in environmental terms to address environmental problems, a big inconsistency. However since GDP thinking is part of the distorted traditional market thinking, then unless it is made consistent with the relevant environmental sustainability problem like green GDP produced by green market growth where green producers and green consumers meet at the green market price, then the GDP based on distorted thinking is also distorted….

Before the Brundtland Commission report in 1987 I was thinking about how to correct the distorted traditional market model to transition it from a fully dirty market nature to a fully clean market nature using sustainability thinking, and then the commission formally called for correcting the social and environmental issues associated with the traditional market development model…. Then I realized that since 1776 to 1987 most economists knew or should have known the assumption of environmental and social neutrality assumptions and the assumption of population dynamic neutrality assumptions in the long term were going to lead to over production, over consumption and over population problems, but they remained silent. So I started a one man project to slowly but sure document the short comings of the traditional market models in simple terms and shared ideas on how to go beyond traditional business as usual model as the Brundtland commission asked in terms of red market thinking, green market thinking and sustainability market thinking….. Then came, Kyoto protocol, then came 2012 Rio +20 and the supposed move to green markets, then came the world of dwarf green markets a la environmental externality management and the flipping of traditional perfect market thinking…..And with all those events came paradigm shift knowledge gaps that needed to be closed….

Below I shared some of my articles related to the issues described above with some good food for thoughts on beyond business as usual

Did Adam Smith Miss the Chance to State the Goal and Structure of Sustainability Markets in His Time? If Yes, Which Could Be Some of the Possible Reasons Behind That?

What If Markets Have Always Been Distorted? Would It Then Be a Good Fix to Add Fair Trade Margins to Correct Distorted Agricultural Market Prices?

Complex and Man-made Markets: Are We Currently Approaching Sustainability in a Backward and More Chaotic Way in Terms of Economic Thinking?

Beyond Traditional Market Thinking: What is the Structure of the Perfect Green market?

Sustainability thought 165: How can we show that the overpopulation framework a la ecological overshoot is a subset of the most distorted market price possible framework? What are the main implications of this?

From Traditional Markets to Green Markets: A Look at Markets Under Perfect Green Market Competition

Sustainability thoughts 126: Are environmental externality management based production and consumption bundles inconsistent with green pareto efficiency and with pareto efficiency principles at the same time? If yes, why?

The Flipping of Traditional Economic Thinking: Contrasting the Working of Dwarf Green Market Thinking with that of Green Market Thinking to Highlight Main Differences and Implications

Each country has its peculiarities. For example, extreme heat waves that may cause draught and eventual wild fire, as seen in Morocco and Algeria. In the other hand, torrential rainfall may cause flooding and it's devastating effects; as seen in North Sudan and Chad. The two examples have different health isdues. Therefore, these common effects of Climate Change seen recently in these countries, present different kind of circumstances, in need of different approaches. This implies a lack of one-size-fit-all approach to the challenges, as such, understanding the issues confronting each country, might help the country in curtailing her peculiarities of Climate change effects on health.

They should

We live in a Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous (VUCA) world. And our climate crisis guarantees it will remain a VUCA world for decades. Climate touches everything so it has knock on effects in society, technology, economics and politics, and, obviously, on our ecosystem.

Traditionally, uncertainty has been the enemy of business leaders. How does one forecast and strategize when living in a time when anything can happen? The first step is to change how we perceive uncertainty. What if we embrace it?

“Anything can happen.” What an opportunity! When I state that the future is malleable, I mean there are an infinite number of potential futures… and we can cultivate the one we will experience by the actions we take today...

Nafees Mohammad thank you for your opinion I welcome you here.

About climate issue and solutions you are dismissive.

The Authorities are responsible true.

Water management by digging up is must solution I and many other columnists been shouting out for years.

Let's work on solution together enough of conflicts of opinions. Damages are done much already.

Water issue is; too much and too little, both.

Regards

Fatema Miah

The annual economic-producing value of a square kilometer of intact Amazon forest must be worth at least 2X as much as chopping it down and converting it to something else, like a soybean field, oil palm plantation, or pasture. For example, the USA, China and India could pay to keep the forest intact and produce carbon credits for the Portuguese. Otherwise it is a losing battle because the Portuguese in charge of the natural resource have ZERO economic reasons to keep ANY of it around in the future. The other option is that the Portuguese decide that the entire forest is sacred and you cannot chop down a single tree, even the dead ones, as the Jains of India feel about their Sacred Forests in the Western Ghats. But in the 500 years that the Europeans have lived in the Americas, that religious sensibility has never developed about anything in the Americas. As "Lame Deer the Seeker of Visions" wrote in his book, to the Europeans, everything has a price tag on it. This is speaking as a Native Person myself. You cannot save anything on this planet, if its annual economic-producing value of leaving it alone does not exceed the value of destroying it.

Dear Thomas,

sure, many volcanic eruptions are known from the period you're referring to. Which part of the world are you interested in and why specifically this time window?

As for methodologies of identification and dating: Standard geological techniques from sedimentology, stratigraphy etc. are widely used and are both quite reliable as well as accurate these days. Within the not too distant past, these may be complemented - or even surpassed - by historical (and/or archaeological) records.

Best,

Julius

3 September MMXXII

With panic...

Cordially...

ASJ

Many thanks, Augusto, for compiling this overview - this is very interesting! All the best, Julius

Dear Nicolay, the research focused on how to go to the green economy as first step to transition to the clean economy was done just before and during 2012 rio +20, but then they did not go the way of green markets and the idea of transitioning to the green economy was buried within SDS environmental sustainability goal I think....

That is why I will start sharing my ideas step by step on how it should have been done or may be done in the future of there is time....

All starts with the dirty economy and the two key steps to take to go from dirty to clean eco omies while being financially and environmentally responsible...in the business side and in the consumer side...

I will share those ideas once published...

Unless you have anything to add, let's leave it here...

@ Dariusz, there are many ways to reduce the food crisis. The most important are: to reduce the food waste, improve trade policies, improve existing infrastructure programme, promote diversification, work to defeat the climate change and close the yield gap.

Dear friends, at the end of the context provided on which this question is based and found just below the question it says: "Please share your own views on the question, not third party views"

Understanding these differences between green economics and dwarf green economics can help us to see if the current economic way in which we are approaching environmental issues like climate change is the right one from the perfect green market theory point of view or not, and if not, why not.

Dear Dariusz

I dare to assert that all epigenetic factors may initiate a food crisis (Social interaction, war, disease, financial, created deficiencies etc.) More important is to have strategies to contain an emerging problem so that it will not spread globally. To avoid that we formed the UNO. In the post war era we also created the global market. Unfortunately, this is an economic concept that is based on competition and the winner in competition are those with with power. Now we are witnessing the global economy is dividing and consolidating in blocks. Unfortunately, the blocksformation is permananentl restructured and driven by a few war mongers. For them power is more important than food for the global citizen.

Many people are afraid and believe that we have too many people on the globe. For them war is the preferred mode to assure access to food. They cant imagine that with innovation and new circulatory technologies it is possible to multiply food supply. Food shortage is always a distribution problem. There are many actors around that increase value through shortage. The alternative is entrepreneurial collaboration with advanced technologies to assure a very large diversity of healthy food, enhanced with free global trade via internet. Science has failed to convince taxpayer that with sustainable technologies we will always have enough food for everybody.

In Australia, we have lost around 50-60% of the population of most larger marsupials due to habitat clearing and clearfell forestry. The 2019 drought and mega-bushfires (and some other intensive fires in the previous decade or so) which in part were fuelled by climate change have further reduced populations of many marsupials by around half again. Some 20-25% of some species remain. In the case of the koala I have seen estimates of only 140,000 remaining in the wild. These are all preliminary and longer term data may show some bounce-back or some further declines (as recently record flooding also fueled in part by climate change has also impacted many of the areas impacted by the major drought and unprecedented bushfires.

Drought

There is some evidence that removal of overburden and crustal could lead to increased magma-rise. For example, volcanoes which currently exist under thick ice sheets 'may' be susceptible to this effect. Arguably, ice sheet removal (melting) may lead to an increased incidence of volcanic activity in those areas which are highly volcanically active, and initially exist under significant ice over-burden which is then rapidly removed. I believe there may be research considering this effect at the end of the last Ice Age in Iceland, and an increase in explosive activity (i.e., measured by the frequency of preserved ashes in soil horizons). The problem, as ever, is in the fidelity of the recent Pleistocene - Holocene (i.e., Quaternary and possibly older) geological record which might (or may not) demonstrate this to be a matter worthy of investigation. The difficulty over this type of time scale will be, as ever, disentangling the 'natural' Milanchovich-Croll climate cyclicity from that of any anthropogenically-mediated cause.

Despite a small amount of uncertainty, scientists find climate models of the 21st century to be pretty accurate because they are based on well-founded physical principles of earth system processes. This basis solidifies the confidence of the scientific community that human emissions are changing the climate, which will impact the entire planet.

I will suggest ClearPath. You can check the link below for more details:

Regards,

K

Acidification induced by climate change causes change in water chemistry and increase the load of dissolved heavy metals

The following link is also very useful RG link:

perhaps priority is the profile - also it is difficult to pressurize politicians

It's hard to predict with such sudden changes!!

Chilean example is rather good, where local communities take action to organiza water supply independently

On Climate Modeling: During the last few years, a number of publications have been already devoted to the evaluation of the CIMP6 models, on the basis of historical climate data over different time periods spanning from 1850 to 2014 (Bock et al. 2020, Brunner et al. 2020, Laurent et al. 2021, Cusinato et al. 2021, Ashfaq et al. 2022). Ashfaq et al. (2022) confirm the ability of CMIP6 models (37 ESMs) to robustly represent observed patterns of oceanic and atmospheric modes associated with natural forcing (NAO, ENSO, PDO). Similar results are reported by Cusinato et al. (2021) from 24 CMIP6 models. Bock et al. (2020) show that the CIMP6 models reproduce well the recent increase in temperature. These results appear to be consistent with CIMP6 models evaluation by Laurent et al. (2020) (29 ESMs).

Ashfaq, M., Rastogi, D., Abid, M. A., & Kao, S. C. (2022). Evaluation of CMIP6 GCMs over the CONUS for downscaling studies.

Bock, L., Lauer, A., Schlund, M., Barreiro, M., Bellouin, N., Jones, C., ... & Eyring, V. (2020). Quantifying progress across different CMIP phases with the ESMValTool. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 125(21), e2019JD032321.

Brunner, L., Pendergrass, A. G., Lehner, F., Merrifield, A. L., Lorenz, R., and Knutti, R.: Reduced global warming from CMIP6 projections when weighting models by performance and independence, Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 995–1012, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-995-2020, 2020.

Cusinato, E., Rubino, A., & Zanchettin, D. (2021). Winter Euro‐Atlantic Climate Modes: Future Scenarios From a CMIP6 Multi‐Model Ensemble. Geophysical Research Letters, 48(19), e2021GL094532.

Laurent, A., Fennel, K., Kuhn, A. (2021). An observation-based evaluation and ranking of historical Earth system model simulations in the northwest North Atlantic Ocean. Biogeosciences, 18(5), 1803-1822.

Dear Lucio,

As you have more than once suggested to me that you prefer short answers, so this time I will answer briefly without arguing my reply at length. Well, in my view, if we are looking at the issue globally rather than regionally then, at least from the original premise, the decision to go green in 2012 and other similar such developments are unlikely to block the path of transition from a brown, unsustainable, combustion-based pollution economy to a clean, sustainable, green closed loop economy. However, problems arise when closely synonymous new concepts e.g. in the field of green, sustainable economy are defined and interpreted differently by different interest groups, by different stakeholders. In addition, these different interpretations are usually deliberate as a result of lobbying by certain interest groups operating in the business and/or political spheres, who are not interested in carrying out a pro-environmental transformation of the economy and developing a clean, sustainable, green circular economy.

Greetings,

Dariusz

Thomas Schuermann, I am including the following two references, for your consideration.

Olaka, L. A., Odada, E. O., Trauth, M. H., & Olago, D. O. (2010). The sensitivity of East African rift lakes to climate fluctuations. Journal of Paleolimnology, 44(2), 629-644.

Sommerfeld, A., Prömmel, K., & Cubasch, U. (2016). The East African Rift System and the impact of orographic changes on regional climate and the resulting aridification. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 105(6), 1779-1794. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/51981490/The_East_African_Rift_System_and_the_imp20170301-19093-1viqkkz-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1660569527&Signature=PsRqzVJt5XCLIDQyEbMWLPDPVdg5cs9e23wh49bbHooQt539YxIeqmNgvETV5LVy3cXE3qNfuRLSoT5mt83e0Tcn~jHrnugJCGN~Kp5bSqeeovtl3pu8J0VMHgwRrWOXzD1XXEW6VJ0StdA-98cvfdAh4AQFNcj5sO4x0E0g7hdmatiO2ibvO2WPUvC0oBY34pvcBgtqT42Na7Vx-9ev8RE4xzPi6VrvTDYyErelObqmKmOHwekqkY0YcM~Xzgxr8N5qys-uvjrsfUQvszFOlivkSbRS7J~j3xoMHcf3A0uvZQf87SvsNsHTYF1XYcBtSOnif9ZQoxb-7T46gizRjw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

Can you please refer to the tools and codes used in regridding?

Good day Esteban. Yes, the answer is No…..they are not addressing the root cause of the environmental problems; they are focusing on managing the consequences of having the root cause problem. If going green markets, green economies and green growth was the consensus in 2012 RIO +20, THEN ECONOMICS SHOULD HAVE GONE SINCE THEN FROM TRADITIONAL MICROECONIMICS TO GREEN MACROECONOMICS AND TRADITIONAL MACROECONOMICS SHOULD HAVE GONE GREEN MACROECONOMICS….Making pollution reduction profitable/beneficial for producers, consumers, the economy, and its growth…….That is consistent with perfect green market thinking…

You cannot move beyond business as usual as the WCED 1987 asked Under dwarf green markets if you do not correct the environmental sustainability problem embedded in the pricing mechanism of the traditional market…..Sadly green market paradigm shift avoidance in place since 2012 requires a systematic wave of willful academic blindness….Universities, governments, social, economic, and environmental NGOS, International organizations, think tanks….

---------------

Buen día Esteban. Sí, la respuesta es No…..no están abordando la causa raíz de los problemas ambientales; se están enfocando en manejar las consecuencias de tener el problema de causa raíz. Si ir a mercados verdes, economías verdes y crecimiento verde fue el consenso en 2012 RÍO +20, ENTONCES LA ECONOMÍA DEBERÍA HABER PASADO DESDE ENTONCES DE LA MICROECONOMÍA TRADICIONAL A LA MACROECONOMÍA VERDE Y LA MACROECONOMÍA TRADICIONAL DEBERÍA HABER PASADO A LA MACROECONOMÍA VERDE… Hacer que la reducción de la contaminación sea rentable/beneficiosa para los productores, los consumidores, la economía y su crecimiento… Eso es consistente con el pensamiento perfecto del mercado verde…

No se puede ir más allá de los negocios como de costumbre como la WCED 1987 pidió bajo los mercados verdes de apariencia si no se corrige el problema de sostenibilidad ambiental incrustado en el mecanismo de fijación de precios del mercado tradicional... Lamentablemente, evitar el cambio de paradigma del mercado tradicional al mercado verde vigente desde 2012 requiere una ola sistemática de ceguera académica voluntaria….Universidades, gobiernos, ONG sociales, económicas y ambientales, Organizaciones internacionales, grupo de expertos….

You are not the only one who doubts the existence of global warming. I noticed this after 1998, when there was a short but very statistically significant increase in temperature. It was not caused by the greenhouse effect. Look at charts from the internet.

Hi Wycliffe Tumwesigye here is a script to download data from CMIP6 or CMIP5 using Python that can be useful for you:

"""

! pip install esgf-pyclient==0.3.0

!pip install requests-cache==0.4.1

from pyesgf.search import SearchConnection

import os

import requests_cache

requests_cache.core.CachedSession

#from pyesgf.search import SearchConnection

#import os

#import pandas as pd

import requests

from tqdm import tqdm

import xarray as xr

#import requests_cache

requests_cache.core.CachedSession

lista_modelos= ['ACCESS-CM2','ACCESS-ESM1-5','AWI-CM-1-1-MR','BCC-CSM2-MR',

'CAMS-CSM1-0','CAS-ESM2-0','CMCC-CM2-SR5','CMCC-ESM2','CanESM5',

'EC-Earth3','EC-Earth3-Veg','EC-Earth3-Veg-LR','FGOALS-f3-L',

'GFDL-ESM4','IITM-ESM','INM-CM4-8','INM-CM5-0','IPSL-CM6A-LR',

'KACE-1-0-G','MIROC6','MPI-ESM1-2-HR','MPI-ESM1-2-LR','MRI-ESM2-0',

'NESM3']

conn = SearchConnection('https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/esg-search', distrib=True)

ctx = conn.new_context(project='CMIP6',

experiment_id=['historical'],

realm=['atmos'],

variable='uas',

frequency='mon',

source_type=['AOGCM'],

variant_label='r1i1p1f1',

source_id= lista_modelos

)

ctx.hit_count

ctx.facet_counts['source_id'].keys()

# Obtain urls lists

lista_urls=[]

for i in range(len(ctx.search())):

try:

result = ctx.search()[i]

print(result.dataset_id,'..............ok')

lista_urls.append(result)

except:

pass

print('-------------------------------')

print('Lista finales')

lista_urls

# Download the first model for example

tr=[x for x in lista_urls if lista_modelos[0] in x.dataset_id]

files = tr[0].file_context().search()

lista=[]

for i in range(len(files)):

lista.append(files[i].opendap_url)

print(lista)

ds = xr.open_mfdataset([x for x in lista], chunks={'time': 120}, combine='nested', concat_dim='time')

ds_mei=ds.where((ds.lon>=-90+360) & (ds.lon<=-60+360) &(ds.lat>=6) & (ds.lat<=25),drop=True)

ds_mei=ds_mei.sel(bnds=1)

# Plot example

data = ds_mei.uas[0,:,:]

print(type(data))

data.plot.contourf(levels=35,cmap='jet',add_colorbar=True, x='lon',y='lat');

# Write the netcdf to a route

ds_mei.to_netcdf('uas_'+lista_modelos[0]+'_Historical.nc',format='NETCDF3_64BIT', mode='w')

"""

I hope it helps

Best regards!

Dear Takele Taye Desta,

In order to build a climate-resilient economy, the pro-environmental transformation of the classic brown growth linear economy of excess to a sustainable green zero-carbon growth and closed loop economy must be carried out efficiently and as quickly as possible. Whether the negative effects of the increasingly rapid global warming process can be avoided or reduced to a significant extent depends on the timeframe in which the aforementioned process of pro-environmental transformation of the economy is realised. The key issue is the period of the next few years. On the other hand, if this plan is not realised on a global scale within the current decade, it is unfortunately unlikely that the most negative scenario of developments and effects related to climate change will be avoided. In this negative scenario, before the end of the middle of the 21st century, the critical level of CO2 in the atmosphere may be exceeded, resulting in a significant acceleration of the progressive global warming process and the impossibility of reversing or even stopping it. Therefore, during this decade, mankind should implement as much as possible of the above-mentioned plan to carry out a pro-environmental transformation of the economy. The extent to which we reduce the scale of a future climate catastrophe and protect the climate, but also the biodiversity of natural ecosystems, protect the planet's biosphere, depends on this. The conditions under which future generations of people will live and the possibilities of life on planet Earth in general depend on this. For several decades, climatologists, biologists and ecologists have been reporting on the growing risk and scale of a global climate catastrophe, which, according to the latest results of predictive analyses of long-term climate change, may already occur at the end of this 21st century. However, these numerous warnings have been ignored and disregarded for many years in the world of politics and business. In the last few years, things have started to change a little positively on this issue. The number of articles dealing with the issue of climate change and the key role of human civilisation in this issue has increased. There has been an increase in the number of discussions and debates on this issue presented in various media. However, the scale of pro-environmental transformation of the economy, including the green transformation of energy, is still far too low. The level of pro-environmental state interventionism, pro-environmental awareness of citizens, development of green finance, development of emission-free energy sources, etc. is too low. I am conducting research in this area. I have described the key determinants for the necessary, smooth and rapid implementation of the pro-environmental transformation of the classic growth, brown, linear economy of excess to a sustainable, green, zero-carbon zero-growth and closed-cycle economy in my scientific work. I have described the issues outlined above in articles posted on my profile of this Research Gate portal. I invite you to collaborate with me on this important issue for the future of the planet's biosphere and climate.

Best regards,

Dariusz

Climate change is a reality, but we must found a reference to be sur about the tendency of change. No one can explain which is the next step for climate change.

The statistical test can not respond to a dynamique change.

Dear Lucio,

I too believe that what you have described as the nature of human population dynamics is dependent on the nature of the dynamics of the traditional market structure that serves them. Well, in the short term (months and quarters) it is citizens who adjust their functioning to seasonal changes in the level of production, income, purchases made etc. In the medium term (several to sometimes a dozen years), changes in the rate of economic growth that take place as part of business cycles translate into changes in citizens' income and consumption levels, and this then influences citizens' decisions to start a family and have children. On the other hand, in the longer term (from several years to several decades), the long-term economic processes, the changing sectoral and industry structure of the economy, the significantly changing level of economic development, production, income, etc., translate into significant changes in the living standards of citizens and the prevailing purchasing, housing and living standards. Subsequently, these significant changes in the economic processes taking place, in economic development, including the public products and services offered by the state (education, health care, public utilities, social assistance) and consequently also in the living standards of citizens largely determine the fertility rate, housing standards, the product and service structure of purchases made, the length of the average life expectancy of citizens, possibly also the process of population ageing and other changes in the social structure. Consequently, there are correlations between economic development and structural changes realised in the medium and long term in markets and economic sectors and changes in citizens' living standards, changes in consumption standards, living conditions, economic decisions made, fertility levels, citizens' life expectancy, social processes, etc.

Regards,

Dariusz

Dear Lucio,

In my opinion, the economics of climate change and the economics of a perfect green market are reconcilable, but only in theory. I have described this in my articles. Unfortunately, from theory to reality is a very big gap in this field. For the time being, the process of carrying out a full pro-environmental transformation of the classic growth, brown, linear economy of excess to a sustainable, green, zero-carbon zero-growth and closed loop economy to create a zero-carbon economy, to halt the progressive process of global warming, to halt the over-consumption of natural resources, to halt the increase in environmental pollution is not possible with the current political, economic, financial, social, etc. realities. Therefore, in reality, the economics of climate change and the economics of a perfect green market are incompatible, despite the fact that it has been theoretically described how this can be achieved.

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz

Clinometer to measure height of trees, camera to photograph light entering sub canopy, traps to collect seeds, bags and jars for samples, tape measure to measure DBH, core sampler if doing dendrochronology, pisometer if determining water tables, gps locater, etc. :)

Remove all forest litter (dead branches from lower parts of trees). It provides the "fuel" for the next "wild" fire.

As noted above, camels are not typically bred to produce meat, but certainly produce milk of high value to local communities. That fact that are managed in extensive grazing models, rather than intensively, means that they will inevitably contribute lower GHG emissions. But they are typically held as wealth assets and as a livelihood component, rather than for high productivity output. As such, they are not really comparable to conventional meat or dairy cattle.

Have a look at the following RG link.

Springer has several options