US seared during hottest year on record by far

Pollution goes off the chart in Beijing, literally.
Tell ya' what. Here's my deal. When all the industrialized cities in China, India and Russia have the same air quality as we do here. When they all comply with the same standards we do in America. When everything, and I mean everything is perfectly equal, then we can talk about moving forward with some further emission controls. Until then, bite me.

BEIJING (AP) — People refused to venture outdoors and buildings disappeared into Beijing's murky skyline on Sunday as the air quality in China's notoriously polluted capital went off the index.

The Beijing Municipal Environmental Monitoring Center said on its website that the density of PM2.5 particulates had surpassed 700 micrograms per cubic meter in many parts of the city. The World Health Organization considers a safe daily level to be 25 micrograms per cubic meter.

PM2.5 are tiny particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in size, or about 1/30th the average width of a human hair. They can penetrate deep into the lungs, so measuring them is considered a more accurate reflection of air quality than other methods.

The Beijing center recommended that children and the elderly stay indoors, and that others avoid outdoor activities.

The U.S. Embassy also publishes data for PM2.5 on Twitter, and interprets the data according to more stringent standards.

In the 24-hour period up to 10 a.m. Sunday, it said 18 of the hourly readings were "beyond index." The highest number was 755, which corresponded to a PM2.5 density of 886 micrograms per cubic meter. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's air quality index goes up to only 500, and the agency advises that anything greater than 300 would trigger a health warning of "emergency conditions," with the entire population likely affected.

While some people vowed to stay indoors with air purifiers turned on, Beijing's streets were still fairly busy Sunday, and there was the familiar sight of heavy traffic on main thoroughfares.

A young couple strolled along hand in hand in the central business district, both with matching white masks strung around their faces. Two Taiwanese tourists wore masks they said they had brought with them because they heard Beijing's pollution was so bad.

"I don't know why there is such heavy haze these past days. It's really quite serious compared with the air quality three days ago," said a 33-year-old lawyer, who would give only his surname, Liu, as he adjusted his own mask. He said he had ventured out only because he needed to go shopping.

Beijing's air started to worsen on Thursday. The Beijing monitoring center has said the pollution is expected to linger until Tuesday.

PM2.5 can result from the burning of fuels in vehicles and power plants.

Weather conditions are a factor in the recent poor air quality, as a lack of wind means pollutants can easily accumulate and fail to dissipate, said Pan Xiao Chuan, a professor at Peking University's public health department.

"Recent pollution doesn't mean there is an increase in the discharge of pollutants," he said.

Experts say they thought the PM2.5 readings were the highest since Beijing started publishing that data early last year. Public pressure forced the publication of the more detailed air quality data, as a growing Chinese middle class is increasingly vocal about the quality of the environment in which it lives. Hourly air quality updates are now available online for more than 70 cities.

Air pollution is a major problem in China due to the country's rapid pace of industrialization, reliance on coal power, explosive growth in car ownership and disregard to environmental laws. It typically gets worse in the winter because of heating needs.

Several other cities, including Tianjin on the coast east of Beijing and southern China's Wuhan city, also reported severe pollution over the last several days.
 
^ Well, what to do about it, if anything, is a separate issue. But the argument about whether it's happening or not needs to be over. We need to move past that silliness. The sooner that the world sees the problem, the sooner something can be done about. But when many people in the most advanced nation in the world are still denying the obvious science, it makes it difficult to move on to the next step. We need to lead, not obstruct. The US is responsible for the bulk of the CO2 excess in the atmosphere.
 
Quote from futurecurrents:

...The US is responsible for the bulk of the CO2 excess in the atmosphere.
Spoken like a true USA hating liberal.
 
Quote from nutmeg:

China emits more CO2 than the US and Canada put together -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/31/world-carbon-dioxide-emissions-country-data-co2

But the US HAS emitted the most so far. More than China, Russia and Germany put together. And our per/capita is at least double most of the world.

But yes, China is a big problem. But we need to at least get on board with the global concerns instead of ignoring them. We could lead by example. China will certainly do nothing if we do nothing.
 
Quote from futurecurrents:

And you are a complete and total idiot to repeat this AGAIN. That even having been shown multiple times the deceptiveness of this statement, you still can't tell the difference between two cherry picked points and a trend is ludicrous. To call you an idiot is an insult to idiots everywhere.

It's really getting ridiculous now. Why don't you just do a self-lobotomy. You'd be better off.


you are a completely ignorant fool.

you even produced the data... there was no warming trend outside the margin of error.

go ahead produce the data again... look at the margin of error...
 
typical leftist bullshit... attack the blogger instead of looking at the data.


tell me where in your pool it says that the scientists say man made CO2 is causing the warming.









Quote from futurecurrents:

Reminder....Watts is a paid denier hack joke meteorologist. So of course he's a favorite of the ignorant denier crowd.




Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[103] no scientific body of national or international standing rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.[10][11]


The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
There is an overwhelming level of scientific consensus on human-caused climate change. Over 95% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that the earth is warming and that human activity is the cause. In spite of this agreement, only about 50% the general public think that scientists have reached a consensus on human-caused climate change. Two sources of the discrepancy are the unbalanced portrayal of the situation in the media, and the Manufactured Doubt Industry.

The Science

When "scientific consensus" is referred to in relation to climate change, it's referring to the following points:

The earth is getting warmer
The warming is mostly due to human activity
If greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continue, the warming will accelerate
The Consensus

Numerous survey studies have been done, and the results are overwhelmingly in favor of scientific consensus that the earth is warming and human activity is the cause. Surveys done by reputable organizations find that around 97% of climate scientists agree with the statements above. The following are results from a few of these surveys, plus a resolution from a very distinguished group of scientists.

Expert Credibility in Climate Change (NAS)

This study compiled a list of 1,372 climate scientists, and then looked at those who are "actively publishing" in the science of climate. They categorized the scientists as either "convinced" or "unconvinced" by the evidence. The results were that 97% of actively publishing climate scientists are convinced by the evidence of anthropogenic climate change. They also found that those scientists that were unconvinced had significantly fewer publications (in any science) than those that were convinced. This suggests that the (vocal) "unconvinced" group actually has done a lot less research. (Read this study in full.)

Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change (AGU)

This study was done in order to address the broader question of public opinion versus scientific opinion. It asked two questions, one about whether temperature is increasing, and one about whether or not human activity is contributing to any change. Here are the results:

Question #1: When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?

About 90% of all the scientists and 97% of the climate scientists said temperatures had risen.
Question #2: Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

About 82% of all the scientists and 97% climate scientists agreed that human activity is a significant contributing factor.
The anonymous poll sought the opinion of the most complete list of earth scientists they could find, contacting more than 10,200 experts at universities and government labs around the world listed in the 2007 edition of the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments. The 2-minute, two-question poll had 3146 responses (30.7% of those polled). Approximately 90% of the scientists who responded were from the U.S., and about 90% held a Ph.D. degree. Of these scientists, 5% were climate scientists who published more than 50% of all their peer-reviewed publications in the past five years on the subject of climate change. The authors noted that the survey included participants with well-documented dissenting opinions on global warming theory. More results from this study, including responses from the general public, are shown below in Figure 1. (Read this study in full.)

EOS_public_scientific_opinion.png


Response distribution to the question, "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?"
 
Back
Top