* Tribune…
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report said Monday if human-caused global warming isn’t limited to just another couple tenths of a degree, an Earth now struck regularly by deadly heat, fires, floods and drought in future decades will degrade in 127 ways with some being “potentially irreversible.”
“The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health,” says the major report designed to guide world leaders in their efforts to curb climate change. Delaying cuts in heat-trapping carbon emissions and waiting on adapting to warming’s impacts, it warns, “will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all.”
Today’s children who may still be alive in the year 2100 are going to experience four times more climate extremes than they do now even with only a few more tenths of a degree of warming over today’s heat. But if temperatures increase nearly 2 more degrees Celsius from now (3.4 degrees Fahrenheit) they would feel five times the floods, storms, drought and heat waves, according to the collection of scientists at the IPCC.
* Tribune…
It will only become more difficult — and, in some cases, nearly impossible — to keep up with the costly and deadly effects of climate change without drastic action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
That’s one takeaway from the new United Nations climate report released Monday, which details risks to ecosystems and people across the globe in the face of human-caused climate change — and a warning that also rings true for the Great Lakes region and Illinois. […]
Although some have predicted the Great Lakes region will become a haven for people who flee damage from wildfires, drought and hurricanes elsewhere, the region’s climate is also transforming — with starker changes projected.
A climate assessment for the Great Lakes region detailed challenges including rising temperatures, flooding caused by a growing number of “unusually large” precipitation events and an increase in extreme weather.
In Illinois, the average daily temperature has increased throughout most of the state in the last century by 1 to 2 degrees, a state-specific climate assessment found. Winter warming has been most pronounced.
- ItsMillerTime - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 11:39 am:
This is why I don’t treat people who talk about climate refugees fleeing to Chicago as some economic boon seriously. It’s not and when/if that happens we will be facing so many other challenges that any benefits will be erased. The whole reason we are failing to adequately address the situation is because of a short term obsession with making as much money as possible
- Give Us Barabbas - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 11:44 am:
I’ve noticed in the decades I’ve lived in Springfield that the typical tracks for tornadoes is creeping more North and East over time. Tornadoes used to reliably pass North or South of us here in Springfield, and the heat island effect of Chicago tended to bend tornadoes away from the city center as well. But the added heat energy and moisture in the climate is bending those tornado tracks in new ways, going forwards. I would not be surprised to see more and larger funnels hitting closer to Springfield and Chicago this year and going into the future.
- Lake Villa Township - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 11:50 am:
Illinois is leading the world in combatting climate change with the clean energy and jobs act, other states and countries need to pick up the pace.
- wildcat12 - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:15 pm:
This terrifies me. I have young children. What kind of world are they going to live in when they’re old?
- lake county democrat - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:23 pm:
What makes climate change so frustrating is that both parties live in a fantasy, though the GOP’s is worse. The GOP either denies it or doesn’t consider it a priority. The Democrats ignore that our conservation means nothing unless China is reigned-in far more than under Paris (which they’re already skirting). We don’t need a green new deal, we need a green marshall plan: investment in new battery/grid technology (which the whole world can use) and exponentially more nuclear in the interim as a bridge.
One positive sign may be the Ukraine crisis is highlighting the need to be independent of Russia and other bad actors. Also, there’s a growing bipartisan consensus on nuclear.
- Left of what - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:28 pm:
“address the situation is because of a short term obsession with making as much money as possible”
That’s called capitalism
- TheInvisibleMan - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:31 pm:
== Winter warming has been most pronounced.==
Much of the increase is also happening in a way that isn’t easily noticeable.
The largest impacts here have been in the daily low average temperatures increasing. The low temps for a day usually occur right before sunrise, so not as many people are noticing to the same degree they are able to notice the high temperatures in the early afternoon.
== larger funnels hitting closer to Springfield and Chicago this year and going into the future. ==
The only recorded F5 tornado in August anywhere in the whole country, happened in a chicago suburb in 1990. I remember it quite well, being at home and dead center in the path of it. Being in your basement when your house is being leveled down to the foundation in about 45 seconds, is an interesting life experience.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:32 pm:
So long as we have a GOP majority or large minority in the Senate, we will not get sufficient support to take remedial action. Our children and grandchildren … will pay the price for the selfishness and ignorance of our society.
- G'Kar - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:36 pm:
Similar to what G U Barabas wrote, I live in N. Central Illinois, 30 miles north of Peoria, and I’ve noticed that winter storms seem to be tracking further south. We used to be in the center of winter storms, but now increasingly we are on the northern fringe. I’m not a meteorologist, nor do I play one on TV and this is just an anecdote, but I’ve wondered if GW isn’t causing this.
- Dan Johnson - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:36 pm:
One more reason not to cut the gas tax. (Would also be good to double down on public transit).
Plus the pension systems ought to divest from fossil fuels. Those are stranded assets. Best not to lost a lot of money on them.
- Ok - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:43 pm:
Is saving the gas tax, just to build more roads for more polluting cars, really the angle you are going for?
- 33rd Ward - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:44 pm:
Another warning ignored by us, just like the berg warnings the Titanic ignored. We think we can’t sink, but we can.
I don’t understand why this topic is political. Why don’t both parties care? We only have one world. There’s no God that will help us. We’ve known about this problem for over 100 years.
The price of gas is more important than the lively hood of humanity and mother nature. Quite depressing really. But the saddest part is we could still do something about it. We’re moving from laziness to apathy. And we’re seeing the results as less young folks care today then did 30 years ago.
- Sir Reel - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:53 pm:
But, but it’s a Chinese hoax.
God help us if the Republicans take control of Congress, or worse yet, the Orange one wins in 2024.
- FormerILSIP - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 12:54 pm:
Following up on LCD’s remarks, when France and Germany are making public U-turns on nuclear power, if we want to tackle fossil fuel driven environmental effects, new nuclear plants are the best strategy to provide the increased electrical power needed by folks using more energy in summer/winter. If/when battery capacity/solar-wind generation can be expanded to provide a consistent supply of energy (which will require solving the logistical rare earth component problem somehow), we can figure out how to move on from existing sources. Until then, however, we either have to choose to pollute here or abroad to provide sufficient power to support a decent standard of living, much less the vastly increased demands of a proposed all-electric vehicle fleet.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 1:26 pm:
We couldn’t all get behind basic pandemic survival items like vaccinations. How are we supposed to find agreement to survive the changing climate?
People are going to do their own research and conclude that everything is fine. No need for any kind of change or, God forbid, sacrifice.
I am not hopeful that we’ll rise to this challenge. Not hopeful at all.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 1:30 pm:
That’s me at 1:26pm.
- Left of what - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 1:31 pm:
@formerILSIP
I am not sure I am fully following. You say we need more nuclear plants and then go on to say this
“we can figure out how to move on from existing sources.”
The concensus is that we know how to begin transitioning to primarily clean burning (nuclear) or renewables now. The issue is political in that legislatures are not acting to put caps on emissions and hard dates to decrease reliance on fossil fuels. I’m not sure this was your intent but you seem to go from sating “Yay nuclear” to ending with well we just have to keep polluting.
You
- FormerILSIP - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 1:49 pm:
@Left of what (1:31PM) The physical components of a completely renewable (wind/solar) energy system based on existing technology do not exist in sufficient quantities, as the battery components alone to store sufficient energy to account for nighttime/low wind days are more than what has been documented to exist in the world today. Until the technology exists to provide sufficient capacity/storage, full-renewable energy will not meet existing energy demands.
While it has significant benefits, nuclear power generation, while arguably cleaner (in terms of fossil fuel pollution), does have an environmental cost in nuclear fuel production and spent fuel storage/elimination. These costs have to be taken into account for any power generation strategy.
The issue of power generation is not political, as the physical constraints on “clean” power production dictate a choice between options that all have significant short-long term issues. Personally, I do think that nuclear power is the best of a set of imperfect options (until the energy storage/rare earth component issue is solved) to provide the necessary power to maintain the standard of living to which we are accustomed.
- Mister Ed - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 2:17 pm:
“That’s called capitalism”- Left of what. It is not capitalism if it is subsidized to death and taxpayers pay for it. Socialism for the corporations, not for people or social programs. Sad.
- Left of what - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 2:25 pm:
- Mister Ed - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 2:17 -
How is profit seeking at all costs not the core principle of a capitalist system?
Also, what are you talking about with subsidies? I never mentioned subsidies.
- Occasional Quipper - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 2:34 pm:
If politicians were serious about climate change they would bring back the national 55 mph speed limit. It reduced gas consumption (and our energy dependence), it reduced carbon emissions, and it saved lives. The fact that it’s not even being considered makes me think they’re not really serious since they would rather figure out ways to throw money (that we don’t have) at the problem. Lowering the speed limit would basically be free and the effect would be immediate. So what are they waiting for, if the crisis is real?
- Downstate - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 3:21 pm:
“If politicians were serious about climate change…”
If your Doctor continued to smoke while warning you about it’s dangers, you’d decide your doctor is either lying, or hypocritical.
When glitterati and political leaders lecture on global warming while hopping on private jets, they give the same impression as the doctor above.
Either it’s a serious matter or too insignificant from them to be good examples.
Inconsistent messaging is the biggest problem facing the global warming efforts.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 3:24 pm:
===Inconsistent messaging is the biggest problem facing the global warming efforts===
Only for people like yourself.
- Dotnonymous - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 3:31 pm:
Human caused climate change is as obvious as the Sun and the Moon…and the truth.
- Nobody Sent - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 3:48 pm:
Too bad our leaders lack the courage to say no to moneyed fossil fuel interests to do the right thing. I fear we are doomed.
- Downstate - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 4:06 pm:
Rich,
The Pew organization surveyed Americans on problems that concern them the most. Of items that were considered a “very big problem” or “moderately big problem”, climate change ranked 15th.
There’s a problem with messaging, when Americans think there are 14 other items that are more important.
Don’t shoot the messenger.
- Techie - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 4:10 pm:
The elephant in the room as far as climate change, and numerous other problems, goes is campaign finance. How can we expect members of Congress to pass legislation to reign in fossil fuels, regulate large-scale agriculture, and other climate-related areas when their campaign contributions depend on them avoiding this?
We are in desperate need of a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United precedent so that Congress can regulate campaign finance. Until then, expect more of the same, which is very little. This is simply where we’re at.
- Walt - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 4:34 pm:
Geo-engineering with be a household term soon. Global dimming coupled with a renewed commitment to decarbonization.
- Left of what - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 5:10 pm:
Downstate, “climate change ranked 15th.”
That is not a fair interpeation if that poll. It clearly was worded so that people picked more than one issue. 42% of people think it a major concern. Additionally, issue polling consistently shows the majority of Americans support renewable energy - “even if the cost of utility bills might increase” - actual wording which is often used when asking that question. These two metrics seem to indicate people actually do think this is a big issue and are largely supportive.
- Mister Ed - Wednesday, Mar 2, 22 @ 5:39 am:
“- Left of what - Tuesday, Mar 1, 22 @ 2:25 pm: How is profit seeking at all costs . . .” Because we are human, and the costs are human lives. Geez. Profits over people is not what capitalism is about. There used to be good companies, now it seems it is all, or nothing approach to achieve maximum profit over the planet and people. Accountability and regulation are needed and so is change. Just look at Dupont and what they “knowingly” did to the communities they were in. Again, all for profit.