Global Warming, Record Arctic Ice Loss Create Deadly ‘New Normal’ With Twenty-Five Billion-Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters In 2 Years

This year brought staggering weather extremes, record loss of Arctic ice and a growing body of scientific analysis linking the two. Those extremes, plus Superstorm Sandy, raised public concern about the immediate threat posed by climate change, providing a palpable debunking of the (mistaken) belief that climate change will impact only future generations or people in faraway lands.

The superstorm — which scientists explained was made far more destructive by manmade climate change – hit the media where it lives and may have been a game changer for many of them, as the Bloomberg Businessweek cover suggests.

Sandy “may have also reset the politics of climate change,” as the UK Guardian noted today (see, for instance, “Michael Bloomberg Endorses Obama, Citing Climate Change As Main Reason“). The official nomination today of climate hawk John Kerry for Secretary of State is a hopeful sign that the president will (finally) raise the salience of this most preventable of existential threats to modern human civilization.

The AP year-end wrap up explained that 2012 should not have been a surprise to anyone who has been listening to climate scientists:

In 2012 many of the warnings scientists have made about global warming went from dry studies in scientific journals to real-life video played before our eyes: Record melting of the ice in the Arctic Ocean. U.S. cities baking at 95 degrees or hotter. Widespread drought. Flooding. Storm surge inundating swaths of New York City.

All of that was predicted years ago by climate scientists and all of that happened in 2012.

Indeed, 2012 showed that the record-smashing weather extremes of 2011 weren’t a fluke, they were a pattern.

America’s heartland lurched from one extreme to the other without stopping at “normal.” Historic flooding in 2011 gave way to devastating drought in 2012.

“The normal has changed, I guess,” said U.S. National Weather Service acting director Laura Furgione. “The normal is extreme.”

Here is how meteorologist and former hurricane hunter Dr. Jeff Masters put it in his 2012 sum up:

It was another year of incredible weather extremes unparalleled in American history during 2012. Eleven billion-dollar weather disasters hit the U.S., a figure exceeded only by the fourteen such disasters during the equally insane weather year of 2011.

Even without including the 2012 disasters, Munich Re, a top reinsurer, found for the first time a “climate-change footprint” in the rapid rise of North American extreme weather catastrophes:

“Climate­-driven changes are already evident over the last few decades for severe thunderstorms, for heavy precipitation and flash flood­ing, for hurricane activity, and for heatwave, drought and wild­-fire dynamics in parts of North America.”

Many top climatologists agree with that assessment. Dr. Kevin Trenberth explained in his must-read 2012 paper “How To Relate Climate Extremes to Climate Change“:

The answer to the oft-asked question of whether an event is caused by climate change is that it is the wrong question. All weather events are affected by climate change because the environment in which they occur is warmer and moister than it used to be….

A growing number of climatologists are warning that we have undergone a “systemic change”:

These are “clearly not freak events,” but “systemic changes,” said climate scientist Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute in Germany. “With all the extremes that, really, every year in the last 10 years have struck different parts of the globe, more and more people absolutely realize that climate change is here and already hitting us.”

A growing body of scientific research links this systemic change to global warming, in particular to loss of Arctic ice far more rapid than any climate model had predicted:

• NOAA Bombshell: Warming-Driven Arctic Ice Loss Is Boosting Chance of Extreme U.S. Weather
• Arctic Warming Favors Extreme, Prolonged Weather Events “Such As Drought, Flooding, Cold Spells And Heat Waves“
• Must-See Video: Has Global Warming Caused A Quantum Jump In Extreme Weather?

Human activity is utterly reshaping the Arctic as this remarkable figure makes clear:

Read more

by Barry Fischer, via Opower’s Outlier Blog

Sometimes energy makes headlines, sometimes it doesn’t.  But it almost always has important implications for the global economy, the environment, and our day-to-day lives.

Here are 10 energy statistics from 2012 that capture some of the most noteworthy trends of the year, and that will shape the energy world in the years to come.

Natural gas, one of the three key fossil fuels in our energy economy (along with coal and petroleum), continues to ascend as a major force.

One prominent example: during the month of April, for the first time ever documented in the US, the amount of electrical generation from natural gas was equal to the amount generated from coal, which has historically been the country’s predominant fuel for power plants. This moment has been on its way for a few years now, as natural gas’ share of electricity generation has been steadily increasing, while coal’s share has been steadily declining (now around 42% on average, down from 52% in 2000).

The fuel’s growing role in the US is tied to the recent boom in gas production from previously untapped shale formations (e.g. in North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas), which as of September 2012 account for 35% of the country’s dry natural gas production (compared to just 2% ten years ago). The plentiful supply of natural gas helped cause the fuel’s price to dip to a ten-year low earlier this year ($2.75 per thousand cubic feet), making it more competitive relative to other energy supply sources, including renewable energy (which now accounts for 13% of US electricity generation, mostly in the form of hydropower).

Smartphone sales volumes in 2012 were huge  – estimated at 717 million retail shipments worldwide (a 45% lift over last year).

But their energy consumption is minuscule.

A study by Opower in September revealed that charging the iPhone 5 costs just $0.41 per year, and charging the Droid Galaxy SIII costs just $0.53.

The collective energy demand of all those phones is nothing to sneeze at, but in the bigger picture, a global increase in smartphone usage is likely to cause lower overall energy consumption…

How so? Many consumers now use their smartphones to do things (e.g. internet, media, games) that they used to do on bigger, energy-hogging devices (e.g. computers, televisions, and game consoles).

A new survey shows that more Americans are taking actions to reduce climate pollution; however, fewer Americans actually believe those actions will do something about climate change.

The survey, conducted by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication, shows an increase in the number of people who take alternative transportation or purchase energy efficient light bulbs compared with 2008. However, even while a majority of respondents still said their individual actions could reduce global warming, that number was down 16 points since 2008.

These results also bear out in individual political action. Even though 70% of respondents said that the world is warming, only 12% said they had contacted an elected official about the subject. Here are some of the top findings from the survey:

• The number of Americans who say they “always” or “often” walk or bike instead of driving is at its highest recorded level (25%) and has risen considerably since March (up 14 points). Americans today are also more likely say they use public transportation or carpool (17%), returning to a level last observed in November 2008 (18%).

• Compact fluorescent light bulbs continue to be adopted by the American consumer, with 57% now reporting that most or all of the light bulbs in their home are CFLs – up from 40% in November 2008.

• Three Americans in ten (32%) say that in the past 12 months they have given business to a company as a reward for their steps to reduce global warming. Nearly a quarter also say that in the past 12 months they have punished companies for opposing steps to reduce global warming by not purchasing their products (24%).

• About one in ten (11%) have contacted a government official about global warming by letter, email, or phone, while 15% have volunteered or donated money to an organization working to reduce global warming.

• Americans who contact a government official about global warming have become much more likely to urge them to take action to reduce it (89%, up 17 percentage points since 2010).

• No matter what their personal beliefs about global warming, many Americans say they have friends who have different views than their own. In fact, more are likely to have friends who disagree than agree with them about global warming.

• Since 2008, Americans have become less likely to say a number of actions taken by themselves and others can reduce global warming.  Americans have become less confident that their individual actions to save energy will reduce their own contribution to global warming (32%, down 16 points since 2010).

The drop in the number of people who say that they can slow climate change with individual action is not that surprising. Since 2008, destructive extreme weather events have increased substantially and messages from science and energy experts have become much more dire. At the same time, press coverage of climate change — including substantive policy discussions and personal actions people are taking — has dropped precipitously since a peak in 2008/2009.