Slashdot Mirror


Northern Hemisphere Pollution a Cause of '80s Africa Drought

vinces99 writes "Decades of drought in central Africa reached their worst point in the 1980s, causing Lake Chad, a shallow lake used to water crops in neighboring countries, to almost dry out completely. The shrinking lake and prolonged drought were initially blamed on overgrazing and bad agricultural practices. More recently, Lake Chad became an example of global warming. But new University of Washington research shows the drought was caused at least in part by Northern Hemisphere air pollution. Particles from coal-burning factories in the United States and Europe during the 1960s, '70s and '80s cooled the entire Northern Hemisphere, shifting tropical rain bands south. That meant that rains no longer reached the Sahel region, a band that spans the African continent just below the Sahara desert."

6 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Re:It's about consequences ... by Nerdfest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When the changes affect global weather (and other) systems, the can be positive and negative, depending on your location and what period of time your looking at. It's part of why it's so difficult to measure and forecast.

  2. Re:It's about consequences ... by wytcld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally, I don't buy into the global warming camp or anti-climate change camp. ... Given that it is based upon scientific principles, I'm going to have to plead: I'm human, I have limited resources to deal with the problem presented before me, it is based upon a system of knowledge that I find acceptable (i.e. science), so I accept it.

    So if, say, 50% of scientific papers are "intellectually honest," and 97% of scientific papers addressing climate change conclude that anthropogenic factors are the main drivers of variance over the last century or more, then how can you not "buy into the global warming camp"?

    Isn't the whole "anti-climate change camp" devoted to the notion that there is such a thing as major, wide-spread actions without consequences, contrary to your major assertion? Because on the level of global climate, somehow man's actions are perpetually too small to effect it, or a deity will counter any potential harm we do, or the planet will magically turn every potential disadvantage to advantage, or the like?

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  3. Re:Not cooling, global waming! by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry but power won't generate itself and NIMBYs have made damned sure we ain't building any nuclear power plants so what else can you do?

    Even the most generous estimates show that even if we throw trillions we don't have at it with current tech renewables will only provide at most around 30% of the US power needs, and that is IF we don't use any more than we are using now but if you want us to switch to hybrids? Well all that power ain't coming from the electric fairy.

    This is why the USA ain't gonna do shit, its because we CAN'T do shit thanks to the NIMBYs every damned where. the Greenies say "ZOMG coal is soooo bad, stop burning that!" and you say fine, we'll replace them with nuke, then the NIMBYs go "ZOMG 3 mile island you can't build that!" so you go fine, we'll build some dams "ZOMG you'll kill the fishies!" well wind it is "ZOMG you'll kill the birds and ruin the land with noise pollution!" and on and on AND ON, meanwhile in the time it takes to get a single reactor through all the NIMBY shit China will have 25 reactors online so they ain't gonna have to worry when the oil gets scarce, they'll have high speed rail and electric vehicles and they aren't gonna have to be burning coal either.

    Lets face it folks, much as i love this country the Asians are out there getting shit done and all we seem to be producing is lawsuits and whiners! You're not gonna get shit done about global warming here and it won't take a conspiracy, the NIMBYs will make damned sure you ain't building shit here so we have no choice but keep the shit we have going no matter what.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  4. Re:It's about consequences ... by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You've missed it. It's not about religious people being stupid but instead about stupid people trying to make stupidity a virtue in a cut down version of a religion. Recall this is the same bunch that rejects the idea of an educated clergy and saw Jesuits (and well educated Protestant clergy) as their mortal enemy before they started going after scientists.

    Pointing out a flaw in a Christianity Lite franchise that's really all about money and control is not the same as going after everyone with a belief.

    You've read far too much into a simple statement above and managed to argue about something different and attack the team you think I'm cheering for

  5. Re:The real question.. by crutchy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what can we expect from the pollution China is dishing out?

    lots of black pots and kettles

  6. Re:Who's to blame? by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    .Now you'll be getting the world you want, where tinpot dictators can brutalize with utter impunity [...]

    Not that the US is to blame for all evils, but as a short historical reminder...

    During the height of the cold war a vague claim of anti-communism apparently was enough to excuse all kinds of torture and murder.

    --

    Stephan