Slashdot Mirror
Pollution In China Could Be Driving Freak Weather In US
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "Jonathan Kaiman reports at The Guardian that China's air pollution could be intensifying storms over the Pacific Ocean and altering weather patterns in North America leading to more ... warm air in the mid-Pacific moving towards the north pole. 'Mid-latitude storms develop off Asia and they track across the Pacific, coming in to the west coast of the U.S.,' says Ellie Highwood, a climate physicist at the University of Reading. 'The particles in this model are affecting how strong those storms are, how dense the clouds are, and how much rainfall comes out of those storms.' Fossil fuel burning and petrochemical processing in Asia's rapidly developing economies lead to a build-up of aerosols, fine particles suspended in the air. Typically, aerosol formation is thought of as the antithesis to global warming: it cools our Earth's climate. But researchers say, too much of any one thing is never good. 'Aerosols provide seeds for cloud formation. If you provide too many seeds, then you fundamentally change cloud patterns and storm patterns,' says co-author Renyi Zhang. China's leaders are aware of the extent of the problem and will soon revise China's environmental protection law for the first time since 1989 ... 'The provisions on transparency are probably the most positive step forward,' says Alex Wang, expert in Chinese environmental law at UCLA. 'These include the requirement that key polluters disclose real-time pollution data.'"
China? Tempests on the other side of the world?
It's clearly a quantum weather butterfly
Just global warming, caused by everyone, including US producing more CO2 than the plants absorb for the last 160 years.
Simple; tax all goods on the amount of pollution used in their manufacture. Set the level so that it does not effect the U.S.A. (Europe and Japan use less energy anyway) and problem solved. Will have a nice side effect of making it less worth while off-shoring manufacturing to China where it is largely cheaper because they don't have to worry about pollution. So not only is it good for the environment it is good for jobs.
I suspect that this research will quickly be twisted around to a "blame the Chinese!" story in popular media.
- There is no climate change
- Oops, there is.. but it's not us.
- Okay, it's us, but we can't do anything about it.
- Wait, it's The Chinese! Let's force them to clean up their act (and slow the economic growth they're gaining - through the same means we (US/EU) we employed - while we're at it. But that's totally just a side-effect, promise!) See? We CAN do something about it after all! *resumes fracking, burning own coal, and driving soccermomvehicles*
Its easy to blame China for massive pollution, but it's industry is merely trying to satisfy massive demand, mostly western.
They cannot be expected to adopt first world environmental standards that took decades for the west to develop. Also US/Euro companies outsourcing manufacturing, are dodging domestic environmental regulations to save on costs. So here at least, no one to blame but the west.
In a way, this reminds me of the financial crisis when it was brewing. We could blame the property developers for profiteering, the real estate agents for overselling, the banks for over-lending, the regulator its for 'light-touch' approach, the politicians for not legislating appropriately and the central banks for not raising interest rates to cool the whole thing down.
But...
Everyone has a share of the responsibility, everyone has little (but many) choices to make daily.
And just as the financial crisis, everyone will be held accountable with the exception of the elites.
So it is true, if a butterfly flaps its wings in China .... The Butterfly Effect
Well, you clearly refused to RTFA. They used high-fidelity models and derived at the conclusion that an amazing increase in particulate has affected weather patterns by increasing cloud formation. This is not complext like the 3rd order effects of CO2 which cause AGW, this is a first order affect. It's not complex. You apparently are just as irrationally religious about AGW as the deniers are.
And oh by the way, the western world has rigorous particulate limits that continue to be advanced because we're aware of this.
True, however, this is talking about how the pollution in china changing the weather patterns in the Pacific, which in turn changes the weather patterns for the U.S.
I am sure if they looked at the data, they would also find that pollution in the U.S. is changing weather patterns in the Atlantic, which in turn changes the weather patterns in Europe.
The article is not saying that China is to blame for global warming, it is just saying that China is to blame for the intense weather swings. For instance, here in Michigan, on Monday, it was 70 degrees F. On Tuesday, it dropped to 29 F and we got a couple inches of snow. That can be traced back to cold air pushed out of the arctic, to warm air pushed into the arctic from the Pacific, to a storm caused by the pollution in china in the Pacific.
Sounds like the easiest job in the world.
This particular effect is not attributed to global pollution levels, but specifically to the northern Pacific zone. Given the known, prevailing wind patterns, it's pretty clear that China has the greatest impact on this particular area.
Of course, AGW is also a huge part of the overall problem, and the USA is a major contributor (the major contributor per capita), but TFA article is not really about AGW per se, it's about a a regional weather trend which happens to affect a neighboring region, North America.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
1.35 billion farting Chinese people could contribute to global warming.
Wake me up when it's "Proven through scientific method without using experimental models generated by computers with data from humans who do not fully understand Earth's climate system."
herpa derp china defense squad
Especially when it's in reference to the air like substance that surrounds most large Chinese cities.
He tried to kill me with a forklift!
+1
Thank you
Per capita statistics on energy use aren't very useful. Americans are also productive. If your method of measuring efficiency is per capita usage, then places like the favorite Marxist straw man of Somalia (and favorite neocon straw man of North Korea) would rate very highly.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
China has pollution, so it is CLEARLY America's fault.
WTF? IF you care about clean air and planet, do not buy crap made in China.
They have a long history of making things as cheaply as possible.
They have no care for the dangers they produce and that are produces as by products.
See lead in toys, sheet rock with mold etc, etc.
ABC - Anywhere But China.
...and the Democrat Underground have both infested Slashdot.
You want to see economic ignorance incarnate? Just come to Slashdot where a bunch of unemployed college students will vomit back all manner of Marxist, Stalinist, Leninist and Maoists economic theory poured into their giant, empty heads by their professors.
You provided a population-energy ratio. I would love to know what pollution-energy ratio, and a GDP per capita/energy ratio. Do you have a source I can peruse?
I slipped and busted my ass on a patch of ice outside of my apartment this morning.
That's who's to blame!
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Thank goodness for transparency. I mean, we all know how honest and forthcoming Chinese and Chinese-American businesses are. They're just like Western corporations now.
Surely they wouldn't lie, would they?
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
How we put some blame on the fleets of planes deploying chemtrails all at the same time and in a pattern? I see it everytime there is a clear day.
Americans constitute 5% of the worlds population, yet we consume 24% of its energy.
Please stop using this bogus comparison to imply that Americans use more than "their share" of the world's energy. The correct comparison is between inputs and outputs. The USA produces nearly 20% of the world's GDP. If your 24% is correct, we have room for improvements in energy efficiency, but we're not nearly the energy gluttons that you're suggesting. The low ratio of population to energy use is largely due to our high productivity.
It is widely reported in So. Cal. media that 25% of Los Angeles County's smog comes from Asia/China.
Isn't that an oxymoron?
FIlters on coal fired power stations and industrial chimneys, catalysts and DPFs on vehicles and a ban on coal heating in cities. Why China can't manage these simple tasks is anyones guess. Its not like they don't have the money.
A little less things that contribute to pollution. Yes, that is the point isn't it?
Care to explain how a revenue neutral shift in tax base changes who gets government assistance?
You can't just throw out Libertarian delusions of the sky falling without even a rudimentary explanation of your reasoning.
"Americans constitute 5% of the worlds population, yet we consume 24% of its energy."
Why dont you also mention what percentage we are of the worlds energy ~production~?
If we produce more than 24% of the worlds energy, than using 24% is nothing to be ashamed of.
You mean "climate" don't you? Go home Kos troll, you're drunk.
"China's leaders are aware of the extent of the problem and will soon revise China's environmental protection law for the first time since 1989"
Whew! Nice to know they're on top of this now.
"Taxes never go down"
False. The tax rate for those who made a million dollars a year used to be 90%, now it's 33%
Every income brackets federal taxes has dropped. The richer you are the more they dropped.
"The government can't and won't live within it's means."
Nearly all agency in the Federal government live with in their means. The others are usually dictated by citizens or external factors in unexpected ways during a fiscal year. War, 9/11. natural disaster, etc...
.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
No, he means weather. Clouds don't last very long.
The difference between the two "straw men" is that there is only one possible form of no government. Somalia is an example. There are many possible permutations of a socialist/Communist government, of which North Korea is only one. Just because there are two sides to an argument doesn't mean each side is equally wrong/correct, or even that one side is slightly wrong/correct.
You also need to find out, on average, how much pollution is generated per million KWh.
If I use more energy then you do, but it's all solar, then I will emit far less gasses and particulates in to the atmosphere.
That example was only to illustrated my point.
China per capita Energy usage includes a lot of people who have little or no electricity.
China use more coal the any other country, and there coal emission standards are very, very low.
So, the amount of crap the put in the air is substantial, and more the what the US puts in the air.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
We also invent half the shit that's invented every year. Other nations need to be more like us, not the other way around...if concern for the comman man is your standard.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
http://www.eia.gov/
also the IEA(not to be confused with the eia above))
https://www.iea.org/co2highlig...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
That's why climate change is a global thing.
Are people laboring under the belief that this will result in purely localized effects?
There is only one atmosphere, and if you screw it up, it's screwed up everywhere.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Americans constitute 5% of the worlds population, yet we consume 24% of its energy.
Please stop using this bogus comparison to imply that Americans use more than "their share" of the world's energy. The correct comparison is between inputs and outputs. The USA produces nearly 20% of the world's GDP. If your 24% is correct, we have room for improvements in energy efficiency, but we're not nearly the energy gluttons that you're suggesting. The low ratio of population to energy use is largely due to our high productivity.
Maybe so ( I'm doubtful. Given my experiences in interactions with US companies, efficiency isn't the word that jumps to the front...), but how much of your GDP is 'real things' and how much is overvalued ones and zeroes (ie IP) and 'services', which really doesn't require very much energy to produce?
"Americans constitute 5% of the worlds population, yet we consume 24% of its energy."
Why dont you also mention what percentage we are of the worlds energy ~production~?
If we produce more than 24% of the worlds energy, than using 24% is nothing to be ashamed of.
Except that a) most countries cope on rather much less, making it seem rather wasteful, consuming resources and generating pollution and b) the pollution doesn't stay in the US (just like China's doesn't stay in China...
Or DU in the Southern Mediterranean over Europe. Perish the thought. Only (about 45?) gigatons of chemically and heat active dust particles that circle the globe. Everyone knows weather has nothing to do with chemical activity and charged partticles (UV, alpha, beta, gamma, etc.).
Really? So cloud-seeding doesn't work?
Isn't how much the crap we buy now will cost.
Its the eventual destination this type of thinking will bring us. Our bad weather will be used as a justification for war with another nation.
Its just the new version of blaming our problems on foreigners.
made in china.
i'll have to grab some snow on the way to school, see if i can find the label.
Nah, you have a silly climate because your mountain ridges are all wrong..
Anyone else recall a sci-fi short story (I think by Frank Herbert, but maybe not) about a woman who worked at a weather office. Her boss finally died after his practice of deeply inhaling the local polluted air, waiting for clear air from China (one day, it stopped and so did he).
One of the side stories was a character who was a member of the Religion of the Month Club. The tagline was: "How can you be sure African Bantu isn't the True Way!!?"
You may be productive but your houses suck. They are poorly insulated and you waste a lot of energy heating and cooling them. Compare them to German homes that need only a fraction of the energy to maintain a pleasant environment.
The reason for this is that the US hates socialism. Germany mandated that new homes are well insulated and low energy, and provided improvements at little or no cost to existing ones. In the US such things are expensive extras and since energy is extremely cheap most people don't seem to care about them much.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
USA nose gets caught in China mouse trap. It's too curious for own good.
The original IPCC scientific report stated that 70 percent of the climate change emissions were coming from just 10 countries, of which two of the largest were the US and China.
But they removed that, because then those countries might have to actually change their behavior and stop shipping US coal to China.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Um, we also have regulations on efficiency here. Not everyone is going to go so far as to sacrifice quality of life and freedom just to make the greens happy. The USA falls somewhere between you and France, which indeed has wasteful homes.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
We begin bombing in 5 minutes.
But Climate change is so simple, as everyone has said.
But we consume more of world GDP than we produce, hence our trade deficits... so we are gluttons, which passes through to our energy use. (Also, we should probably check the GDP figures for, say, financial `production' vs. producing food, warmth, and Angry Birds.)
One of the real problems with China is that few fully realize how bad of shape they are in. When OCO2 comes out and the numbers are measured for CO2 flows in and out of CHina, the world is in for a shock.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
And yet, that is a joke. China emits more than 1/3 of the CO2 emissions in the world today. America is below 15%. And Europe-OECD is actually ABOVE America. The problem is, that IPCC normalizes in bizarre fashions. The idea that CO2 emissions are compared in a national way is a joke. Germany's emission are climbing fast and yet, total emissions are below America. Many nations in Europe are fairly low, and yet, in terms of CO2 / $GDP, they are monster high.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
U.S is always playing it.
How much of the world food produce do you consume, and what can we conclude from that? Exactly.
You like to buy cheap stuff, right? Don't want to overpay for your product, right? Chinese make stuff, you buy stuff. So what seems to be the problem here?
Yea, where would we be without rounded corners and software patents. THANKS USA!!!
And American regulator.
And out of that 20% of the worlds GDP, how much is manufactured in China?
Also what is so important about GDP. Why do we need so much of it? And if i have more of it, will i be happier?
Yes i have done a bit of economics. But really economics makes some pretty arbitrary measures of what is productive.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
No, the problem is that some people stick their heads in the sand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_garbage_patch
Could it be affecting our weather, too?