Fearing Climate Change--Don't Underestimate Resilience

 Virginia Postrel has an old article  on several things, but the hook is the difference between East and West Coasts, specifically Silicon Valley and Boston.  It leads up to this:

In his 1988 book, SEARCHING FOR SAFETY, the late UC-Berkeley political scientist Aaron Wildavsky laid out two alternatives for dealing with risk: anticipation, the static planning that aspires to perfect foresight, and resilience, the dynamic response that relies on having many margins of adjustment:

Anticipation is a mode of control by a central mind; efforts are made to predict and prevent potential dangers before damage is done. Forbidding the sale of certain medical drugs is an anticipatory measure. Resilience is the capacity to cope with unanticipated dangers after they have become manifest, learning to bounce back. An innovative biomedical industry that creates new drugs for new diseases is a resilient device. . . . Anticipation seeks to preserve stability: the less fluctuation, the better. Resilience accommodates variability; one may not do so well in good times but learn to persist in the bad.

 I want to apply the distinction to our approach to climate change. Most of the things we're doing are anticipatory, central, top-down.  That's good, but my general optimism is based on human resilience.  There are many things going on which will enable us to survive with a reasonable standard of living.  For example, in today's papers there was a brief mention of scientists working on wheat varieties which are more heat tolerant. 

Global Warming

 Bits from today's media: 

• Charlestown SC sees "sunny day" flooding of streets about once a week.
• Since then, temperatures in Fairbanks have shifted so much that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration officially changed the city’s subarctic designation in 2021, downgrading it to “warm summer continental.”

The Commodity Credit Corporation Piggy Bank

 CCC was set up in the 1930's. One of the reasons was to handle the money for entitlement programs: farm programs which established payment rates for doing or not doing things without an appropriation, a cap.  

When I worked at ASCS there was still a sharp division between CCC and ASCS. CCC decisions were made by the CCC, composed of the administrators of affected agencies and the secretary's office.  There were a couple bureaucrats handling the development of "dockets" for the board, which recorded the rationale for the decision and included the regulations to be published in the Federal Register, Chapter 7, secs. 1400-1499. 

There were bureaucratic implications: if Congress passed a program with authority to use CCC facilities, it meant that the Printing and Distribution Branch could tap CCC funds to print forms and handbooks on an emergency basis and, I believe, bypass the Government Printing Office's time-consuming process. And the expenses weren't charged to ASCS administrative appropriation.

On the equipment side, similar logic applied.  If equipment could be tied to CCC operations, then it was charged to CCC and not ASCS.

As automation came along, first with programmable calculators and then System/36, etc. the IT types were able to use CCC money.

It was in the early 1990's I think that Congress, specifically House Appropriations, woke up to this loophole.  I know SCS people were jealous of ASCS ability to use CCC.  Did someone blow the whistle on ASCS?  Possibly. More likely the USDA IT office complained about ASCS/FSA bypassing them by using CCC. 

Meanwhile the different administrations have found the ability to tap CCC funds for various programs.  By now I've lost track of who has done what.  The most recent announcement is this, pilot projects for climate change.

The United States of Excess

 This is a 2015 small book by Robert Paarlberg, subtitled "Gluttony and the Dark Side of American Exceptionalism.". Its thesis is that the US stands out for its obesity and its per capita greenhouse gas emissions, both of which are based in America's:

• material and demographic conditions
• political structure
• culture.

I found it interesting, specifically:

• the importance of geography in American politics in contrast to European countries--our politicians do "earmarks", bring home the bacon for their constituents while EU pols are more bound to a party platform.
• the distinction between "mitigation" and "adaptation" as applied to climate change and obesity.  Mitigation means changing the causes of the problems; adaptation means dealing with the results.  He argues that the US will go for adaptation in both instances.  

Global Warming and the Arctic

 Vox has this post which updates a previous post of mine which noted commercial shippers using the Arctic in the summertime to go from Asia to Europe or vice versa.  Now it's possible in winter, at least some years.

Ice on the Mississippi

 Am I remembering things.  Just caught a snippet of news about ice on the Mississippi, near Natchez I think, along with a statement it was interfering with shipping and was rare.

Seems to me I remember that the Mississippi used to shut down in the winter, at least upper reaches, because it was ice covered.  

Though I might be conflating the Mississippi with the Great Lakes.

Drum on Carbon Tax

Kevin Drum has a long post on the carbon tax. 

"Loose" and "Tight" or "Hot" and "Cold"

Finished "Rule Makers, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World".

It's a new book getting some attention.   The author has identified a dichotomy and applied it broadly, perhaps too much so (a familiar pattern: to the girl with a hammer everything appears to be a nail).

Briefly, the idea is that a country like Germany or Denmark has a "tight" culture, one where norms are well established throughout the society.  Whereas a country like the US has a "loose" culture, norms are both less well established and less consistent through the society.  She draws out implications and argues for this distinction explaining other differences in many aspects of society. She does allow for a given society changing from one state to the other.  For example, Singapore became a very "tight" culture in the last 50 years while Saudi Arabia is trying to "loosen" a bit, at least in some areas.

I recommend the book, but it's not why I mention it.

My idea is that societies might also vary between "hot" and "cold"; both hotness and tightness being descriptors which can be applied at the society level to capture qualities we feel intuitively.

I'm triggered of course by the current controversy over whether the president's rhetoric has contributed to recent events.  I think most people would agree that US society today is "hotter" than it has been in the past. There's a lot of fighting going on, whether you see it as Trump draining the swamp and fighting for the forgotten against the MSM and the pointy-headed liberals or as the Resistance waging a battle against hate and ignorance.  That makes today's US "hot".

Global warming suggests that with more energy in the system, it's more likely that storms will be more powerful and more damaging.  Can I stretch the metaphor to argue that the hotter the social climate, the more damage the inevitable storms created by loners and fringe actors are going to cause?

The "Medicane" as Symptom of Warming

See this Grist piece.

Who knew the Mediterranean could have hurricanes?

ND Top Wheat State?

That's what this Grist post says.  It seems KS and ND are competing, with ND top in 2 of last 3 years. Grist attributes it to global warming. 

The "Heat Island" Myth

Don't have research to back this up, but I believe some who challenge global warming do so on the basis that urban heat islands have skewed our temperature records, creating a spurious rise in temperature.

Now I could agree that a heat island effect could skew the record of maximum temperatures at a given location.  If an airport was mostly rural back in the day, but now is in a urban area, the maximum temperatures are likely to be higher than otherwise.

But that's not an argument against global warming, just an argument against reliance using record high temps at a site as evidence for it.  I'm assuming that the experts create an average temperature for a given area by taking the temperature at a point and applying it to the surface area around, extending the area until it reaches the area represented by another point.  For example, take Dulles airport, which is maybe 6 miles west of Reston.  If Dulles is at 80 degrees today and Reston is at 78, then in my mind the average temp would be 79, as Dulles represents the area approximately 3 miles east of the airport and Reston the area 3 miles west.  Determine how many square miles Dulles represents and multiply times its temp, do the same for Reston, and all the other weather stations and you can come up with an average temperature.

If this image is right, see what it does for heat islands.  The heat in an island is real, so if Dulles gets built up so it's now 82 degrees rather than 80, the 82 should still be applied to the area around Dulles. 

Proof on the Ground of Global Warming

FiveThirtyEight has a post describing the NOAA and USDA climate maps.  There's differences in data sources and methodology as well as aim, but they do show the gradual movement north of climate zones.

Global warming skeptics like to challenge temperature histories, claiming scientists change the data to fit preconceived ideas.  I view that as highly unlikely, but the most reliable evidence of global warming is: show me the money.  When people spend their money, as in cruises through the Northwest Passage or in changing what plants they raise, that's good solid evidence.

Alaskan Ag--The Reality of Climate Change

The skeptics of climate change challenge the accuracy of temperature graphs, so I like to find phenomena which can't be challenged, like the Northwest Passage or growing cabbages outdoors in Alaska.

(I remember back in the late 70's there were a few farms with bases or maybe normal crop acreages on record in Alaska. )

Climate Change Is Real: The Northwest Passage Cruise

Lawyers, Guns, and Money  has a post which covers an article on a cruise ship cruising through the Northwest Passage.

I follow Powerline, which is skeptical of climate change, along with some liberal sites which accept it pretty much without question.  Though I've a knee-jerk reaction that things are probably more complicated than the public discussion makes out, it seems to me this is unambiguous proof of global warming.  Real people, not scientists, are venturing real money to cruise through the Northwest Passage, the object of centuries of exploration. 

IMHO the rate and extent of climate change may be debatable, but not the fact.

[Updated:  Here's a discussion from Politico on how far behind we are in icebreakers--I guess Congress is assuming the ice will vanish on its own.]

Corn Production Moving North?

Stealing from this site: Schnitkey, G. "Changes in Where Corn Is Grown in the Last Ten Years." farmdoc daily (6):135, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, July 19, 2016. Permalink: http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2016/07/changes-in-where-corn-is-grown-last-ten-years.html It seems corn production is moving northward.  Can't imagine the reason why.

EU Migration and Global Warming

Over the years there have been a few articles trying to relate climate change and various kinds of political unrest.  You'll have to take that assertion on faith, because I don't have URLs.

Conservatives tend to doubt the immediacy of global warming and to argue that humanity can adapt to changed conditions in the future, just as we have in the past.

On an individual basis, I've great faith in the ability of humans to adapt to the worse conditions. I do think global warming/climate change is real and there's a strong case for trying to cap greenhouse gases.

The turmoil associated with the migration of people from the Middle East and parts of Africa into Europe doesn't make me optimistic about our ability to adapt.  Today the EU is struggling to handle millions (at most) of refugees.  What happens when Bangladesh is struck by a strong cyclone, generating many more refugees than the EU is seeing--do we think that India will be able to handle them?

[Update:  see this Grist piece on the subject of climate refugees.]

Some Forecasts Are Accurate: EPA in 1989

Chris Clayton at DTN goes back to  a 1989 EPA "report  to Congress, "The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States,"... a three-year study looking at impacts of climate change 30 to 50 years out", noting several of the accurate forecasts: northern crop shifts, higher soybean yields, algae blooms in the Great Lakes, and adverse impacts on California water.

Global Warming Leads to War: France Versus Switzerland

Conflict over scarce resources often gets violent: think about the Westerns with the cattlemen versus the homesteaders or the sheep ranchers.

And here's proof that global warming will cause conflict on a national scale: the Swiss stole French water in the midst of record setting heat.

Tidbits from John Phipps

John has a post on global warming, noting the expansion of Canada's growing season, meaning their acreage of corn is expanding. (He suggests looking at such evidence on the ground is more likely to be convincing than the IPCC studies, and I agree. A sidenote: apparently Canada and the US are on the same path of expanding the use of crop insurance.

Who Wins and Loses With Crop Insurance

Farmdocdaily (IL extension) has a post on the state-level distribution of direct payments versus crop insurance.  Most states (32 of them) are pretty close in their share but these states differ significantly:

Eleven states had a difference of 1.5 or more percentage points (a "+" sign means insurance share exceeded direct payment share):  Texas (+8.8%), North Dakota (+4.1%), South Dakota (+3.3%), Kansas (+1.9%), California (-1.8%), Louisiana (-1.9%), Iowa (-2.0%), Ohio (-2.1%), Minnesota (-2.9%), Nebraska (-3.0%), and Arkansas (-3.8%).

Bottomline: Great Plains states with higher risk and more variable production get more crop insurance, non Great Plains states less.  As the study observes, it raises the possibility that crop insurance will encourage the shift of production to more risky areas.  As a second thought, though, "shift" is perhaps the wrong term; "expansion" might be better.   Maybe we should view crop insurance as one measure by which agriculture is adjusting to global warming?