CONNECT
Extreme Drought Contributes to Global Warming Trend
Eco Watch / News Report
Published: Saturday 4 August 2012
“The scientists found a major drought that struck western North America in 2000 to 2004 significantly reduced carbon uptake and stressed the region’s water resources.”
Reposted with permission from EcoWatch.org
Findings from a new scientific study indicate a major carbon release from the extreme turn-of-the-century drought in western North America—the worst of the last millennium—with likelihood of even drier times ahead.
The study, titled Reduction in Carbon Uptake During Turn of the Century Drought in Western North America, published this week in Nature-Geoscience, was conducted by a team of researchers led by Christopher Schwalm, assistant research professor for Northern Arizona University’s (NAU) School of Earth Sciences and Sustainability.
The scientists found a major drought that struck western North America in 2000 to 2004 significantly reduced carbon uptake and stressed the region’s water resources.
The study illustrates the impact of the drought as seen in reduced precipitation, decreased soil moisture, reduced river flows and lower crop yields. It also poses the question of how common such an extreme event might be in the future.
“To our surprise, the drought, which was severe with respect to recent and past conditions, is forecasted to become the wetter end of a new climatology,” Schwalm said. “And it would make the 21st century climate akin to mega-droughts of the last millennium.”
He said the severity of this widespread five-year drought, the worst of its kind over the past 800 years, inhibited carbon uptake, essentially contributing to global warming conditions.
And climate models demonstrate a continuing trend toward a warmer planet. Global circulation patterns are expected to shift in a way that would create drier conditions across western North America, expanding the region that is already chronically dry and making today’s drought conditions the new normal.
“At this point, our concerns go beyond carbon uptake,” Schwalm said. “We have to start looking at water resources, especially in parts of North America that already are dealing with water shortages.”
The study was based on analysis of data from NASA satellite remote sensing products and a suite of ground-based monitoring stations that directly measure carbon uptake and release. Data from the monitoring stations are assembled by a global community of scientists participating in FLUXNET, a network of micrometeorological tower sites that measure carbon, water and energy exchanges. The instruments help to monitor plant productivity, evapotranspiration, and carbon and water budgets.
Top Stories
By Richard (RJ) Eskow
5 comments on "Extreme Drought Contributes to Global Warming Trend"
August 05, 2012 9:13am
Good comments above. I would only add that we in the U.S. and indeed the world had better start thinking (seriously) about "less people." The U.N. predicts 9 BILLION people on the planet in 2050. Think we have water problems now? Add 2 billion straws to an already depleted source and watch the catastrophe multiply exponentially. Of course, the "womb-worshipers" will object. And if reasonable, thinking individuals don't counter-act their antediluvian lunacy, we'll ALL be singing "How Dry I Am." Except the mega-wealthy who will simply "outbid" the rest of us for that which sustains us.
"Water Wars" will soon be fought in earnest in many locations on the planet. Including, the United States.
August 05, 2012 1:18pm
woetopoe:
You bring up an interesting topic. I have also long believed that overpopulation is the cause of environmental degradation and the destruction of species. However, there are a few thinkers around now who say that overpopulation will not be as great a problem in the future. I can't quite accept their arguments, but they have enough logic in them to give me pause. They say that in the developed world, for example, the more prosperous the middle class becomes, the fewer children they have. And they point out that in most of the world, the urban population is growing and the rural population is decreasing, and that in the cities, children are no longer the asset they were historically among rural societies; in fact, they become liabilities, requiring more and more of your income and giving little or nothing back. (Financially, of course.)
However, I think their arguments have merit only if some level of prosperity is still possible for the masses, and I'm seriously in doubt about that. I think we're headed for some kind of economic or societal collapse, due to converging factors.
I also agree with you about "Water Wars." Have you read "Climate Wars" by Gwynne Dyer? It's one of several books that warn about national conflicts over dwindling resources, and water is the most essential resource.
It's not a bright or promising future we leave our grandchildren. Agriculture sparked the population increase, and cheap energy fueled the massive jumps we've seen in the last century. But what happens when the fields dry up, and cheap energy has been exhausted? And all this happening when nuclear weaponry seems to be spreading.
A related comment: As an ex-Catholic I've long blamed the Church for much of the population increase in the West. The theological foundations of opposition to contraception are pretty flimsy. I can understand why the Church opposes abortion, given the belief about a soul in the fetus, but why oppose condoms or the pill? It seems they should be one of the greatest advocates of contraception, since if eggs aren't fertilized, no fetuses will be aborted. It boils down to the Church belief that contraception is artificial and unnatural. Now this, mind you, from the Pope who was born nude yet wears clothing, flies all over the world although he has no wings, and if he needs a heart by-pass he'll get it from experts in the field.
Yet massive overpopulation is responsible for most of the environmental problems on our planet
August 05, 2012 3:05pm
Hi Ron, thanks for the (level-headed) response. Population is "flattening out" in various locations (including the U.S.), but the "overall" trend is still one of "unsustainability." I've read numerous and recent accounts of as many as 800 million to one "billion" people a day going hungry. Population increase may be slowing in certain areas (nations) but "migration" to places where a person or family feels he/she/they have a chance at survival is only going to increase as resources become increasingly depleted in coming years. I live in California and have many friends of all ethnicities but the simple fact remains; you can only put so many people on a boat before it sinks.
Many of the world's largest cities are already over-whelmed by influxes in population and I sadly see a future that (unless there's some catastrophic event/events of Malthusian proportions) will actually be regressive in a Dickensian/Orwell/Sinclair type scenario. I have two daughters in their twenties so I'm obviously not enthused by this outlook. I have "not" read the book you relate to but have already written the name and author down. It's a subject that many Americans, given the ongoing drought/climate change conditions across the country, are becoming embroiled in, whether they agree with the causes or not. "Fields drying up, cheap energy exhausted, nuclear weaponry spreading" (forgive my paraphrasing) all add up to a pretty grim future for ALL living things.
If you haven't read Mark Twain's autobiography, released 100 years after his death, may I suggest it. Pay particular attention to a segment entitled "The Character of Man." Quite profound and lamentably accurate IMO.
Although I favor a woman's right to choose (even an abortion), I too, understand certain individuals/institutions opposition. Like you, I "don't" understand the antediluvian and dogmatic stance taken by the Catholic Church other than the hierarchical powers must consistently conclude that to adopt a more nuanced (and sensible) approach might encroach upon their long stated position, hence, diluting their power in some manner. Your comment on the Pope was extremely well said and could also apply to many who take scripture "just a wee bit" too serious.
Our "Liberal" governor is currently taking steps to alter the water deliverance system of my state in what many ( including myself) feel will negatively impact us for generations, if not forever. Your book suggestion is most timely. Take care Ron and thanks again for the "conversation." Dave Waldon
August 04, 2012 8:25pm
WE need to develop more drought-resistant crops - corn, tomatoes, and the like - either that or those that can be grown in colder weather, where we seem to have a little more moisture. Stay the hell out of this, Monsanto. You've caused enough damage. New homes, many existing homes, need to dig cisterns for washing cars, watering gardens. Forget the lawn. The grass will come back whenever it rains. There is also a spray dye(?) to put on your lawn - looks like a beautiful green lawn - without water!
Why is everyone so concerned by the idiot, know-nothing repugnants. There are more of us than them - TAKE OVER!!!!
August 04, 2012 2:51pm
I have believed in man-made global warming for several years, and as a resident of the Southwest, I am greatly concerned that climatologists are predicting that our region will only become hotter and drier, leading ultimately to the mass migration of millions of Americans. Yet other, wetter regions, may see increased storms and flooding. And one can only wonder: where should a prudent person move to?
With climate extremes so much in the headlines the last few years, we still have the Republican "know-nothings" claiming it is all a hoax, and that we should continue "business-as-usual." The Republican War on Science may cost Americans a lot more than we imagine.