What Actual Effects Will Global Warming Have?
Recently, I got to thinking about global warming, and then thinking “well, if global warming is something we’re going to have to live with, what are the actual effects it will have?”
We all know about the doomsday prophecies of frequent high-category hurricanes, desertification, erosion, and all that stuff, but what exactly can we anticipate, and is it as pressing an issue as it’s made out to be? Here are some potential effects I found:
-Glaciers retreating. As far as I can tell, glaciers retreating is bad for salmon and skiing, as well as hydroelectric power in some areas. So if you’re a fan of eating salmon, skiing, and hydroelectric power, sorry. I recommend cod, not skiing, and nuclear power.
-Slowing down or shutting down thermohaline circulation, leading to possible cooling. The circulation of the oceans, including the Gulf stream, is dependent on a few variables, including water temperature, water salinity (and therefore density), and wind. There’s potential that global warming could interrupt this normal circulation. Slowing down the Gulf stream, of course, could actually mean cooling in some parts of the northern hemisphere.
-The oceans rise. But how much? An Inconvenient Truth claims a rise in sea level of about 20 feet. Okay, 20 feet. But after how much time? According to Wikipedia:
If all the ice on the polar ice caps were to melt away, the oceans of the world would rise an estimated 70 m (230 ft). However, with little major melt expected in Antarctica, sea level rise of not more than 0.5 m (1.6 ft) is expected through the 21st century, with an average annual rise of 0.004 m (0.013 ft) per year.
An ocean rise not more than half a meter is expected through the 21st Century. But head for the hills, right? We may have bases on Mars before we have to move oceanfront homes.
Both my uncle and John Stossel (two separate people; I’m not related to John Stossel) have brought up the fact that a full glass of icewater does not overflow when the ice melts. Touche, but Flarking Smoo also brought up that it isn’t just floating ice that melts into the ocean. Touche, but if “little major melt” is expected from Antartica, isn’t this kind of a non-issue right now?
-Global warming could mean more cardiovascular disease, since the body has to work hard to keep cool.
“If it really is a few degrees warmer in the next 50 years, we could definitely have more cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Karin Schenck-Gustafsson, of the department of cardiology at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute.
I don’t know about you, but the difference between a hot 90 degree day and a 93 degree day feels pretty minimal to me. If you have heart problems, you might want to stay inside regardless.
Beneficial Effects
What about beneficial effects of global warming? Even Mussolini got the trains going on time. According to Wikipedia,
For smaller values of warming (1 to 3 °C), changes are expected to produce net benefits in some regions and for some activities, and net costs for others.
“Smaller values of warming” applies to the short-term future, i.e., us.
Also, according to the aforementioned John Stossel:
The fundamentalist doom-mongers ignore scientists who say the effects of global warming may be benign. Harvard astrophysicist Sallie Baliunas says added carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may actually benefit the world because more CO2 helps plants grow. Warmer winters would give farmers a longer harvest season.
-The emergence of the elusive Northwest Passage, allowing for a superior trade route for supertankers during the North Hemisphere’s summer. Says Wikipedia:
Melting Arctic ice may open the Northwest Passage in summer, which would cut 5,000 nautical miles (9,000 km) from shipping routes between Europe and Asia. This would be of particular relevance for supertankers which are too big to fit through the Panama Canal and currently have to go around the tip of South America. According to the Canadian Ice Service, the amount of ice in Canada’s eastern Arctic Archipelago decreased by 15% between 1969 and 2004.
One problem I have with all the global warming hibbery doo is that it seems rooted in typical “fear-based” thinking. If conservatives like me downplay the effects of global warming, then isn’t it possible that many proponents exaggerate them?
It’s easy to say “the consequences of global warming could be dire!!!” while leaving out “…in 250 years, assuming current trends continue and our long-term projections are accurate.” That doesn’t have quite the same punch-in-the-gut impact.
If humans can create a problem this large, aren’t we also capable of solving it? Clinging to global warming fears does no one any good and doesn’t place trust in the innovative capabilities humans have proven to have over the years. Isn’t it also possible that the Earth will be capable of balancing out some of the effects of global warming?
Global warming doomsday prophets have no regard for any of that potential; they’d rather use global warming as another way to regulate the gas you fill your cars with and the way you live your life.
Stay tuned for more about this kind of politics and its consequences (as in the case of ethanol) later this week.
Visit the BPN Political Discussion Boards
Did you like this post? Subscribe to the BipolarNation feed.
You can also receive the latest BipolarNation.com posts delivered to your e-mail inbox! Subscribe here.
The BipolarNation Robots Say You Might Also Like These Posts:
