wolfyvegan

joined 4 months ago
MODERATOR OF
 

Abstract

Recent Earth energy budget observations show an increase in the sunlight absorbed by the Earth of 0.45 W/m2 per decade, caused primarily by a decrease in cloud reflection. Here we decompose the solar radiative budget trends into general circulation and cloud controlling process components. Regimes representing the midlatitude and tropical storm zones are defined, and the trends in the areal coverage of those regimes which are potentially induced by circulation changes are separated from trends in the cloud radiative effect within each regime which are potentially induced by changes in local cloud controlling processes. The regime area change component, which manifests itself as a contraction of the midlatitude and tropical storm regimes, constitutes the largest contribution to the solar absorption trend, causing decreased sunlight reflection of 0.37 W/m2 per decade. This result provides a crucial missing piece in the puzzle of the 21st century increase of the Earth's solar absorption.

Key Points

Satellite observations show that in the past 24 years the worlds storm cloud zones have been contracting at a rate of 1.5%–3% per decade

This contraction allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface and constitutes the largest contribution to the observed 21st century trend of increased solar absorption

Plain Language Summary

Analysis of satellite observations shows that in the past 24 years the Earth's storm cloud zones in the tropics and the middle latitudes have been contracting at a rate of 1.5%–3% per decade. This cloud contraction, along with cloud cover decreases at low latitudes, allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface. When the contribution of all cloud changes is calculated, the storm cloud contraction is found to be the main contributor to the observed increase of the Earth's solar absorption during the 21st century.

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

Abstract

Recent Earth energy budget observations show an increase in the sunlight absorbed by the Earth of 0.45 W/m2 per decade, caused primarily by a decrease in cloud reflection. Here we decompose the solar radiative budget trends into general circulation and cloud controlling process components. Regimes representing the midlatitude and tropical storm zones are defined, and the trends in the areal coverage of those regimes which are potentially induced by circulation changes are separated from trends in the cloud radiative effect within each regime which are potentially induced by changes in local cloud controlling processes. The regime area change component, which manifests itself as a contraction of the midlatitude and tropical storm regimes, constitutes the largest contribution to the solar absorption trend, causing decreased sunlight reflection of 0.37 W/m2 per decade. This result provides a crucial missing piece in the puzzle of the 21st century increase of the Earth's solar absorption.

Key Points

Satellite observations show that in the past 24 years the worlds storm cloud zones have been contracting at a rate of 1.5%–3% per decade

This contraction allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface and constitutes the largest contribution to the observed 21st century trend of increased solar absorption

Plain Language Summary

Analysis of satellite observations shows that in the past 24 years the Earth's storm cloud zones in the tropics and the middle latitudes have been contracting at a rate of 1.5%–3% per decade. This cloud contraction, along with cloud cover decreases at low latitudes, allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface. When the contribution of all cloud changes is calculated, the storm cloud contraction is found to be the main contributor to the observed increase of the Earth's solar absorption during the 21st century.

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

We have recently revised the temperature threshold. Up to 2022, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the tipping point for coral reefs would occur when warming is between 1.5C and 2C above preindustrial levels. But in 2023, we revised that to between 1C and 1.5C. The world is already close to that upper limit and it will certainly come within the next 10 or 20 years as a result of committed climate change – which comes from cumulative emissions that have already gone into the atmosphere. So have we already gone past the tipping point for coral reefs in global terms? Perhaps.

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

We have recently revised the temperature threshold. Up to 2022, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the tipping point for coral reefs would occur when warming is between 1.5C and 2C above preindustrial levels. But in 2023, we revised that to between 1C and 1.5C. The world is already close to that upper limit and it will certainly come within the next 10 or 20 years as a result of committed climate change – which comes from cumulative emissions that have already gone into the atmosphere. So have we already gone past the tipping point for coral reefs in global terms? Perhaps.

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

archived (Wayback Machine):

 

archived (Wayback Machine):

 

archived (Wayback Machine):

 

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

archived (Wayback Machine)

 

archived (Wayback Machine)

 
  • Panama is pouring new resources into protecting Darién, a remote province where the rugged, nearly impenetrable jungle provides cover for migrants, drug traffickers, illegal loggers, miners and cattle ranchers.
  • Dozens of park guards have been hired and trained with new technology, and officials are working on implementing stricter regulations for logging and agribusiness.
  • New roads and bridges will bring investment, access to education and health care to hard-to-reach communities, but they could also attract an influx of people ready to cut down the forest.
  • As more people arrive to the region, the agricultural frontier pushes closer to the limits of the park, raising concerns among rangers about how they will defend it in years to come.

archived (Wayback Machine)

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 9 points 2 months ago

Upvoting for thought-provoking spoiler properly marked as spoiler.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago

Sure. I take pride in planting fruit trees regardless of the result. Plus, anything that makes life more difficult for the cattle ranchers means that they have less time and energy to devote to cutting down more of the forest. But I suspect that at least some of the engkalas will survive to adulthood. They want to sell that land anyway.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Sometimes I do ask neighbours for their permission to plant fruit trees on their lands for our mutual consumption, but I don't negotiate with animal abusers.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago (13 children)

...Is this a simple empirical question? !vegan@lemmy.world has the most monthly active users, followed by !vegan@slrpnk.net.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's pretty arbitrary. In the broader sense, the word refers to any native flora or fauna that evolved in that location, and so its use in the human context doesn't make much sense. Basically, people use the term to mean any group of people who were living in a place before Europeans or other imperialists arrived. People commonly accept that humans did not originate in the Americas, but still the people whose ancestors were there before white people are called "indigenous" even though their ancestors also came from somewhere else. In Japan, it's the Ainu who were there before the next group of people from the mainland arrived. And so on.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

and plant some fruit trees while you're at it.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 months ago (9 children)

Be Crime. Do Gay.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

An excellent native option for colder climates! Which species is your favourite? :)

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago

I agree. Peaceful cohabitation without domination can work quite well. I don't even know how many animals share this house, but it's probably hundreds at least. If they don't bother me, I don't bother them. It's only when the cohabitation is involuntary/non-consensual or when someone tries to control others by force or coercion that it becomes a problem.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

These are important questions that not enough people are asking. See my other comment, but basically, I agree with your conclusion.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Pretty much this. Don't own other beings as property. Don't instigate violence against peaceful beings. Do not attempt to restrict the freedom of other beings. It really is that simple.

[–] wolfyvegan@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 months ago

If you think that someone tampering with your drinking water without your consent is unethical, then we seem to be in agreement...?

(The right to affordable healthcare is a positive right, whereas the right to freedom from intervention is a negative right; they are not in the same category.)

view more: ‹ prev next ›