NASA Earth Observatory Home Images Global Maps Features News & Notes Global Warming By Holli Riebeek Design by Robert Simmon June 3, 2010 Throughout its long history, Earth has warmed and cooled time and again. Climate has changed when the planet received more or less sunlight due to subtle shifts in its orbit, as the atmosphere or surface changed, or when the Sun’s energy varied. But in the past century, another force has started to influence Earth’s climate: humanity Previous versions of this article were published in 2007 and 2002. Archived versions are available as PDF files. Photograph of sunglint and the Earth's limb from the Internation Space Station Expedition 22. (NASA astronaut photograph ISS022-E-6674.) What is Global Warming? Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released by people burning fossil fuels. How Does Today’s Warming Compare to Past Climate Change? Earth has experienced climate change in the past without help from humanity. But the current climatic warming is occurring much more rapidly than past warming events. Why Do Scientists Think Current Warming Isn’t Natural? In Earth’s history before the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s climate changed due to natural causes unrelated to human activity. These natural causes are still in play today, but their influence is too small or they occur too slowly to explain the rapid warming seen in recent decades. How Much More Will Earth Warm? Models predict that as the world consumes ever more fossil fuel, greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise, and Earth’s average surface temperature will rise with them. Based on plausible emission scenarios, average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century. Some of this warming will occur even if future greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, because the Earth system has not yet fully adjusted to environmental changes we have already made. How Will Earth Respond to Warming Temperatures? The impact of global warming is far greater than just increasing temperatures. Warming modifies rainfall patterns, amplifies coastal erosion, lengthens the growing season in some regions, melts ice caps and glaciers, and alters the ranges of some infectious diseases. Some of these changes are already occurring. References and Related Resources Global Warming Throughout its long history, Earth has warmed and cooled time and again. Climate has changed when the planet received more or less sunlight due to subtle shifts in its orbit, as the atmosphere or surface changed, or when the Sun’s energy varied. But in the past century, another force has started to influence Earth’s climate: humanity How does this warming compare to previous changes in Earth’s climate? How can we be certain that human-released greenhouse gases are causing the warming? How much more will the Earth warm? How will Earth respond? Answering these questions is perhaps the most significant scientific challenge of our time. What is Global Warming? Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released as people burn fossil fuels. The global average surface temperature rose 0.6 to 0.9 degrees Celsius (1.1 to 1.6° F) between 1906 and 2005, and the rate of temperature increase has nearly doubled in the last 50 years. Temperatures are certain to go up further. Graph of global mean temperature from 1880 to 2009. Despite ups and downs from year to year, global average surface temperature is rising. By the beginning of the 21st century, Earth’s temperature was roughly 0.5 degrees Celsius above the long-term (1951–1980) average. (NASA figure adapted from Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis.) Earth’s natural greenhouse effect Earth’s temperature begins with the Sun. Roughly 30 percent of incoming sunlight is reflected back into space by bright surfaces like clouds and ice. Of the remaining 70 percent, most is absorbed by the land and ocean, and the rest is absorbed by the atmosphere. The absorbed solar energy heats our planet. As the rocks, the air, and the seas warm, they radiate “heat” energy (thermal infrared radiation). From the surface, this energy travels into the atmosphere where much of it is absorbed by water vapor and long-lived greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. When they absorb the energy radiating from Earth’s surface, microscopic water or greenhouse gas molecules turn into tiny heaters— like the bricks in a fireplace, they radiate heat even after the fire goes out. They radiate in all directions. The energy that radiates back toward Earth heats both the lower atmosphere and the surface, enhancing the heating they get from direct sunlight. This absorption and radiation of heat by the atmosphere—the natural greenhouse effect—is beneficial for life on Earth. If there were no greenhouse effect, the Earth’s average surface temperature would be a very chilly -18°C (0°F) instead of the comfortable 15°C (59°F) that it is today. See Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget to read more about how sunlight fuels Earth’s climate. The enhanced greenhouse effect What has scientists concerned now is that over the past 250 years, humans have been artificially raising the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at an ever-increasing rate, mostly by burning fossil fuels, but also from cutting down carbon-absorbing forests. Since the Industrial Revolution began in about 1750, carbon dioxide levels have increased nearly 38 percent as of 2009 and methane levels have increased 148 percent. Graphs of atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane from 1750 to 2009. Increases in concentrations of carbon dioxide (top) and methane (bottom) coincided with the start of the Industrial Revolution in about 1750. Measurements from Antarctic ice cores (green lines) combined with direct atmospheric measurements (blue lines) show the increase of both gases over time. (NASA graphs by Robert Simmon, based on data from the NOAA Paleoclimatology and Earth System Research Laboratory.) The atmosphere today contains more greenhouse gas molecules, so more of the infrared energy emitted by the surface ends up being absorbed by the atmosphere. Since some of the extra energy from a warmer atmosphere radiates back down to the surface, Earth’s surface temperature rises. By increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases, we are making Earth’s atmosphere a more efficient greenhouse. How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past? Earth has experienced climate change in the past without help from humanity. We know about past climates because of evidence left in tree rings, layers of ice in glaciers, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. For example, bubbles of air in glacial ice trap tiny samples of Earth’s atmosphere, giving scientists a history of greenhouse gases that stretches back more than 800,000 years. The chemical make-up of the ice provides clues to the average global temperature. See the Earth Observatory’s series Paleoclimatology for details about how scientists study past climates. Photograph of a section of an ice core, with bubbles. Graph of temperature anomalies from the EPICA ice core, Antarctica. Glacial ice and air bubbles trapped in it (top) preserve an 800,000-year record of temperature & carbon dioxide. Earth has cycled between ice ages (low points, large negative anomalies) and warm interglacials (peaks). (Photograph courtesy National Snow & Ice Data Center. NASA graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from Jouzel et al., 2007.) Using this ancient evidence, scientists have built a record of Earth’s past climates, or “paleoclimates.” The paleoclimate record combined with global models shows past ice ages as well as periods even warmer than today. But the paleoclimate record also reveals that the current climatic warming is occurring much more rapidly than past warming events. As the Earth moved out of ice ages over the past million years, the global temperature rose a total of 4 to 7 degrees Celsius over about 5,000 years. In the past century alone, the temperature has climbed 0.7 degrees Celsius, roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming. Graph of multi-proxy global temperature reconstruction and instrumental records. Temperature histories from paleoclimate data (green line) compared to the history based on modern instruments (blue line) suggest that global temperature is warmer now than it has been in the past 1,000 years, and possibly longer. (Graph adapted from Mann et al., 2008.) Models predict that Earth will warm between 2 and 6 degrees Celsius in the next century. When global warming has happened at various times in the past two million years, it has taken the planet about 5,000 years to warm 5 degrees. The predicted rate of warming for the next century is at least 20 times faster. This rate of change is extremely unusual. Is Current Warming Natural? In Earth’s history before the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s climate changed due to natural causes not related to human activity. Most often, global climate has changed because of variations in sunlight. Tiny wobbles in Earth’s orbit altered when and where sunlight falls on Earth’s surface. Variations in the Sun itself have alternately increased and decreased the amount of solar energy reaching Earth. Volcanic eruptions have generated particles that reflect sunlight, brightening the planet and cooling the climate. Volcanic activity has also, in the deep past, increased greenhouse gases over millions of years, contributing to episodes of global warming. A biographical sketch of Milutin Milankovitch describes how changes in Earth’s orbit affects its climate. These natural causes are still in play today, but their influence is too small or they occur too slowly to explain the rapid warming seen in recent decades. We know this because scientists closely monitor the natural and human activities that influence climate with a fleet of satellites and surface instruments. Images of the Atmospheric Research Observatory and Polar Operational Environmental Satellite. Remote meteorological stations (left) and orbiting satellites (right) help scientists monitor the causes and effects of global warming. [Images courtesy NOAA Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (left) and Environmental Visualization Laboratory (right).] NASA satellites record a host of vital signs including atmospheric aerosols (particles from both natural sources and human activities, such as factories, fires, deserts, and erupting volcanoes), atmospheric gases (including greenhouse gases), energy radiated from Earth’s surface and the Sun, ocean surface temperature changes, global sea level, the extent of ice sheets, glaciers and sea ice, plant growth, rainfall, cloud structure, and more. On the ground, many agencies and nations support networks of weather and climate-monitoring stations that maintain temperature, rainfall, and snow depth records, and buoys that measure surface water and deep ocean temperatures. Taken together, these measurements provide an ever-improving record of both natural events and human activity for the past 150 years. Scientists integrate these measurements into climate models to recreate temperatures recorded over the past 150 years. Climate model simulations that consider only natural solar variability and volcanic aerosols since 1750—omitting observed increases in greenhouse gases—are able to fit the observations of global temperatures only up until about 1950. After that point, the decadal trend in global surface warming cannot be explained without including the contribution of the greenhouse gases added by humans. Though people have had the largest impact on our climate since 1950, natural changes to Earth’s climate have also occurred in recent times. For example, two major volcanic eruptions, El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991, pumped sulfur dioxide gas high into the atmosphere. The gas was converted into tiny particles that lingered for more than a year, reflecting sunlight and shading Earth’s surface. Temperatures across the globe dipped for two to three years. Graphs of the magnitudes of natural and anthropogenic influences on climate from 1889 to 2006. Although Earth’s temperature fluctuates naturally, human influence on climate has eclipsed the magnitude of natural temperature changes over the past 120 years. Natural influences on temperature—El Niño, solar variability, and volcanic aerosols—have varied approximately plus and minus 0.2° C (0.4° F), (averaging to about zero), while human influences have contributed roughly 0.8° C (1° F) of warming since 1889. (Graphs adapted from Lean et al., 2008.) Although volcanoes are active around the world, and continue to emit carbon dioxide as they did in the past, the amount of carbon dioxide they release is extremely small compared to human emissions. On average, volcanoes emit between 130 and 230 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. By burning fossil fuels, people release in excess of 100 times more, about 26 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere every year (as of 2005). As a result, human activity overshadows any contribution volcanoes may have made to recent global warming. Changes in the brightness of the Sun can influence the climate from decade to decade, but an increase in solar output falls short as an explanation for recent warming. NASA satellites have been measuring the Sun’s output since 1978. The total energy the Sun radiates varies over an 11-year cycle. During solar maxima, solar energy is approximately 0.1 percent higher on average than it is during solar minima. Extreme ultraviolet images of the sun during Solar Max and Solar Minimum. The transparent halo known as the solar corona changes between solar maximum (left) and solar minimum (right). (NASA Extreme Ultraviolet Telescope images from the SOHO Data Archive.) Each cycle exhibits subtle differences in intensity and duration. As of early 2010, the solar brightness since 2005 has been slightly lower, not higher, than it was during the previous 11-year minimum in solar activity, which occurred in the late 1990s. This implies that the Sun’s impact between 2005 and 2010 might have been to slightly decrease the warming that greenhouse emissions alone would have caused. Graph of total solar irradiance from 1978 to 2010. Satellite measurements of daily (light line) and monthly average (dark line) total solar irradiance since 1979 have not detected a clear long-term trend. (NASA graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from the ACRIM Science Team.) Scientists theorize that there may be a multi-decadal trend in solar output, though if one exists, it has not been observed as yet. Even if the Sun were getting brighter, however, the pattern of warming observed on Earth since 1950 does not match the type of warming the Sun alone would cause. When the Sun’s energy is at its peak (solar maxima), temperatures in both the lower atmosphere (troposphere) and the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) become warmer. Instead, observations show the pattern expected from greenhouse gas effects: Earth’s surface and troposphere have warmed, but the stratosphere has cooled. Graph of tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures from 1978 to 2010. Satellite measurements show warming in the troposphere (lower atmosphere, green line) but cooling in the stratosphere (upper atmosphere, red line). This vertical pattern is consistent with global warming due to increasing greenhouse gases, but inconsistent with warming from natural causes. (Graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from Remote Sensing Systems, sponsored by the NOAA Climate and Global Change Program.) The stratosphere gets warmer during solar maxima because the ozone layer absorbs ultraviolet light; more ultraviolet light during solar maxima means warmer temperatures. Ozone depletion explains the biggest part of the cooling of the stratosphere over recent decades, but it can’t account for all of it. Increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the troposphere and stratosphere together contribute to cooling in the stratosphere. How Much More Will Earth Warm? To further explore the causes and effects of global warming and to predict future warming, scientists build climate models—computer simulations of the climate system. Climate models are designed to simulate the responses and interactions of the oceans and atmosphere, and to account for changes to the land surface, both natural and human-induced. They comply with fundamental laws of physics—conservation of energy, mass, and momentum—and account for dozens of factors that influence Earth’s climate. Though the models are complicated, rigorous tests with real-world data hone them into powerful tools that allow scientists to explore our understanding of climate in ways not otherwise possible. By experimenting with the models—removing greenhouse gases emitted by the burning of fossil fuels or changing the intensity of the Sun to see how each influences the climate—scientists use the models to better understand Earth’s current climate and to predict future climate. The models predict that as the world consumes ever more fossil fuel, greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise, and Earth’s average surface temperature will rise with them. Based on a range of plausible emission scenarios, average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century. Graph of predicted temperature change based on 4 scenarios of carbon dioxide emissions. Model simulations by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate that Earth will warm between two and six degrees Celsius over the next century, depending on how fast carbon dioxide emissions grow. Scenarios that assume that people will burn more and more fossil fuel provide the estimates in the top end of the temperature range, while scenarios that assume that greenhouse gas emissions will grow slowly give lower temperature predictions. The orange line provides an estimate of global temperatures if greenhouse gases stayed at year 2000 levels. (©2007 IPCC WG1 AR-4.) Climate Feedbacks Greenhouse gases are only part of the story when it comes to global warming. Changes to one part of the climate system can cause additional changes to the way the planet absorbs or reflects energy. These secondary changes are called climate feedbacks, and they could more than double the amount of warming caused by carbon dioxide alone. The primary feedbacks are due to snow and ice, water vapor, clouds, and the carbon cycle. Snow and ice Perhaps the most well known feedback comes from melting snow and ice in the Northern Hemisphere. Warming temperatures are already melting a growing percentage of Arctic sea ice, exposing dark ocean water during the perpetual sunlight of summer. Snow cover on land is also dwindling in many areas. In the absence of snow and ice, these areas go from having bright, sunlight-reflecting surfaces that cool the planet to having dark, sunlight-absorbing surfaces that bring more energy into the Earth system and cause more warming. Photograph of the retreating Athabasca Glacier, Jasper National Park, Canada. Canada’s Athabasca Glacier has been shrinking by about 15 meters per year. In the past 125 years, the glacier has lost half its volume and has retreated more than 1.5 kilometers. As glaciers retreat, sea ice disappears, and snow melts earlier in the spring, the Earth absorbs more sunlight than it would if the reflective snow and ice remained. (Photograph ©2005 Hugh Saxby.) Water Vapor The largest feedback is water vapor. Water vapor is a strong greenhouse gas. In fact, because of its abundance in the atmosphere, water vapor causes about two-thirds of greenhouse warming, a key factor in keeping temperatures in the habitable range on Earth. But as temperatures warm, more water vapor evaporates from the surface into the atmosphere, where it can cause temperatures to climb further. The question that scientists ask is, how much water vapor will be in the atmosphere in a warming world? The atmosphere currently has an average equilibrium or balance between water vapor concentration and temperature. As temperatures warm, the atmosphere becomes capable of containing more water vapor, and so water vapor concentrations go up to regain equilibrium. Will that trend hold as temperatures continue to warm? The amount of water vapor that enters the atmosphere ultimately determines how much additional warming will occur due to the water vapor feedback. The atmosphere responds quickly to the water vapor feedback. So far, most of the atmosphere has maintained a near constant balance between temperature and water vapor concentration as temperatures have gone up in recent decades. If this trend continues, and many models say that it will, water vapor has the capacity to double the warming caused by carbon dioxide alone. Clouds Closely related to the water vapor feedback is the cloud feedback. Clouds cause cooling by reflecting solar energy, but they also cause warming by absorbing infrared energy (like greenhouse gases) from the surface when they are over areas that are warmer than they are. In our current climate, clouds have a cooling effect overall, but that could change in a warmer environment. Astronaut photograph of clouds over Florida. Clouds can both cool the planet (by reflecting visible light from the sun) and warm the planet (by absorbing heat radiation emitted by the surface). On balance, clouds slightly cool the Earth. (NASA Astronaut Photograph STS31-E-9552 courtesy Johnson space Center Earth Observations Lab.) If clouds become brighter, or the geographical extent of bright clouds expands, they will tend to cool Earth’s surface. Clouds can become brighter if more moisture converges in a particular region or if more fine particles (aerosols) enter the air. If fewer bright clouds form, it will contribute to warming from the cloud feedback. See Ship Tracks South of Alaska to learn how aerosols can make clouds brighter. Clouds, like greenhouse gases, also absorb and re-emit infrared energy. Low, warm clouds emit more energy than high, cold clouds. However, in many parts of the world, energy emitted by low clouds can be absorbed by the abundant water vapor above them. Further, low clouds often have nearly the same temperatures as the Earth’s surface, and so emit similar amounts of infrared energy. In a world without low clouds, the amount of emitted infrared energy escaping to space would not be too different from a world with low clouds. Thermal infrared image of the Western Hemisphere from GOES. Clouds emit thermal infrared (heat) radiation in proportion to their temperature, which is related to altitude. This image shows the Western Hemisphere in the thermal infrared. Warm ocean and land surface areas are white and light gray; cool, low-level clouds are medium gray; and cold, high-altitude clouds are dark gray and black. (NASA image courtesy GOES Project Science.) High cold clouds, however, form in a part of the atmosphere where energy-absorbing water vapor is scarce. These clouds trap (absorb) energy coming from the lower atmosphere, and emit little energy to space because of their frigid temperatures. In a world with high clouds, a significant amount of energy that would otherwise escape to space is captured in the atmosphere. As a result, global temperatures are higher than in a world without high clouds. If warmer temperatures result in a greater amount of high clouds, then less infrared energy will be emitted to space. In other words, more high clouds would enhance the greenhouse effect, reducing the Earth’s capability to cool and causing temperatures to warm. See Clouds and Radiation for a more complete description. Scientists aren’t entirely sure where and to what degree clouds will end up amplifying or moderating warming, but most climate models predict a slight overall positive feedback or amplification of warming due to a reduction in low cloud cover. A recent observational study found that fewer low, dense clouds formed over a region in the Pacific Ocean when temperatures warmed, suggesting a positive cloud feedback in this region as the models predicted. Such direct observational evidence is limited, however, and clouds remain the biggest source of uncertainty--apart from human choices to control greenhouse gases—in predicting how much the climate will change. The Carbon Cycle Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and warming temperatures are causing changes in the Earth’s natural carbon cycle that also can feedback on atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. For now, primarily ocean water, and to some extent ecosystems on land, are taking up about half of our fossil fuel and biomass burning emissions. This behavior slows global warming by decreasing the rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide increase, but that trend may not continue. Warmer ocean waters will hold less dissolved carbon, leaving more in the atmosphere. Map of anthropogenic carbon dissolved in the oceans. About half the carbon dioxide emitted into the air from burning fossil fuels dissolves in the ocean. This map shows the total amount of human-made carbon dioxide in ocean water from the surface to the sea floor. Blue areas have low amounts, while yellow regions are rich in anthropogenic carbon dioxide. High amounts occur where currents carry the carbon-dioxide-rich surface water into the ocean depths. (Map adapted from Sabine et al., 2004.) See The Ocean’s Carbon Balance on the Earth Observatory. On land, changes in the carbon cycle are more complicated. Under a warmer climate, soils, especially thawing Arctic tundra, could release trapped carbon dioxide or methane to the atmosphere. Increased fire frequency and insect infestations also release more carbon as trees burn or die and decay. On the other hand, extra carbon dioxide can stimulate plant growth in some ecosystems, allowing these plants to take additional carbon out of the atmosphere. However, this effect may be reduced when plant growth is limited by water, nitrogen, and temperature. This effect may also diminish as carbon dioxide increases to levels that become saturating for photosynthesis. Because of these complications, it is not clear how much additional carbon dioxide plants can take out of the atmosphere and how long they could continue to do so. The impact of climate change on the land carbon cycle is extremely complex, but on balance, land carbon sinks will become less efficient as plants reach saturation, where they can no longer take up additional carbon dioxide, and other limitations on growth occur, and as land starts to add more carbon to the atmosphere from warming soil, fires, and insect infestations. This will result in a faster increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide and more rapid global warming. In some climate models, carbon cycle feedbacks from both land and ocean add more than a degree Celsius to global temperatures by 2100. Emission Scenarios Scientists predict the range of likely temperature increase by running many possible future scenarios through climate models. Although some of the uncertainty in climate forecasts comes from imperfect knowledge of climate feedbacks, the most significant source of uncertainty in these predictions is that scientists don’t know what choices people will make to control greenhouse gas emissions. The higher estimates are made on the assumption that the entire world will continue using more and more fossil fuel per capita, a scenario scientists call “business-as-usual.” More modest estimates come from scenarios in which environmentally friendly technologies such as fuel cells, solar panels, and wind energy replace much of today’s fossil fuel combustion. It takes decades to centuries for Earth to fully react to increases in greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide, among other greenhouse gases, will remain in the atmosphere long after emissions are reduced, contributing to continuing warming. In addition, as Earth has warmed, much of the excess energy has gone into heating the upper layers of the ocean. Like a hot water bottle on a cold night, the heated ocean will continue warming the lower atmosphere well after greenhouse gases have stopped increasing. These considerations mean that people won’t immediately see the impact of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Even if greenhouse gas concentrations stabilized today, the planet would continue to warm by about 0.6°C over the next century because of greenhouses gases already in the atmosphere. See Earth’s Big Heat Bucket, Correcting Ocean Cooling, and Climate Q&A: If we immediately stopped emitting greenhouse gases, would global warming stop? to learn more about the ocean heat and global warming. How Will Global Warming Change Earth? The impact of increased surface temperatures is significant in itself. But global warming will have additional, far-reaching effects on the planet. Warming modifies rainfall patterns, amplifies coastal erosion, lengthens the growing season in some regions, melts ice caps and glaciers, and alters the ranges of some infectious diseases. Some of these changes are already occurring. Photograph of Lake Powell showing the bathtub ring exposed by the low lake level. Global warming will shift major climate patterns, possibly prolonging and intensifying the current drought in the U.S. Southwest. The white ring of bleached rock on the once-red cliffs that hold Lake Powell indicate the drop in water level over the past decade—the result of repeated winters with low snowfall. (Photograph ©2006 Tigresblanco.) Changing Weather For most places, global warming will result in more frequent hot days and fewer cool days, with the greatest warming occurring over land. Longer, more intense heat waves will become more common. Storms, floods, and droughts will generally be more severe as precipitation patterns change. Hurricanes may increase in intensity due to warmer ocean surface temperatures. Maps of predicted future precipitation based on global circulation models. Apart from driving temperatures up, global warming is likely to cause bigger, more destructive storms, leading to an overall increase in precipitation. With some exceptions, the tropics will likely receive less rain (orange) as the planet warms, while the polar regions will receive more precipitation (green). White areas indicate that fewer than two-thirds of the climate models agreed on how precipitation will change. Stippled areas reveal where more than 90 percent of the models agreed. (©2007 IPCC WG1 AR-4.) It is impossible to pin any single unusual weather event on global warming, but emerging evidence suggests that global warming is already influencing the weather. Heat waves, droughts, and intense rain events have increased in frequency during the last 50 years, and human-induced global warming more likely than not contributed to the trend. Rising Sea Levels The weather isn’t the only thing global warming will impact: rising sea levels will erode coasts and cause more frequent coastal flooding. Some island nations will disappear. The problem is serious because up to 10 percent of the world’s population lives in vulnerable areas less than 10 meters (about 30 feet) above sea level. Between 1870 and 2000, the sea level increased by 1.7 millimeters per year on average, for a total sea level rise of 221 millimeters (0.7 feet or 8.7 inches). And the rate of sea level rise is accelerating. Since 1993, NASA satellites have shown that sea levels are rising more quickly, about 3 millimeters per year, for a total sea level rise of 48 millimeters (0.16 feet or 1.89 inches) between 1993 and 2009. Graph of average global sea level since 1880. Sea levels crept up about 20 centimeters (7.9 inches) during the twentieth century. Sea levels are predicted to go up between 18 and 59 cm (7.1 and 23 inches) over the next century, though the increase could be greater if ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt more quickly than predicted. Higher sea levels will erode coastlines and cause more frequent flooding. (Graph ©2007 Robert Rohde.) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that sea levels will rise between 0.18 and 0.59 meters (0.59 to 1.9 feet) by 2099 as warming sea water expands, and mountain and polar glaciers melt. These sea level change predictions may be underestimates, however, because they do not account for any increases in the rate at which the world’s major ice sheets are melting. As temperatures rise, ice will melt more quickly. Satellite measurements reveal that the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are shedding about 125 billion tons of ice per year—enough to raise sea levels by 0.35 millimeters (0.01 inches) per year. If the melting accelerates, the increase in sea level could be significantly higher. Impacting Ecosystems More importantly, perhaps, global warming is already putting pressure on ecosystems, the plants and animals that co-exist in a particular climate zone, both on land and in the ocean. Warmer temperatures have already shifted the growing season in many parts of the globe. The growing season in parts of the Northern Hemisphere became two weeks longer in the second half of the 20th century. Spring is coming earlier in both hemispheres. This change in the growing season affects the broader ecosystem. Migrating animals have to start seeking food sources earlier. The shift in seasons may already be causing the lifecycles of pollinators, like bees, to be out of synch with flowering plants and trees. This mismatch can limit the ability of both pollinators and plants to survive and reproduce, which would reduce food availability throughout the food chain. See Buzzing About Climate Change to read more about how the lifecycle of bees is synched with flowering plants. Warmer temperatures also extend the growing season. This means that plants need more water to keep growing throughout the season or they will dry out, increasing the risk of failed crops and wildfires. Once the growing season ends, shorter, milder winters fail to kill dormant insects, increasing the risk of large, damaging infestations in subsequent seasons. In some ecosystems, maximum daily temperatures might climb beyond the tolerance of indigenous plant or animal. To survive the extreme temperatures, both marine and land-based plants and animals have started to migrate towards the poles. Those species, and in some cases, entire ecosystems, that cannot quickly migrate or adapt, face extinction. The IPCC estimates that 20-30 percent of plant and animal species will be at risk of extinction if temperatures climb more than 1.5° to 2.5°C. Impacting People The changes to weather and ecosystems will also affect people more directly. Hardest hit will be those living in low-lying coastal areas, and residents of poorer countries who do not have the resources to adapt to changes in temperature extremes and water resources. As tropical temperature zones expand, the reach of some infectious diseases, such as malaria, will change. More intense rains and hurricanes and rising sea levels will lead to more severe flooding and potential loss of property and life. Photograph of beach erosion in Massachusetts, 2007. One inevitable consequence of global warming is sea-level rise. In the face of higher sea levels and more intense storms, coastal communities face greater risk of rapid beach erosion from destructive storms like the intense nor’easter of April 2007 that caused this damage. (Photograph ©2007 metimbers2000.) Hotter summers and more frequent fires will lead to more cases of heat stroke and deaths, and to higher levels of near-surface ozone and smoke, which would cause more ‘code red’ air quality days. Intense droughts can lead to an increase in malnutrition. On a longer time scale, fresh water will become scarcer, especially during the summer, as mountain glaciers disappear, particularly in Asia and parts of North America. On the flip side, there could be “winners” in a few places. For example, as long as the rise in global average temperature stays below 3 degrees Celsius, some models predict that global food production could increase because of the longer growing season at mid- to high-latitudes, provided adequate water resources are available. The same small change in temperature, however, would reduce food production at lower latitudes, where many countries already face food shortages. On balance, most research suggests that the negative impacts of a changing climate far outweigh the positive impacts. Current civilization—agriculture and population distribution—has developed based on the current climate. The more the climate changes, and the more rapidly it changes, the greater the cost of adaptation. Ultimately, global warming will impact life on Earth in many ways, but the extent of the change is largely up to us. Scientists have shown that human emissions of greenhouse gases are pushing global temperatures up, and many aspects of climate are responding to the warming in the way that scientists predicted they would. This offers hope. Since people are causing global warming, people can mitigate global warming, if they act in time. Greenhouse gases are long-lived, so the planet will continue to warm and changes will continue to happen far into the future, but the degree to which global warming changes life on Earth depends on our decisions now. References Anthes, R.A., Corell, R.W., Holland, G., Hurrell, J.W., MacCracken, M.C., & Trenberth, K. (2010, February 12). Hurricanes and Global Warming—Potential Linkages and Consequences. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 87: 623-628. Accessed April 15, 2010. Arctic Council. (2004). Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Report. Accessed March 22, 2007. Balachandran, N., Rind, D., Lonergan, P., & Shindell, D. (1999). Effects of solar cycle variability on the lower stratosphere and the troposphere. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(D22), 27, 321-327, 339. Bender, M. A., Knutson, T. R., Tuleya, R. E., Sirutis, J. J., Vecchi, G. A., Garner, S. T., and Held, I. M. (2010). Modeled Impact of Anthropogenic Warming on the Frequency of Intense Atlantic Hurricanes. Science, 327(5964), 454-458. Bonan, G. B. (2008). Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests. Science, 320(5882), 1444-1449. Cazenave, A. (2006). How fast are the ice sheets melting? Science, 314, 1251-1252. Clement, A.C., Burgman, R., Norris, J.R. (2009, July 24) Observational and model evidence for positive low-level cloud feedback. Science, 325 (5939), 460-464. Dessler, A., Zhang, Z., Yang, P. (2008, October 23). Water-vapor climate feedback inferred from climate fluctuations, 2003-2008. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L20704. Emanuel, K. (2005). Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature, 436, 686-688. Foucal, P., Frölich, C., Spruit, H., and Wigley, T. (2006). Variations in solar luminosity and their effect on the Earth’s climate. Nature, 443, 161-166. Hansen, J., Sato, M., Ruedy, R., Kharecha, P., Lacis, A., Miller, R., Nazarenko, L., et al. (2007). Climate simulations for 1880–2003 with GISS model E. Climate Dynamics, 29(7), 661-696. Hansen, J., Nazarenko, L., Ruedy, R., Sato, M., Willis, J., Del Genio, A., Koch, D., Lacis, A., Lo, K., Menon, S., Novakov, T., Perlwitz, J., Russell, G., Schmidt, G.A., and Tausnev, N. (2005, June 3). Earth’s energy imbalance: confirmation and implications. Science, 308, 1431-1435. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers. A Report of Working Group 1 to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability Summary for Policymakers. A Report of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Joint Science Academies. (2005). Joint Science Academies’ Statement: Global Response to Climate Change. June 2005. Jouzel, J., Masson-Delmotte, V., Cattani, O., Dreyfus, G., Falourd, S., Hoffmann, G., Minster, B., et al. (2007). Orbital and Millennial Antarctic Climate Variability over the Past 800,000 Years. Science, 317(5839), 793-796. Labitzke, K., Butchart, N., Knight, J., Takahashi, M., Nakamoto, M., Nagashima, T., Haigh, J., et al. (2002). The global signal of the 11-year solar cycle in the stratosphere: observations and models. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 64(2), 203-210. Laštovička, J., Akmaev, R. A., Beig, G., Bremer, J., & Emmert, J. T. (2006). ATMOSPHERE: Global Change in the Upper Atmosphere. Science, 314(5803), 1253-1254. Lau, K. M., and H. T. Wu. (2007). Detecting trends in tropical rainfall characteristics, 1979-2003. International Journal of Climatology, 27. Lean, J. L., & Rind, D. H. (2009). How will Earth’s surface temperature change in future decades? Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L15708. Lean, J. L., & Rind, D. H. (2008). How natural and anthropogenic influences alter global and regional surface temperatures: 1889 to 2006. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(18). Luthcke, S.B., Zwally, H.J., Abdalati, W., Rowlands, D.D., Ray, R.D., Nerem, R.S., Lemoine, F.G., McCarthy, J.J., and Chinn, D.S. (2006). Recent Greenland ice mass loss by drainage system from satellite gravity observations. Science, 314, 1286-1289. Mann, M. E., Zhang, Z., Hughes, M. K., Bradley, R. S., Miller, S. K., Rutherford, S., & Ni, F. (2008). Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(36), 13252-13257. Manvendra K. Dubey, Petr Chylek, Charlie S. Zender, & Chris K. Folland. (2010, February 12). Global Warming and the Next Ice Age. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89 (12), 1905-1909. McGranahan, G., D. Balk and B. Anderson. (2007). The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environment & Urbanization, 19 (1), 17-37. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC. Oren, R., Ellsworth, D. S., Johnsen, K. H., Phillips, N., Ewers, B. E., Maier, C., Schafer, K. V., et al. (2001). Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere. Nature, 411(6836), 469-472. Ramanathan, V., & Feng, Y. (2008). On avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system: Formidable challenges ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(38), 14245-14250. Rind, D., Lean, J.L., Lerner, J., Lonergan, P., and Leboissetier, A. (2008). Exploring the stratospheric/tropospheric response to solar forcing. Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, D24103. Robock, A., Marquardt, A., Kravitz, B., & Stenchikov, G. (2009). Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L19703. Sabine, C. L. (2004). The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2. Science, 305(5682), 367-371. Schimel, D. (2007). Carbon cycle conundrums. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(47), 18353-18354. Seager, R., Ting, M., Held, I., Kushnir, Y., Lu, J., Vecchi, G., Huang, H., et al. (2007). Model Projections of an Imminent Transition to a More Arid Climate in Southwestern North America. Science, 316(5828), 1181-1184. Shepherd, A., and Wingham, D. (2007). Recent sea-level contributions of the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets. Science, 315, 1529-1532. Soden, B. J. and Held, I.M. (2006, July). An assessment of climate feedbacks in coupled ocean-atmosphere models. Journal of Climate, 19: 3354-3360. Stainforth, D. A., Aina, T., Christensen, C., Collins, M., Faull, N., Frame, D. J., Kettleborough, J. A., et al. (2005). Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature, 433(7024), 403-406. U.S. Climate Change Science Program. (April 2006). Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere. Accessed April 13, 2007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Climate Change. Accessed March 22, 2007. U.S. Geological Survey. (2009, December 29). Volcanic gases and their effects. Volcano Hazards Program. Accessed March 29, 2010. Velicogna, I., and Wahr, J., (2006). Measurements of time-variable gravity show mass loss in Antarctica. Science, 311 (5768), 1754-1756. Weir, J. (2002, April 8). Global Warming. Earth Observatory. Accessed April 13, 2007. Related Reading United States Global Change Research Program. Real Climate Introduction Global Warming How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past? Is Current Warming Natural? How Much More Will Earth Warm? How Will Global Warming Change Earth? References and Related Resources Print this entire article Share facebook twitter stumbleupon Google+ pinterest Subscribe Today

Gentle People reading this blog: Three years ago the NASA Earth Observatory published the following report. Today, it is January 14, 2013 and it is business as usual for average North Americans. It is a polluting business governed by the Oil and Car and Plastics industry in paid conjunction with their advertising employees in the Media as well as their powerful friends sitting quietly and basically doing nothing in our governments. It is dangerous business leading to extreme consequences in the near future for millions and millions of children now born to this Earth! I have not witnessed any great reactions or changes to the following NASA report! I was expecting an increase in Electric Car sales and more people insulating their homes and placing Solar Panels on their roof-tops and/or creating apartment gardens and a heck of a lot more recycling of plastic products as well as Tree plantings everywhere. Instead there is a negative fatalism suggesting there is nothing we can do to change the system! A fatalism motivated by a world economy dominated by international Oil and the advertising they use on a daily basis to motivate almost everybody into consuming almost everything imaginable. Wake up people! Creating and allowing out of control global warming will not be a pleasant experience for your children! Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive Director: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NASA Earth Observatory For: Images..Global Maps..Features..News & Notes, please visit: NASA Earth Observatory.net / Global Warming By Holli Riebeek Design by Robert Simmon June 3, 2010 Throughout its long history, Earth has warmed and cooled time and again. Climate has changed when the planet received more or less sunlight due to subtle shifts in its orbit, as the atmosphere or surface changed, or when the Sun’s energy varied. But in the past century, another force has started to influence Earth’s climate: humanity Previous versions of this article were published in 2007 and 2002. Archived versions are available as PDF files. Photograph of sunglint and the Earth's limb from the Internation Space Station Expedition 22. (NASA astronaut photograph ISS022-E-6674.) What is Global Warming? Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released by people burning fossil fuels. How Does Today’s Warming Compare to Past Climate Change? Earth has experienced climate change in the past without help from humanity. But the current climatic warming is occurring much more rapidly than past warming events. Why Do Scientists Think Current Warming Isn’t Natural? In Earth’s history before the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s climate changed due to natural causes unrelated to human activity. These natural causes are still in play today, but their influence is too small or they occur too slowly to explain the rapid warming seen in recent decades. How Much More Will Earth Warm? Models predict that as the world consumes ever more fossil fuel, greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise, and Earth’s average surface temperature will rise with them. Based on plausible emission scenarios, average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century. Some of this warming will occur even if future greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, because the Earth system has not yet fully adjusted to environmental changes we have already made. How Will Earth Respond to Warming Temperatures? The impact of global warming is far greater than just increasing temperatures. Warming modifies rainfall patterns, amplifies coastal erosion, lengthens the growing season in some regions, melts ice caps and glaciers, and alters the ranges of some infectious diseases. Some of these changes are already occurring. References and Related Resources Global Warming Throughout its long history, Earth has warmed and cooled time and again. Climate has changed when the planet received more or less sunlight due to subtle shifts in its orbit, as the atmosphere or surface changed, or when the Sun’s energy varied. But in the past century, another force has started to influence Earth’s climate: humanity How does this warming compare to previous changes in Earth’s climate? How can we be certain that human-released greenhouse gases are causing the warming? How much more will the Earth warm? How will Earth respond? Answering these questions is perhaps the most significant scientific challenge of our time. What is Global Warming? Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released as people burn fossil fuels. The global average surface temperature rose 0.6 to 0.9 degrees Celsius (1.1 to 1.6° F) between 1906 and 2005, and the rate of temperature increase has nearly doubled in the last 50 years. Temperatures are certain to go up further. Graph of global mean temperature from 1880 to 2009. Despite ups and downs from year to year, global average surface temperature is rising. By the beginning of the 21st century, Earth’s temperature was roughly 0.5 degrees Celsius above the long-term (1951–1980) average. (NASA figure adapted from Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis.) Earth’s natural greenhouse effect Earth’s temperature begins with the Sun. Roughly 30 percent of incoming sunlight is reflected back into space by bright surfaces like clouds and ice. Of the remaining 70 percent, most is absorbed by the land and ocean, and the rest is absorbed by the atmosphere. The absorbed solar energy heats our planet. As the rocks, the air, and the seas warm, they radiate “heat” energy (thermal infrared radiation). From the surface, this energy travels into the atmosphere where much of it is absorbed by water vapor and long-lived greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. When they absorb the energy radiating from Earth’s surface, microscopic water or greenhouse gas molecules turn into tiny heaters— like the bricks in a fireplace, they radiate heat even after the fire goes out. They radiate in all directions. The energy that radiates back toward Earth heats both the lower atmosphere and the surface, enhancing the heating they get from direct sunlight. This absorption and radiation of heat by the atmosphere—the natural greenhouse effect—is beneficial for life on Earth. If there were no greenhouse effect, the Earth’s average surface temperature would be a very chilly -18°C (0°F) instead of the comfortable 15°C (59°F) that it is today. See Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget to read more about how sunlight fuels Earth’s climate. The enhanced greenhouse effect What has scientists concerned now is that over the past 250 years, humans have been artificially raising the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at an ever-increasing rate, mostly by burning fossil fuels, but also from cutting down carbon-absorbing forests. Since the Industrial Revolution began in about 1750, carbon dioxide levels have increased nearly 38 percent as of 2009 and methane levels have increased 148 percent. Graphs of atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane from 1750 to 2009. Increases in concentrations of carbon dioxide (top) and methane (bottom) coincided with the start of the Industrial Revolution in about 1750. Measurements from Antarctic ice cores (green lines) combined with direct atmospheric measurements (blue lines) show the increase of both gases over time. (NASA graphs by Robert Simmon, based on data from the NOAA Paleoclimatology and Earth System Research Laboratory.) The atmosphere today contains more greenhouse gas molecules, so more of the infrared energy emitted by the surface ends up being absorbed by the atmosphere. Since some of the extra energy from a warmer atmosphere radiates back down to the surface, Earth’s surface temperature rises. By increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases, we are making Earth’s atmosphere a more efficient greenhouse. How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past? Earth has experienced climate change in the past without help from humanity. We know about past climates because of evidence left in tree rings, layers of ice in glaciers, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. For example, bubbles of air in glacial ice trap tiny samples of Earth’s atmosphere, giving scientists a history of greenhouse gases that stretches back more than 800,000 years. The chemical make-up of the ice provides clues to the average global temperature. See the Earth Observatory’s series Paleoclimatology for details about how scientists study past climates. Photograph of a section of an ice core, with bubbles. Graph of temperature anomalies from the EPICA ice core, Antarctica. Glacial ice and air bubbles trapped in it (top) preserve an 800,000-year record of temperature & carbon dioxide. Earth has cycled between ice ages (low points, large negative anomalies) and warm interglacials (peaks). (Photograph courtesy National Snow & Ice Data Center. NASA graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from Jouzel et al., 2007.) Using this ancient evidence, scientists have built a record of Earth’s past climates, or “paleoclimates.” The paleoclimate record combined with global models shows past ice ages as well as periods even warmer than today. But the paleoclimate record also reveals that the current climatic warming is occurring much more rapidly than past warming events. As the Earth moved out of ice ages over the past million years, the global temperature rose a total of 4 to 7 degrees Celsius over about 5,000 years. In the past century alone, the temperature has climbed 0.7 degrees Celsius, roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming. Graph of multi-proxy global temperature reconstruction and instrumental records. Temperature histories from paleoclimate data (green line) compared to the history based on modern instruments (blue line) suggest that global temperature is warmer now than it has been in the past 1,000 years, and possibly longer. (Graph adapted from Mann et al., 2008.) Models predict that Earth will warm between 2 and 6 degrees Celsius in the next century. When global warming has happened at various times in the past two million years, it has taken the planet about 5,000 years to warm 5 degrees. The predicted rate of warming for the next century is at least 20 times faster. This rate of change is extremely unusual. Is Current Warming Natural? In Earth’s history before the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s climate changed due to natural causes not related to human activity. Most often, global climate has changed because of variations in sunlight. Tiny wobbles in Earth’s orbit altered when and where sunlight falls on Earth’s surface. Variations in the Sun itself have alternately increased and decreased the amount of solar energy reaching Earth. Volcanic eruptions have generated particles that reflect sunlight, brightening the planet and cooling the climate. Volcanic activity has also, in the deep past, increased greenhouse gases over millions of years, contributing to episodes of global warming. A biographical sketch of Milutin Milankovitch describes how changes in Earth’s orbit affects its climate. These natural causes are still in play today, but their influence is too small or they occur too slowly to explain the rapid warming seen in recent decades. We know this because scientists closely monitor the natural and human activities that influence climate with a fleet of satellites and surface instruments. Images of the Atmospheric Research Observatory and Polar Operational Environmental Satellite. Remote meteorological stations (left) and orbiting satellites (right) help scientists monitor the causes and effects of global warming. [Images courtesy NOAA Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (left) and Environmental Visualization Laboratory (right).] NASA satellites record a host of vital signs including atmospheric aerosols (particles from both natural sources and human activities, such as factories, fires, deserts, and erupting volcanoes), atmospheric gases (including greenhouse gases), energy radiated from Earth’s surface and the Sun, ocean surface temperature changes, global sea level, the extent of ice sheets, glaciers and sea ice, plant growth, rainfall, cloud structure, and more. On the ground, many agencies and nations support networks of weather and climate-monitoring stations that maintain temperature, rainfall, and snow depth records, and buoys that measure surface water and deep ocean temperatures. Taken together, these measurements provide an ever-improving record of both natural events and human activity for the past 150 years. Scientists integrate these measurements into climate models to recreate temperatures recorded over the past 150 years. Climate model simulations that consider only natural solar variability and volcanic aerosols since 1750—omitting observed increases in greenhouse gases—are able to fit the observations of global temperatures only up until about 1950. After that point, the decadal trend in global surface warming cannot be explained without including the contribution of the greenhouse gases added by humans. Though people have had the largest impact on our climate since 1950, natural changes to Earth’s climate have also occurred in recent times. For example, two major volcanic eruptions, El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991, pumped sulfur dioxide gas high into the atmosphere. The gas was converted into tiny particles that lingered for more than a year, reflecting sunlight and shading Earth’s surface. Temperatures across the globe dipped for two to three years. Graphs of the magnitudes of natural and anthropogenic influences on climate from 1889 to 2006. Although Earth’s temperature fluctuates naturally, human influence on climate has eclipsed the magnitude of natural temperature changes over the past 120 years. Natural influences on temperature—El Niño, solar variability, and volcanic aerosols—have varied approximately plus and minus 0.2° C (0.4° F), (averaging to about zero), while human influences have contributed roughly 0.8° C (1° F) of warming since 1889. (Graphs adapted from Lean et al., 2008.) Although volcanoes are active around the world, and continue to emit carbon dioxide as they did in the past, the amount of carbon dioxide they release is extremely small compared to human emissions. On average, volcanoes emit between 130 and 230 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. By burning fossil fuels, people release in excess of 100 times more, about 26 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere every year (as of 2005). As a result, human activity overshadows any contribution volcanoes may have made to recent global warming. Changes in the brightness of the Sun can influence the climate from decade to decade, but an increase in solar output falls short as an explanation for recent warming. NASA satellites have been measuring the Sun’s output since 1978. The total energy the Sun radiates varies over an 11-year cycle. During solar maxima, solar energy is approximately 0.1 percent higher on average than it is during solar minima. Extreme ultraviolet images of the sun during Solar Max and Solar Minimum. The transparent halo known as the solar corona changes between solar maximum (left) and solar minimum (right). (NASA Extreme Ultraviolet Telescope images from the SOHO Data Archive.) Each cycle exhibits subtle differences in intensity and duration. As of early 2010, the solar brightness since 2005 has been slightly lower, not higher, than it was during the previous 11-year minimum in solar activity, which occurred in the late 1990s. This implies that the Sun’s impact between 2005 and 2010 might have been to slightly decrease the warming that greenhouse emissions alone would have caused. Graph of total solar irradiance from 1978 to 2010. Satellite measurements of daily (light line) and monthly average (dark line) total solar irradiance since 1979 have not detected a clear long-term trend. (NASA graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from the ACRIM Science Team.) Scientists theorize that there may be a multi-decadal trend in solar output, though if one exists, it has not been observed as yet. Even if the Sun were getting brighter, however, the pattern of warming observed on Earth since 1950 does not match the type of warming the Sun alone would cause. When the Sun’s energy is at its peak (solar maxima), temperatures in both the lower atmosphere (troposphere) and the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) become warmer. Instead, observations show the pattern expected from greenhouse gas effects: Earth’s surface and troposphere have warmed, but the stratosphere has cooled. Graph of tropospheric and stratospheric temperatures from 1978 to 2010. Satellite measurements show warming in the troposphere (lower atmosphere, green line) but cooling in the stratosphere (upper atmosphere, red line). This vertical pattern is consistent with global warming due to increasing greenhouse gases, but inconsistent with warming from natural causes. (Graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from Remote Sensing Systems, sponsored by the NOAA Climate and Global Change Program.) The stratosphere gets warmer during solar maxima because the ozone layer absorbs ultraviolet light; more ultraviolet light during solar maxima means warmer temperatures. Ozone depletion explains the biggest part of the cooling of the stratosphere over recent decades, but it can’t account for all of it. Increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the troposphere and stratosphere together contribute to cooling in the stratosphere. How Much More Will Earth Warm? To further explore the causes and effects of global warming and to predict future warming, scientists build climate models—computer simulations of the climate system. Climate models are designed to simulate the responses and interactions of the oceans and atmosphere, and to account for changes to the land surface, both natural and human-induced. They comply with fundamental laws of physics—conservation of energy, mass, and momentum—and account for dozens of factors that influence Earth’s climate. Though the models are complicated, rigorous tests with real-world data hone them into powerful tools that allow scientists to explore our understanding of climate in ways not otherwise possible. By experimenting with the models—removing greenhouse gases emitted by the burning of fossil fuels or changing the intensity of the Sun to see how each influences the climate—scientists use the models to better understand Earth’s current climate and to predict future climate. The models predict that as the world consumes ever more fossil fuel, greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise, and Earth’s average surface temperature will rise with them. Based on a range of plausible emission scenarios, average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century. Graph of predicted temperature change based on 4 scenarios of carbon dioxide emissions. Model simulations by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate that Earth will warm between two and six degrees Celsius over the next century, depending on how fast carbon dioxide emissions grow. Scenarios that assume that people will burn more and more fossil fuel provide the estimates in the top end of the temperature range, while scenarios that assume that greenhouse gas emissions will grow slowly give lower temperature predictions. The orange line provides an estimate of global temperatures if greenhouse gases stayed at year 2000 levels. (©2007 IPCC WG1 AR-4.) Climate Feedbacks Greenhouse gases are only part of the story when it comes to global warming. Changes to one part of the climate system can cause additional changes to the way the planet absorbs or reflects energy. These secondary changes are called climate feedbacks, and they could more than double the amount of warming caused by carbon dioxide alone. The primary feedbacks are due to snow and ice, water vapor, clouds, and the carbon cycle. Snow and ice Perhaps the most well known feedback comes from melting snow and ice in the Northern Hemisphere. Warming temperatures are already melting a growing percentage of Arctic sea ice, exposing dark ocean water during the perpetual sunlight of summer. Snow cover on land is also dwindling in many areas. In the absence of snow and ice, these areas go from having bright, sunlight-reflecting surfaces that cool the planet to having dark, sunlight-absorbing surfaces that bring more energy into the Earth system and cause more warming. Photograph of the retreating Athabasca Glacier, Jasper National Park, Canada. Canada’s Athabasca Glacier has been shrinking by about 15 meters per year. In the past 125 years, the glacier has lost half its volume and has retreated more than 1.5 kilometers. As glaciers retreat, sea ice disappears, and snow melts earlier in the spring, the Earth absorbs more sunlight than it would if the reflective snow and ice remained. (Photograph ©2005 Hugh Saxby.) Water Vapor The largest feedback is water vapor. Water vapor is a strong greenhouse gas. In fact, because of its abundance in the atmosphere, water vapor causes about two-thirds of greenhouse warming, a key factor in keeping temperatures in the habitable range on Earth. But as temperatures warm, more water vapor evaporates from the surface into the atmosphere, where it can cause temperatures to climb further. The question that scientists ask is, how much water vapor will be in the atmosphere in a warming world? The atmosphere currently has an average equilibrium or balance between water vapor concentration and temperature. As temperatures warm, the atmosphere becomes capable of containing more water vapor, and so water vapor concentrations go up to regain equilibrium. Will that trend hold as temperatures continue to warm? The amount of water vapor that enters the atmosphere ultimately determines how much additional warming will occur due to the water vapor feedback. The atmosphere responds quickly to the water vapor feedback. So far, most of the atmosphere has maintained a near constant balance between temperature and water vapor concentration as temperatures have gone up in recent decades. If this trend continues, and many models say that it will, water vapor has the capacity to double the warming caused by carbon dioxide alone. Clouds Closely related to the water vapor feedback is the cloud feedback. Clouds cause cooling by reflecting solar energy, but they also cause warming by absorbing infrared energy (like greenhouse gases) from the surface when they are over areas that are warmer than they are. In our current climate, clouds have a cooling effect overall, but that could change in a warmer environment. Astronaut photograph of clouds over Florida. Clouds can both cool the planet (by reflecting visible light from the sun) and warm the planet (by absorbing heat radiation emitted by the surface). On balance, clouds slightly cool the Earth. (NASA Astronaut Photograph STS31-E-9552 courtesy Johnson space Center Earth Observations Lab.) If clouds become brighter, or the geographical extent of bright clouds expands, they will tend to cool Earth’s surface. Clouds can become brighter if more moisture converges in a particular region or if more fine particles (aerosols) enter the air. If fewer bright clouds form, it will contribute to warming from the cloud feedback. See Ship Tracks South of Alaska to learn how aerosols can make clouds brighter. Clouds, like greenhouse gases, also absorb and re-emit infrared energy. Low, warm clouds emit more energy than high, cold clouds. However, in many parts of the world, energy emitted by low clouds can be absorbed by the abundant water vapor above them. Further, low clouds often have nearly the same temperatures as the Earth’s surface, and so emit similar amounts of infrared energy. In a world without low clouds, the amount of emitted infrared energy escaping to space would not be too different from a world with low clouds. Thermal infrared image of the Western Hemisphere from GOES. Clouds emit thermal infrared (heat) radiation in proportion to their temperature, which is related to altitude. This image shows the Western Hemisphere in the thermal infrared. Warm ocean and land surface areas are white and light gray; cool, low-level clouds are medium gray; and cold, high-altitude clouds are dark gray and black. (NASA image courtesy GOES Project Science.) High cold clouds, however, form in a part of the atmosphere where energy-absorbing water vapor is scarce. These clouds trap (absorb) energy coming from the lower atmosphere, and emit little energy to space because of their frigid temperatures. In a world with high clouds, a significant amount of energy that would otherwise escape to space is captured in the atmosphere. As a result, global temperatures are higher than in a world without high clouds. If warmer temperatures result in a greater amount of high clouds, then less infrared energy will be emitted to space. In other words, more high clouds would enhance the greenhouse effect, reducing the Earth’s capability to cool and causing temperatures to warm. See Clouds and Radiation for a more complete description. Scientists aren’t entirely sure where and to what degree clouds will end up amplifying or moderating warming, but most climate models predict a slight overall positive feedback or amplification of warming due to a reduction in low cloud cover. A recent observational study found that fewer low, dense clouds formed over a region in the Pacific Ocean when temperatures warmed, suggesting a positive cloud feedback in this region as the models predicted. Such direct observational evidence is limited, however, and clouds remain the biggest source of uncertainty--apart from human choices to control greenhouse gases—in predicting how much the climate will change. The Carbon Cycle Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and warming temperatures are causing changes in the Earth’s natural carbon cycle that also can feedback on atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. For now, primarily ocean water, and to some extent ecosystems on land, are taking up about half of our fossil fuel and biomass burning emissions. This behavior slows global warming by decreasing the rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide increase, but that trend may not continue. Warmer ocean waters will hold less dissolved carbon, leaving more in the atmosphere. Map of anthropogenic carbon dissolved in the oceans. About half the carbon dioxide emitted into the air from burning fossil fuels dissolves in the ocean. This map shows the total amount of human-made carbon dioxide in ocean water from the surface to the sea floor. Blue areas have low amounts, while yellow regions are rich in anthropogenic carbon dioxide. High amounts occur where currents carry the carbon-dioxide-rich surface water into the ocean depths. (Map adapted from Sabine et al., 2004.) See The Ocean’s Carbon Balance on the Earth Observatory. On land, changes in the carbon cycle are more complicated. Under a warmer climate, soils, especially thawing Arctic tundra, could release trapped carbon dioxide or methane to the atmosphere. Increased fire frequency and insect infestations also release more carbon as trees burn or die and decay. On the other hand, extra carbon dioxide can stimulate plant growth in some ecosystems, allowing these plants to take additional carbon out of the atmosphere. However, this effect may be reduced when plant growth is limited by water, nitrogen, and temperature. This effect may also diminish as carbon dioxide increases to levels that become saturating for photosynthesis. Because of these complications, it is not clear how much additional carbon dioxide plants can take out of the atmosphere and how long they could continue to do so. The impact of climate change on the land carbon cycle is extremely complex, but on balance, land carbon sinks will become less efficient as plants reach saturation, where they can no longer take up additional carbon dioxide, and other limitations on growth occur, and as land starts to add more carbon to the atmosphere from warming soil, fires, and insect infestations. This will result in a faster increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide and more rapid global warming. In some climate models, carbon cycle feedbacks from both land and ocean add more than a degree Celsius to global temperatures by 2100. Emission Scenarios Scientists predict the range of likely temperature increase by running many possible future scenarios through climate models. Although some of the uncertainty in climate forecasts comes from imperfect knowledge of climate feedbacks, the most significant source of uncertainty in these predictions is that scientists don’t know what choices people will make to control greenhouse gas emissions. The higher estimates are made on the assumption that the entire world will continue using more and more fossil fuel per capita, a scenario scientists call “business-as-usual.” More modest estimates come from scenarios in which environmentally friendly technologies such as fuel cells, solar panels, and wind energy replace much of today’s fossil fuel combustion. It takes decades to centuries for Earth to fully react to increases in greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide, among other greenhouse gases, will remain in the atmosphere long after emissions are reduced, contributing to continuing warming. In addition, as Earth has warmed, much of the excess energy has gone into heating the upper layers of the ocean. Like a hot water bottle on a cold night, the heated ocean will continue warming the lower atmosphere well after greenhouse gases have stopped increasing. These considerations mean that people won’t immediately see the impact of reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Even if greenhouse gas concentrations stabilized today, the planet would continue to warm by about 0.6°C over the next century because of greenhouses gases already in the atmosphere. See Earth’s Big Heat Bucket, Correcting Ocean Cooling, and Climate Q&A: If we immediately stopped emitting greenhouse gases, would global warming stop? to learn more about the ocean heat and global warming. How Will Global Warming Change Earth? The impact of increased surface temperatures is significant in itself. But global warming will have additional, far-reaching effects on the planet. Warming modifies rainfall patterns, amplifies coastal erosion, lengthens the growing season in some regions, melts ice caps and glaciers, and alters the ranges of some infectious diseases. Some of these changes are already occurring. Photograph of Lake Powell showing the bathtub ring exposed by the low lake level. Global warming will shift major climate patterns, possibly prolonging and intensifying the current drought in the U.S. Southwest. The white ring of bleached rock on the once-red cliffs that hold Lake Powell indicate the drop in water level over the past decade—the result of repeated winters with low snowfall. (Photograph ©2006 Tigresblanco.) Changing Weather For most places, global warming will result in more frequent hot days and fewer cool days, with the greatest warming occurring over land. Longer, more intense heat waves will become more common. Storms, floods, and droughts will generally be more severe as precipitation patterns change. Hurricanes may increase in intensity due to warmer ocean surface temperatures. Maps of predicted future precipitation based on global circulation models. Apart from driving temperatures up, global warming is likely to cause bigger, more destructive storms, leading to an overall increase in precipitation. With some exceptions, the tropics will likely receive less rain (orange) as the planet warms, while the polar regions will receive more precipitation (green). White areas indicate that fewer than two-thirds of the climate models agreed on how precipitation will change. Stippled areas reveal where more than 90 percent of the models agreed. (©2007 IPCC WG1 AR-4.) It is impossible to pin any single unusual weather event on global warming, but emerging evidence suggests that global warming is already influencing the weather. Heat waves, droughts, and intense rain events have increased in frequency during the last 50 years, and human-induced global warming more likely than not contributed to the trend. Rising Sea Levels The weather isn’t the only thing global warming will impact: rising sea levels will erode coasts and cause more frequent coastal flooding. Some island nations will disappear. The problem is serious because up to 10 percent of the world’s population lives in vulnerable areas less than 10 meters (about 30 feet) above sea level. Between 1870 and 2000, the sea level increased by 1.7 millimeters per year on average, for a total sea level rise of 221 millimeters (0.7 feet or 8.7 inches). And the rate of sea level rise is accelerating. Since 1993, NASA satellites have shown that sea levels are rising more quickly, about 3 millimeters per year, for a total sea level rise of 48 millimeters (0.16 feet or 1.89 inches) between 1993 and 2009. Graph of average global sea level since 1880. Sea levels crept up about 20 centimeters (7.9 inches) during the twentieth century. Sea levels are predicted to go up between 18 and 59 cm (7.1 and 23 inches) over the next century, though the increase could be greater if ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt more quickly than predicted. Higher sea levels will erode coastlines and cause more frequent flooding. (Graph ©2007 Robert Rohde.) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that sea levels will rise between 0.18 and 0.59 meters (0.59 to 1.9 feet) by 2099 as warming sea water expands, and mountain and polar glaciers melt. These sea level change predictions may be underestimates, however, because they do not account for any increases in the rate at which the world’s major ice sheets are melting. As temperatures rise, ice will melt more quickly. Satellite measurements reveal that the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are shedding about 125 billion tons of ice per year—enough to raise sea levels by 0.35 millimeters (0.01 inches) per year. If the melting accelerates, the increase in sea level could be significantly higher. Impacting Ecosystems More importantly, perhaps, global warming is already putting pressure on ecosystems, the plants and animals that co-exist in a particular climate zone, both on land and in the ocean. Warmer temperatures have already shifted the growing season in many parts of the globe. The growing season in parts of the Northern Hemisphere became two weeks longer in the second half of the 20th century. Spring is coming earlier in both hemispheres. This change in the growing season affects the broader ecosystem. Migrating animals have to start seeking food sources earlier. The shift in seasons may already be causing the lifecycles of pollinators, like bees, to be out of synch with flowering plants and trees. This mismatch can limit the ability of both pollinators and plants to survive and reproduce, which would reduce food availability throughout the food chain. See Buzzing About Climate Change to read more about how the lifecycle of bees is synched with flowering plants. Warmer temperatures also extend the growing season. This means that plants need more water to keep growing throughout the season or they will dry out, increasing the risk of failed crops and wildfires. Once the growing season ends, shorter, milder winters fail to kill dormant insects, increasing the risk of large, damaging infestations in subsequent seasons. In some ecosystems, maximum daily temperatures might climb beyond the tolerance of indigenous plant or animal. To survive the extreme temperatures, both marine and land-based plants and animals have started to migrate towards the poles. Those species, and in some cases, entire ecosystems, that cannot quickly migrate or adapt, face extinction. The IPCC estimates that 20-30 percent of plant and animal species will be at risk of extinction if temperatures climb more than 1.5° to 2.5°C. Impacting People The changes to weather and ecosystems will also affect people more directly. Hardest hit will be those living in low-lying coastal areas, and residents of poorer countries who do not have the resources to adapt to changes in temperature extremes and water resources. As tropical temperature zones expand, the reach of some infectious diseases, such as malaria, will change. More intense rains and hurricanes and rising sea levels will lead to more severe flooding and potential loss of property and life. Photograph of beach erosion in Massachusetts, 2007. One inevitable consequence of global warming is sea-level rise. In the face of higher sea levels and more intense storms, coastal communities face greater risk of rapid beach erosion from destructive storms like the intense nor’easter of April 2007 that caused this damage. (Photograph ©2007 metimbers2000.) Hotter summers and more frequent fires will lead to more cases of heat stroke and deaths, and to higher levels of near-surface ozone and smoke, which would cause more ‘code red’ air quality days. Intense droughts can lead to an increase in malnutrition. On a longer time scale, fresh water will become scarcer, especially during the summer, as mountain glaciers disappear, particularly in Asia and parts of North America. On the flip side, there could be “winners” in a few places. For example, as long as the rise in global average temperature stays below 3 degrees Celsius, some models predict that global food production could increase because of the longer growing season at mid- to high-latitudes, provided adequate water resources are available. The same small change in temperature, however, would reduce food production at lower latitudes, where many countries already face food shortages. On balance, most research suggests that the negative impacts of a changing climate far outweigh the positive impacts. Current civilization—agriculture and population distribution—has developed based on the current climate. The more the climate changes, and the more rapidly it changes, the greater the cost of adaptation. Ultimately, global warming will impact life on Earth in many ways, but the extent of the change is largely up to us. Scientists have shown that human emissions of greenhouse gases are pushing global temperatures up, and many aspects of climate are responding to the warming in the way that scientists predicted they would. This offers hope. Since people are causing global warming, people can mitigate global warming, if they act in time. Greenhouse gases are long-lived, so the planet will continue to warm and changes will continue to happen far into the future, but the degree to which global warming changes life on Earth depends on our decisions now. References Anthes, R.A., Corell, R.W., Holland, G., Hurrell, J.W., MacCracken, M.C., & Trenberth, K. (2010, February 12). Hurricanes and Global Warming—Potential Linkages and Consequences. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 87: 623-628. Accessed April 15, 2010. Arctic Council. (2004). Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Report. Accessed March 22, 2007. Balachandran, N., Rind, D., Lonergan, P., & Shindell, D. (1999). Effects of solar cycle variability on the lower stratosphere and the troposphere. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(D22), 27, 321-327, 339. Bender, M. A., Knutson, T. R., Tuleya, R. E., Sirutis, J. J., Vecchi, G. A., Garner, S. T., and Held, I. M. (2010). Modeled Impact of Anthropogenic Warming on the Frequency of Intense Atlantic Hurricanes. Science, 327(5964), 454-458. Bonan, G. B. (2008). Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests. Science, 320(5882), 1444-1449. Cazenave, A. (2006). How fast are the ice sheets melting? Science, 314, 1251-1252. Clement, A.C., Burgman, R., Norris, J.R. (2009, July 24) Observational and model evidence for positive low-level cloud feedback. Science, 325 (5939), 460-464. Dessler, A., Zhang, Z., Yang, P. (2008, October 23). Water-vapor climate feedback inferred from climate fluctuations, 2003-2008. Geophysical Research Letters, 35, L20704. Emanuel, K. (2005). Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature, 436, 686-688. Foucal, P., Frölich, C., Spruit, H., and Wigley, T. (2006). Variations in solar luminosity and their effect on the Earth’s climate. Nature, 443, 161-166. Hansen, J., Sato, M., Ruedy, R., Kharecha, P., Lacis, A., Miller, R., Nazarenko, L., et al. (2007). Climate simulations for 1880–2003 with GISS model E. Climate Dynamics, 29(7), 661-696. Hansen, J., Nazarenko, L., Ruedy, R., Sato, M., Willis, J., Del Genio, A., Koch, D., Lacis, A., Lo, K., Menon, S., Novakov, T., Perlwitz, J., Russell, G., Schmidt, G.A., and Tausnev, N. (2005, June 3). Earth’s energy imbalance: confirmation and implications. Science, 308, 1431-1435. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers. A Report of Working Group 1 to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability Summary for Policymakers. A Report of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Joint Science Academies. (2005). Joint Science Academies’ Statement: Global Response to Climate Change. June 2005. Jouzel, J., Masson-Delmotte, V., Cattani, O., Dreyfus, G., Falourd, S., Hoffmann, G., Minster, B., et al. (2007). Orbital and Millennial Antarctic Climate Variability over the Past 800,000 Years. Science, 317(5839), 793-796. Labitzke, K., Butchart, N., Knight, J., Takahashi, M., Nakamoto, M., Nagashima, T., Haigh, J., et al. (2002). The global signal of the 11-year solar cycle in the stratosphere: observations and models. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 64(2), 203-210. Laštovička, J., Akmaev, R. A., Beig, G., Bremer, J., & Emmert, J. T. (2006). ATMOSPHERE: Global Change in the Upper Atmosphere. Science, 314(5803), 1253-1254. Lau, K. M., and H. T. Wu. (2007). Detecting trends in tropical rainfall characteristics, 1979-2003. International Journal of Climatology, 27. Lean, J. L., & Rind, D. H. (2009). How will Earth’s surface temperature change in future decades? Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L15708. Lean, J. L., & Rind, D. H. (2008). How natural and anthropogenic influences alter global and regional surface temperatures: 1889 to 2006. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(18). Luthcke, S.B., Zwally, H.J., Abdalati, W., Rowlands, D.D., Ray, R.D., Nerem, R.S., Lemoine, F.G., McCarthy, J.J., and Chinn, D.S. (2006). Recent Greenland ice mass loss by drainage system from satellite gravity observations. Science, 314, 1286-1289. Mann, M. E., Zhang, Z., Hughes, M. K., Bradley, R. S., Miller, S. K., Rutherford, S., & Ni, F. (2008). Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(36), 13252-13257. Manvendra K. Dubey, Petr Chylek, Charlie S. Zender, & Chris K. Folland. (2010, February 12). Global Warming and the Next Ice Age. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89 (12), 1905-1909. McGranahan, G., D. Balk and B. Anderson. (2007). The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environment & Urbanization, 19 (1), 17-37. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC. Oren, R., Ellsworth, D. S., Johnsen, K. H., Phillips, N., Ewers, B. E., Maier, C., Schafer, K. V., et al. (2001). Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere. Nature, 411(6836), 469-472. Ramanathan, V., & Feng, Y. (2008). On avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system: Formidable challenges ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(38), 14245-14250. Rind, D., Lean, J.L., Lerner, J., Lonergan, P., and Leboissetier, A. (2008). Exploring the stratospheric/tropospheric response to solar forcing. Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, D24103. Robock, A., Marquardt, A., Kravitz, B., & Stenchikov, G. (2009). Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L19703. Sabine, C. L. (2004). The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2. Science, 305(5682), 367-371. Schimel, D. (2007). Carbon cycle conundrums. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(47), 18353-18354. Seager, R., Ting, M., Held, I., Kushnir, Y., Lu, J., Vecchi, G., Huang, H., et al. (2007). Model Projections of an Imminent Transition to a More Arid Climate in Southwestern North America. Science, 316(5828), 1181-1184. Shepherd, A., and Wingham, D. (2007). Recent sea-level contributions of the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets. Science, 315, 1529-1532. Soden, B. J. and Held, I.M. (2006, July). An assessment of climate feedbacks in coupled ocean-atmosphere models. Journal of Climate, 19: 3354-3360. Stainforth, D. A., Aina, T., Christensen, C., Collins, M., Faull, N., Frame, D. J., Kettleborough, J. A., et al. (2005). Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature, 433(7024), 403-406. U.S. Climate Change Science Program. (April 2006). Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere. Accessed April 13, 2007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Climate Change. Accessed March 22, 2007. U.S. Geological Survey. (2009, December 29). Volcanic gases and their effects. Volcano Hazards Program. Accessed March 29, 2010. Velicogna, I., and Wahr, J., (2006). Measurements of time-variable gravity show mass loss in Antarctica. Science, 311 (5768), 1754-1756. Weir, J. (2002, April 8). Global Warming. Earth Observatory. Accessed April 13, 2007. Related Reading United States Global Change Research Program. Real Climate Introduction Global Warming How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past? Is Current Warming Natural? How Much More Will Earth Warm? How Will Global Warming Change Earth? References and Related Resources Print this entire article Share facebook twitter stumbleupon Google+ pinterest Subscribe Today

The following are questions I feel the world needs answered. 1. How toxic is the Gulf of Mexico in 2014? 2. Does Oil continue to leak from the broken drill located on the Ocean floor? 3. Is B.P. continuing to spray deadly toxic oil dispersant on Gulf waters in 2014? 4. Is it true that the United States military complex and the Pentagon is converting all of its war machines, including ships and air-craft, to Hydrogen fuel and to nuclear power in order to break the economic hold that the British Petrolium company has on the U.S. government and on the U.S. economy? 5. Is it true that president Barack Obama is finally taking global warming seriously and is now working on his plan for a national Electric grid based on wind and water and Solar power? 6. Is it true that Michelle Obama is creating a national garden plan where every family will have access to a small garden? 7. Is it true that the U.S.Environment Protection Agency will now have the legal power and the ability to seize and sell the assets of any company, including large multi- national companies such as B.P.,that deliberately or through accident, create toxic pollution and contribute to the destruction of the natural environment? 8. Is it true that all Washington members of Congress and all U.S. Senators will now be legally forced to disclose to the general public, all donations and donors who contribute to their personal election campaigns.

I'm sorry but this year, like last year and the year before, I've decided not to upgrade my browser or my email system. I've found alternative systems and I will continue to use my old computer until the day it falls apart...but hey! I can write this about you. You made some dangerously close and powerful attempts to remove me from the net! They did not work and now it is my turn to try and remove you commercially abusive exploiters from the world wide web. I may also remove a few snoopy government agencies from the web if they prove to be dangerous and Orwellian as opposed to Humanitarian and Democratic. I will do it with the help of millions and millions of poor people who also can't afford to upgrade and update every year nearing the comically commercial holiday season. I will continue to do it with every human-rights protector and environmentally friendly person that I can find on the net. Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive Director: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement.

Happy Holidays Everyone! Of course that includes all the global warming deniers and all the people who continue to pump Carbon Monoxide into the air we breath and all the industrial polluters who adamantly continue to believe that money and the commercial economy are more important to them than clean air and clean water. They of course can afford to drink from toxic Plastic bottled water. It is the Christmas season and I have faith that great changes are around the corner. A Japanese Battery firm has created high capacity Batteries. In 2015 Electric Car Lithium-Ion Batteries will have a six hundred mile range. The car itself will be priced within reach of middle and lower middle class buyers. Ho Ho and again, Happy Holidays!

Ho Ho Ho and Merry Christmas from a Grinchy old man! And why am I feeling Grinchy? I'm feeling angry because Microsoft wants me to update my old computer again! THEY ASKED ME TO DO THAT LAST YEAR AND I SIMPLY SWITCHED TO ANOTHER NET BROWSER. THAT WORKED FOR A YEAR BUT NOW MICROSOFT IS AT IT AGAIN! THEY WANT ME TO UPGRADE! I DID TRY TO UPDATE ONCE OR TWICE BUT OOOPS, THE NEW WINDOWS WON'T WORK ON MY OLD XP. WHAT A SURPRISE! I HAVE TO BUY A NEW COMPUTER AT A MICROSOFT STORE. HELL! OOOPS...SORRY SANTA CLAUSE! I DON'T WANT AND CAN'T AFFORD TO UPGRADE MY OLD WINDOWS filled XP COMPUTER...AGAIN! SO WHAT IF IT IS NINE YEARS OLD! IT STILL WORKS GREAT OFFLINE! THAT MEANS WHEN I'M NOT ON THE INTERNET BLOG WRITING THESE WORDS OF WISDOM, I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO TROUBLE USING MY XP COMPUTER OR THE CD PLAYER OR THE DVD PLAYER OR EVEN THE MICROPHONE WHICH ARE ALL ATTACHED TO MY X.P. COMPUTER! STRANGE IS IT NOT? I ONLY HAVE TROUBLE WITH MICROSOFT WHEN I ATTEMPT TO GO ONLINE AND UPGRADE MY WINDOWS PROGRAMS! TODAY, MY MICROSOFT BROWSER AND EMAIL NO LONGER WORK. WHY? BECAUSE I RELOADED MY OLD WINDOWS XP PROGRAM INTO MY COMPUTER IN A SAD ATTEMPT TO GET BACK ON LINE AFTER I DID THE UNTHINKABLE. I ATTEMPTED TO UPGRADE. IT WAS A TOTAL FAILURE AND EVEN THE BELL NETWORK PROVIDERS COULD NOT HELP ME. THEY HAVE A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH MICROSOFT. HOWEVER, THEY DON'T HAVE THAT AGREEMENT WITH VIDEOTRON OR APPLE COMPUTERS. REVENGE IS MINE HO HO HO! I NOW PREFER TO BORROW THIS SEVEN YEAR OLD APPLE COMPUTER TO SEND OUT THIS MESSAGE OF GOOD CHEER TO ALL THE NICE PEOPLE OUT THERE THINKING OF BUYING A NEW COMPUTER THIS CHRISTMAS 2013. DO NOT BUY A P.C. WITH MICROSOFT APPLICATIONS AND YOU WON'T NEED TO UPGRADE EVERY CHRISTMAS. MICROSOFT HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS FOR ME SINCE I BEGAN TO USE P.C. COMPUTERS BACK TWENTY-FIVE YEARS. UPGRADING IS A CON THEY PLAY TO MAKE YOU PAY MORE AND MORE ON CHRISTMAS DAY. POETIC IS IT NOT? APPLE COMPUTERS DO NOT USE MICROSOFT SYSTEMS. APPLES WORK AND KEEP ON WORKING YEAR AFTER YEAR. Think about it and MERRY CHRISTMAS!

storyofstuff.org Hello Annie! Remember me? Years ago I helped push you and your "story of stuff" all over the net. Times have changed and some bad people have pushed back and blocked many of our efforts to unite. Getting your message out is important but our net access points have been blocked and stuffed full of commercials. Years ago it was known as spam and we would not allow span to interfere with our personal communications. Today, the net is full of beautifully created spam and interpersonal communication has been reduced to twitter size messages. Joining together is exactly what dozens of powerful international companies do not want us to do and they are blocking our efforts to communicate and unite towards better goals. To be fair, many other companies have switched towards creating a better and safer planet but as yet not enough are following your idea of 'BETTER'. This time around I need your help. I need a place to write and I need to regain much of the power that has literally been stolen from me and from sweet people like yourself. Can you provide me with a small writing area on your site? A place I can fill with dozens of links to great pro environment and better life web sites? Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive director: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement. human4us@bell.net

Gentle readers of this Blog: The United States government continues to struggle and the following is a message the Democrats are sending to all of you. Friend -- Last month, the federal government shut down for 17 days. The Office of Management and Budget estimates that the shut-down cost American taxpayers $2 billion in worker productivity alone -- millions of people went without work and critical services were cut off. Because OFA supporters like you never stopped putting pressure on Congress, the House leaders responsible for pushing us to the brink backed down. This budget crisis hurt -- and you and I know it didn't have to happen. What's worse is that unless something fundamental changes in Washington, we could be heading toward another series of budget showdowns in the coming months. Congress still has to pass a long-term budget, and address the devastating cuts that have been in place since the sequester took effect last March. Even though it might not be on the front pages every day, we're going to keep you in the loop on where we are, and what's coming down the pike. Check out this budget update on our blog, and pass it along to anyone else you think should read it. Here are the basics of what you need to know on where budget talks are in Congress: Right now, a bipartisan budget conference committee is working to produce a long-term budget solution -- they have until December 13th to hammer out a plan. From there, Congress will have until January 15th to debate, tweak, and pass the budget to avoid another government shutdown. That's also the day that the next round of devastating sequester cuts will go into effect -- these cuts were designed to put pressure on Congress to find a solution. If they fail to pass a budget by that date, the new round of sequestration cuts will be much more severe than the ones we saw in 2013. Many government agencies still had funding available from previous years that they were able to dig into, and take steps to prevent furloughs and deep budgetary cuts -- but now, they're running out of options, and another round of sequester cuts would slow our fragile economic recovery. The bottom line is that there's a lot at stake over the next two months. Congress needs to step up and pass a long-term budget that addresses sequester cuts and grows our economy from the middle out. We'll keep you posted on what happens after the conference committee deadline in December. But for today, make sure to check out this blog post, and pass it along to the folks you know who need to stay in the loop. http://my.barackobama.com/Budget-Update-Blog Thanks -- more soon, Nico Nico Probst Director of Special Projects Organizing for Action ---------------- The other side will spend millions to maintain the status quo. We're fighting for change -- chip in $5 or more to support OFA today.

Gentle readers of this blog. Festering anger is an emotion I intensely dislike. It is an anger I am feeling towards my Canadian government and towards all politicians and business people involved with the production and delivery of fossil fuels. It is what I feel when I see the horrible deaths of thousands of helpless Philippino people created by a destructive Typhoon the size and strength of which has not been recorded in human history. This festering anger burns inside of me every time I see a car commercial on television and every time I am forced to watch a government sponsored commercial depicting how creating oil pipelines will help develop our Canadian economy. I connected the dots years ago. Fossil fuels create warm air and that in turn creates warm Ocean waters and that creates extremely dangerous Hurricanes and Cyclones. Our so called political and economic leaders pretend they do not believe in global warming. I honestly wish they all lived in the Philippines. What feeds my anger is the certain knowledge that these cold blooded commercial human beings are the indirect cause of the most horrific climate disasters ever to curse our lives! My anger burns deep! It is the absolute knowledge that we could have slowed climate change years ago when U.S. Senator Al Gore first provided us with solid science based evidence of man made global warming. For his honest efforts, Al Gore was chastised and dismissed by global warming deniers who today continue to deride and obstruct any efforts to slow climate change. Why? Because it is not in their economic best interests to allow alternative energy systems to exist! The proof of that became evident when the first efficient Electric Cars produced by the General Motors company, were literally forced off the market by Oil rich Republican president Bush and his new pro Oil government. The U.S. Electric cars were completely destroyed but the concept was not killed. Today, the honourable Japanese have brought back the Electric Cars and more than a few international companies have followed suit; but is it too little too late? Has time run out on all of us? Within the last ten years C02 emissions in the atmosphere have jumped up and off the science charts. CO2 emissions are created almost completely by burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere. With warmer air the Arctic ice has melted and our Oceans have become a birthing ground for Hurricanes and Cyclones the size of continents. Today I am pointing the finger directly at every human being who is creating and pumping Carbon pollution into our atmosphere and sadly, that includes myself. I could have made stronger efforts to stop the pollution! Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive Director: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement. P.S. Hello President Putin! Please free your Greenpeace political prisoners. Eleven Nobel prize winners believe in Greenpeace and they also believe you should free the Greenpeace crew as an Olympic games goodwill gesture. The Olympic games are a world peace movement and you are creating a negative image for yourself and for Russia by keeping Greenpeace members locked in your prison. Don't allow the Sochi Olympic games to become a laughing stock for the world.

I owe the Canadian Broadcasting Company and all it's members an apology. I once called them cowards for not standing up to Canadian federal prime minister Harper when he threatened to cut their budget. I also worried, with good reason, that the CBC was not providing enough coverage on global warming! The reason I worried pertains to my information from NASA which was not correlating with anything the CBC was providing over the last few years. That of course has changed with the proliferation of deadly hurricanes such as "Super Typhoon Haiyan which has hit Guiuan, on the Philippine island of Samar, at 4:40 a.m. local time Friday. Three hours before landfall, the Joint Typhoon Warning Centre assessed Haiyan's sustained winds at 195 mph, gusting to 235 mph, making it the fourth-strongest tropical cyclone in world history" and the C.B.C, along with many international NEWS services, finally provided sufficient if not prolific information after the fact. Ten thousand people are presumed dead because of hurricane Haiyan. How many of these people could have been saved with enough advanced warning? What if global warming deniers were fewer and far between and television commercials sold millions more Electric Cars? Meanwhile, my friend in Washington would like you to read this ....> SUPPORT THE EPA'S NEW CLEAN ENERGY STANDARDS. "Climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous -- and a lot of that is due to carbon pollution from power plants. It threatens the health of our communities, and is already leading to more frequent and damaging storms, wildfires, droughts, and heat waves. I strongly support the EPA's standards to clean up carbon pollution from new and existing power plants because it will protect Americans' health, spur investment in clean energy, and unleash American innovation." BARACK OBAMA.

Gentle readers of this Google Blog: In Canada we have a Medicare system that works fast! On October 2, 2013, a friend of mine broke her leg. I brought her to the Montreal General Hospital and they examined and X rayed her leg. A doctor then adjusted her leg and applied a temporary Plaster cast. She was sent home for a week and we waited for the swelling to reduce. She was prescribed over the counter pain reducing pills. A week later we returned to the hospital for an operation where a small metal plate was screwed into her leg. She was not put to sleep and the surgeons used only a pain blocking local anesthetic. She did not feel pain during the operation and we went home the same night. Today, in lieu of a Plaster cast she is wearing a special hard plastic boot that she can remove when she feels the need to scratch. Her physiotherapy at a local clinic has begun and my friend is on the road to a full recovery. Today is October 30, 2013. It took less than four weeks from break to recovery and that includes the paper work for the insurance and the hospital. Her work insurance plan in combination with our Canadian national medicare plan helped pass her quickly through the system. My friend paid for the plastic boot but she could have opted for the free Plaster cast. If you want the same kind of service then I recommend you help your president Obama create your national medicare system. Pass this message along to friends and family. P.S. Don't be fooled by those who want to destroy Obamacare because they are motivated by economic interests that are not based on your personal health and welfare. Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive director: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement. Reply | Menu From: Lindsay Siler, BarackObama.com Subject: Tricking people into not getting health care... Date: Wed 10/30/13 8:58 PM Show details View in plain text Friend -- When the facts aren't on your side, and you don't have good ideas of your own, there's only one thing left to do: Pass out free beer and koozies. That's not really true, but it does happen to be exactly what the Koch brothers' group has been doing at college campuses across the country -- all to try to convince young people not to get health insurance. That's right -- they're setting up booths, right next to the organizations helping students get covered, and handing out free stuff. The bad news is these guys have millions of dollars to spend -- the anti-Obamacare crowd has already spent more than $400 million against us. It's going to take real, on-the-ground organizing to beat them. The good news is that's what OFA does best. The facts aren't that complicated -- no matter how much noise the other side makes, Obamacare is here to stay, and it's helping millions of people get better, more affordable care as I write this. The thing is, there's no Koch brothers-recommended alternative to Obamacare here. They're saying just risk it -- and hope you (or your kids) don't get sick. We won't be able to outspend them, but we can help shut this cynical campaign down with OFA's brand of organizing, which just happens to specialize in actually trying to help people. So if you're tired of the Kochs' cynicism, donate whatever you can to help us figh back today: https://donate.barackobama.com/Protect-Obamacare Thanks, Lindsay Lindsay Siler National Director of Issue Campaigns Organizing for Action ---------------- The other side will spend millions to maintain the status quo. We're fighting for change -- chip in $5 or more to support OFA today. PAID FOR BY ORGANIZING FOR ACTION Contributions or gifts to Organizing for Action are not tax deductible. This email was sent to: human4us@bell.net. If that is not your preferred email address, you can update your information here. We believe that emails are a vital way to stay in direct contact with supporters. Click here if you'd like to unsubscribe from these messages. Organizing for Action, P.O. Box 66732 Washington, D.C. 20035 Sign out | Help (C)2013 Microsoft Privacy | Legal

----- Original Message -----

From: Tom Mauser

To: Joseph Raglione

Ex/Dir: The World Humanitarian Peace and Ecology Movement.

Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 5:56 PM

Subject: My son Daniel

Joseph -- My son, Daniel, was a smart, quiet kid. He'd just become a straight-A student, and he was overcoming his shyness as a new member of the debate team. On April 20th, 1999, my beautiful and bright 15-year-old son was killed by two teenagers with guns in the library of Columbine High School -- one of 12 innocent kids who lost their lives for no reason at all. It's been 14 years since that horrible day -- 14 years of fighting so no family has to grieve like ours did. These tragedies keep happening, and so far, Congress has failed to take common-sense action to stop them -- even though nine in 10 Americans have agreed that it's time to act by expanding background checks to close the loopholes that put guns in the hands of dangerous people. This Wednesday, OFA and allied organizations are standing up for a national Day of Action to ask members of Congress: What will it take to finally act to prevent gun violence? I hope you'll join in -- say you'll do one thing this week to show Congress you want action to prevent gun violence. The last questions you ever want to hear as a parent are: "What was your child wearing, and do you have any dental records?" That's what the police asked me the evening of the shooting at Columbine High, as they tried to establish who had been killed. It was the most hopeless I'd ever felt. Since Daniel's death, I've found a way to honor him: by trying to prevent other families from feeling this pain. I've advocated locally and nationally for smarter gun laws -- even helping achieve a statewide ballot victory here in Colorado. In December, when I heard about the shooting in Newtown, I sat in my office and broke down. I was watching another community torn apart by guns -- more parents grieving, more kids who would never see graduation, or a wedding, or a family of their own. And in the wake of another tragedy, nine in 10 Americans agreed that it was time to act -- expand background checks to close the loopholes that put guns in the hands of dangerous people. But Congress disappointed us, putting politics above the safety of our kids. That's why this week, we're asking: How many parents will have to go through what I did before we say "enough"? You should be a part of this, too. Tell Congress you're going to keep asking until they act: http://my.barackobama.com/Do-One-Thing-for-Gun-Violence-Prevention Thank you, Tom Tom Mauser Littleton, Colorado   ====================================   Dear Tom Mauser:    There are no words I can write that will help you alleviate the pain of your loss. I can, however, inform you that I've been on the world wide web from it's inception and that I will continue to use my computer to fight for you and for others like yourself who have suffered great personal loss. Your letter will be delivered to the millions of AVAAZ readers who make up Al Gore's powerful organization and to as many readers as I can reach with my old computer.  I've not heard from Michael Moore in a while but he was a champion for your cause.  I am hoping he has not given up.     The second amendment of the United States is all that stands in the way of gun reform. The NRA loves to hide behind the second amendment! They hold it up like a sacred shield from the past  but that ancient law was not meant to protect modern day psychopathic killers of children. It was meant to protect a struggling new nation from invasion by a dangerous foreign government. I suggested to your president Obama that he hold a national referendum asking U.S. citizens if the second amendment should be changed to exclude automatic weapons. When the second amendment was created by the founding fathers of your country, they were talking about one shot rifles and squirrel guns and certainly not about modern day assault rifles or even multi-bullet hand guns for that matter. For that reason alone the second amendment must be changed.    I suggest you contact as many radio and television stations as possible and ask for their help creating a referendum. The politicians will almost certainly jump in on the action once the ball is rolling.   Thank you for your letter and yes, I will help you keep the media ball rolling even if there is not a large Media response at the beginning. Truth always wins in the end. Signed: Joseph Raglione Executive director: The world humanitarian peace and ecology movement.

Joseph,

Thank you so much for the encouraging comments you left for the activists that were detained by the Russian Coast Guard, we really appreciate your support. However, I'm writing now to update you on some disturbing developments.

It’s a tense and dramatic moment on the high seas of the Russian Arctic.

Just hours ago, a helicopter descended suddenly on the Greenpeace International ship Arctic Sunrise, where we were protesting against Gazprom’s plans to drill for oil in these pristine and remote waters. Armed officials of the Russian Coast Guard stormed the ship, holding 25 activists - including two Canadians - on their knees at gunpoint. Seconds later, communications from the ship were cut off. We are seriously concerned for their safety, and are demanding that the Russian authorities free all the activists and withdraw from our ship immediately.

Please send an urgent email to the Russian Embassy in Canada demanding they free our activists!

This illegal seizure of our ship and crew comes after two of our activists were arrested early yesterday morning for taking part in a peaceful protest on the Prirazlomnaya Arctic oil platform to stop Shell’s new partner, Gazprom from becoming the first company to produce oil from the icy waters of the region. They were held overnight against their will by the Russian authorities with no charges or legal representation. 

Right now, all around the world, hundreds of supporters are flooding the streets outside the Russian embassies in their countries, to demand the release of the people who put their bodies on the line to protect the Arctic from oil destruction. They’re there on behalf of our movement of nearly 4 million, and we cannot allow them to be threatened for standing up for their beliefs.

The Russian authorities have called us “terrorists,” but it’s clear the real threat to the fragile Arctic comes from the reckless oil companies that are determined to profit from Arctic oil -- no matter what the cost. Together we must show we are stronger than than those who want to destroy the Arctic, and will not be intimidated into silence.

Click here to email the Russian Embassy in Canada to demand the immediate release of our activists and an end to Arctic drilling for good.

Thank you for your unconditional support,



Christy Ferguson
Greenpeace Canada Arctic Campaigner

Gentle Readers on Google:

  The Russians have attacked the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise and taken prisoners at gun point!
I repeat! The Russians have attacked the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise and taken prisoners at gun point!
Write or telephone a Russian Embassy in  your country and demand that president Putin and his government release the ship and the Greenpeace activists immediately!

This email was intended for all readers on the search engine Google. If you received this email it is because you are subscribed to the Google search engine and to the Greenpeace Canada email list.

Unsubscribe me from this list