On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 3:29:11 AM UTC-5, SlurpieMcDoublegulp wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 3:20:21 AM UTC-5, SlurpieMcDoublegulp wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 3:18:09 AM UTC-5, SlurpieMcDoublegulp wrote:
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 3:17:44 AM UTC-5, SlurpieMcDoublegulp wrote:
Scorching temperatures brought on by climate change could leave large swaths of the Middle East and North Africa uninhabitable by the middle of this century, a new study predicts.

Researchers at Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and The Cyprus Institute in Nicosia crunched the numbers and found that this area, a "climate change hotspot" where days of extreme heat have doubled since 1970, could soon be plagued by weather so brutal that it triggers a "climate exodus."

On the hottest of days, temperatures in North Africa and the Middle East can reach highs of around 109 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the findings. But that figure could soar to 114 degrees by 2050, and 122 degrees by 2100 -- extremes the researchers say could have "important consequences for human health and society."

Study lead author Jos Lelieveld, director of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and a professor at The Cyprus Institute, says the change in climate could jeopardize the very existence of the area's 500 million inhabitants.

"Prolonged heat waves and desert dust storms can render some regions uninhabitable, which will surely contribute to the pressure to migrate," Lelieveld said in a statement.

By analyzing climate data dating back to 1986, the researchers were able to forecast temperatures through the 21st century. Their calculations were based on two different possible scenarios: They first analyzed what would happen if global carbon emissions were reduced by mid-century, and then looked at what would happen if humans continue releasing greenhouse gases at a rate that's "business as usual."

The study, published in the journal Climate Change, shows that either way, the region south of the Mediterranean Sea should be ready not just for blazing temperatures, but also for lengthier heat waves.

Between 1986 and 2005, heat waves in the region lasted an average of 16 days, according to the findings. Under the researchers' more moderate scenario, the average length could reach 80 days by mid-century and 118 days by 2100. And if we humans do nothing to reduce our carbon footprint, the projections suggest people in this area can expect 200 unusually hot days per year by the end of the century.

Regardless of which scenario plays out, the paper's authors say "climate change can result in a significant deterioration of living conditions for people living in North Africa and the Middle East, and consequently, sooner or later, many people may have to leave the region."

Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State University who was not involved in the study, said the prediction of a climate exodus in this region is "not at all surprising."

"This study," he said via email, "is just part of a slew of recent studies that have shown that warmth will literally exceed the range of human habitability over an increasingly large swath of Earth's land regions if we fail to curtail our burning of fossil fuels. Yet another clarion call for climate action as if we needed it."

The study echoes the findings of a March paper co-authored by James Hansen, an adjunct professor at Columbia University's Earth Institute, which found summers in tropical locations, including the Middle East, will be too hot for humans to live through by 2100.

By Sebastien Malo

NEW YORK (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Economies across large swathes of the globe could shrink dramatically by mid-century as fresh water grows scarce due to climate change, the World Bank reported on Tuesday.

The Middle East could be hardest hit, with its gross domestic product slipping as much as 14 percent by 2050 unless measures are taken to reallocate water significantly, the Washington-based institution said in a report.

Such measures include efficiency efforts and investment in technologies such as desalination and water recycling, it said.

Global warming can cause extreme floods and droughts and can mean snowfall is replaced by rain, with higher evaporation rates, experts say.

It also can reduce mountain snow pack that provides water, and the melting of inland glaciers can deplete the source of runoff, they say. Also, a rise in sea level can lead to sal****er contaminating groundwater.

"When we look at any of the major impacts of climate change, they one way or the other come through water, whether it's drought, floods, storms, sea level rise," Richard Damania, World Bank lead economist and lead author of the report, told reporters in a telephone conference.

Fresh water shortages could take a toll on sectors from agriculture to energy, the World Bank said.

"Water is of course at the centre of life, but it's also at the centre of economic activity," Damania said.

Water scarcity would not have the same impact worldwide, and Western Europe and North American economies would likely be spared, according to the World Bank models.

But rising economies such as China and India could be hard hit, it said.

In the Sahel belt that stretches across Africa below the Sahara, GDP could well dip some 11 percent with water scarcity, the World Bank said. A similar impact would be felt in Central Asia, it said.

But measures to reallocate fresh water could show gains in some regions, the bank said.

For example, a shift in allocation could lead to GDP growth of about 11 percent by 2050 in Central Asia, the bank said.

The World Bank also advocated pricing water consumption, a proposal that has stirred controversy and is opposed by those who do not think water should not have any price tag.

"If you're making money out of water, particularly if you're using a lot of water as a commercial user, then it's reasonable to suggest that you pay minimally enough to cover the cost of providing you with that water," Damania said.

"This might well mean free water if you are exceedingly poor," he said.

About a quarter of the world's population, or some 1.6 billion people, live in countries where water already is scarce, according to the World Bank.

Last month, 175 nations signed a deal reached last year in Paris to slow global warming and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

(Reporting by Sebastien Malo, Editing by Ellen Wulfhorst)

Many of the largest U.S. investment funds, including pensions, are doing nothing to protect their investors' savings from the financial risks posed by climate change, according to an analysis by the Asset Owners Disclosure Project, a nonprofit. At least 117 American funds, with a combined $4.6 trillion in assets, have taken no action to mitigate the risks associated with a warming planet.

"It simply isn't professional for the funds to do nothing," Julian Poulter, the group's CEO, told The Huffington Post.

Indeed, there have been warning signs for quite some time that big investors, from a purely financial perspective, need to think hard about fossil fuels. The S&P 500 stock index is up around 50 percent from 10 years ago. Oil stocks over the same period are up just over 1 percent.

And business is arguably only going to get harder. Global financial regulators are starting to work out a standard system for companies to voluntarily disclose climate risks, the governor of the Bank of England has warned insurance companies that they're at risk of being wiped out by climate change, and Saudi Arabia wants to kick its oil habit.

A 2013 report from England's Institute and Faculty of Actuaries found that under business-as-usual policies, resource scarcity associated with a changing climate could stall the global economy and cause pension funds to be unable to pay out benefits.