Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Theodore Rethers's avatar

HI Tom, I have been giving much thought to the sensitivity issue from a hydro/ecological perspective, as you know that I believe that our focus on co2 as the main problem is in itself becoming part of the problem. If we see our adverse impact on this planet as a sensitivity enhancer then this becomes a multiplier on the co2 sensitivity . Say co2 sensitivity is 3 and our environmental impact is creating increased sensitivity in regards to incoming solar radiation through ecological and hydrological changes is 2 then the overall sensitivity is 5 or 6 depending on a time feedback loop. This is a number being thrown around a lot in regards to the rate of increase we are currently experiencing. If we can turn our land and ocean impact sensitivity into a fraction instead of a multiplier through work aligned with hydrological as well as ecological repair then we allow ourselves ample time to bring about a safe and profitable transition. Deforestation of tropical rainforest for biofuels is an example of how wrong I think our understanding is and the danger we are amplifying through our lack of understanding. Maybe we should think again about a sensitivity piece.

Ken Fabian's avatar

The way I see it each el Nino gives us a glimpse of what neutral years would be without sulfate aerosol pollution; what el Nino temperatures would bring without the disguising mask of fossil fuel pollution are hotter again.

2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?