Due to widespread use, the term tipping point has acquired a less than succinct quality, and any clarity once tied to The Climate Tipping Point has gone catawampus. Consequently, many ignore the coming discontinuity in the climate while using the term tipping point for any transition. A recent articles says, “…Events have almost pushed our planet to the tipping point and that global warming may be unstoppable.” Holy cow (flatulence), really? What the heck does “almost pushed our planet to the tipping point” mean?
About twenty years ago, climate scientists began publically stating that the climate system, which is chaotic in nature (think butterfly effect), was moving too quickly into a higher energy state–something dangerous for our species. The atmospheric balances were in flux, the result of anthropogenic forcing of the radiative balance. Plus, the resulting difficulties would compound due to the persistence of GHGs. Some of which persist for generations. Can you say CO2? Suggesting that we’d better reduce processes modifying the radiative balance so we can figure out what is going on–rather than perform a planetary experiment–scientists also stated the affects from human forcing the radiative balance were already happening. All told, twenty years ago, climatologists went public saying human forcing of the climate might be a juggernaut of change.
“Ooh bad, I’m scared. Turn out for hikes. Get out the bikes. Protest the carbon. Turn off the lights. Dump the fossils. Pump the sun. Make it all green, or by gosh we’re done. Go Gaia! Free throw from the 350 PPMV line…” Sorry. At tip-off, the Muse pulled me over the line. Now where were we?
Oh, I remember. So climatologists were not voicing concerns just because of the warmer climate. I know shock, awe, wonder. The towering reason scientists were making a big stinking hullabaloo about the climate is the likelihood of a discontinuity (an energy state change, a phase shift, a tipping point, weather chaos), in the complex system we call the Earth’s climate. Extra energy and planetary-sized complex systems do not play well together. They deliver excessive conditions via the ecosystem to life forms that need their climate to function in benign equilibrium. For example, there are relatively even time periods that we call seasons in the temperate zones. At the poles, it is cold year-round and at the equator, it is hot year-round. The climate system appears as a secure steady state, even as that steady state is under attack from too much retained energy. So benign equilibrium–from the human perspective–is the climate supports human endeavors.
Complex systems like our climate have certain characteristics. Rather than bore you with terms like strange attractors, bifurcation, Lorenz systems, and other intellectual babble, consider one aspect of complex systems. Their capacity to shift into a nonlinear (insofar as climate, think: dangerous, destructive, damaging, deadly, deleterious, detrimental, dire, disastrous, ruinous, unpredictable, and lethal) framework under certain conditions–like excess energy in the system. This shift is called a discontinuity, and sometimes, The Climate Tipping Point.
Time out, environmental foul: “Hubris causing a hubbub through the use of italicized words indicating alliteration impacting the economy.” Penalty called. The officials are conferring. We have a decision.
In the name of editorial excess, The Climatebull will now present “balance-of-reporting” comments. For that balance, we have enlisted a generic spokesperson–since generics are cheaper. Says that generic spokesperson, “I like a warm climate, fossil fuels, and big vehicles because they are all good for me. Those things also mean I am a free person. Environmental hand wringing is socialistic nonsense meant to damage our economy. Scientists should not be trusted because they aren’t 100% sure of anything. Trust the economy.” Now back to our blog (I still hate that word). The condition that fosters danger, as well as my alliteration and metric, is too much added “stuff” in a system. In the case of our climate, that added “stuff” is extra energy due to anthropogenic forcing of the radiative balance. In the case of my alliteration and metric–too much Muse–or is that coffee?
We know complex systems reach a point of unalterable change, but we are unaware of how a rapidly formed, human-induced climate discontinuity will treat us. The odds say that when a discontinuity (tipping point) occurs, the new climate regime will be dangerous for humans, rather than benign. Further, after a planet wide discontinuity, the economic bets are void. The planet will be fine; however, the list of “maybes” for humanity and the “what-might-happen-to-us” goes on and on. We also do not know when a climate discontinuity will happen; just that it will occur if humans continue altering our planet’s energy balance with the deep black, otherwise known as space, as in the final frontier. We already know Earth’s weather events will be highly energized.
Example: A fishbowl tips over. That bowl full of water, and its inhabitants, spill onto a table. The ecosystem in that container transforms as a result of the state change, too bad for the fish. I’ll take the analogy to an extreme. At some earlier period, imagine the fish conversing in the bowl. One fish says to the other fish, “Don’t worry about the bowl reaching the tipping point. Our economy will protect us.”
Playing roulette with our planet’s climate is madness. Ignoring the possibility of a discontinuity is stupid, suggesting a higher energy state will be okay is foolish, and attempting to fillet the result is gauche.
Oops, darn, another foul. Hey ref, what’s the beef? There were no italics in that paragraph! What do you mean fish endangerment?
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.